Top Law Schools

disco_barred wrote: It's more than just 'taking' practice exams. By and large, the people I know who did well took a lot of practice exams. I do, however, know people that took a lot and did poorly as well as people who only took a few and did great. The key isn't volume - the key is understanding what's going on. It will happen 'organically' to some extent, but you really need to engage with the material - go over answers with other students, compare with model answers, and make sure you figure out how to actually score points with your legal knowledge. Far too many people accumulate huge amounts of legal know-how but never refine the skill of applying that knowledge.

This is really really true. I only took three full practice exams total, including one mandatory midterm. However, I put a lot of time into reading exam questions and practicing just the issue-spotting, and in reading lots of material on how to write a solid exam answer. I experimented during my finals with different strategies for writing the answers; the one test where I did the most core-dumping of accrued knowledge earned me my only below-median grade. The professor bluntly told me I had an excellent grasp of the course material and it was the manner in which I applied it (or more specifically failed to adequately apply it) that cost me on the exam.

All four exams demonstrated I had great knowledge of the BLL but how I chose to use that knowledge was the difference between an A and a B. This is the #1 reason why 0Ls should not waste time studying subject matter; you have enough time to learn all the law you need to know during the fall. What you need to get ahead is to know how to USE that knowledge on an exam. You need to know how to "think like a lawyer" and to apply the law to the facts.

Read things like "A Civil Action", or Schauer's "Thinking Like A Lawyer". These are productive uses of your time because they educate you about the legal process. You might read GTM, though it'll make a lot more sense if you read it after you've started the semester and studied some cases. Don't read E&E's. They teach you what the law is, not how to apply it on an exam. They don't teach you how to think like a lawyer. As a 0L they aren't giving you the edge you think they are.

FlanAl wrote:Applying this fall so have a year between UG and Law school. During this time I plan to grab whatever job I can. Unfortunately the chances of it being completely mindless are high. What would you recommend to stay sharp that could beneficial in law school?

Also how much hand holding is there in first semester of 1L? Where I study law is an undergraduate degree and I was able to take public international law. It was supposed to be a first year course but it was almost exclusively 2nd years and exchange students. I loved the class but got absolutely destroyed because I didn't write in a "legal style" or something along those lines. There was no guidance on what legal style was or how we were meant to write for the class. I just wonder because this was a first year class and there was no guidance on what was expected, just lecturing and discussion of the cases. Just think that some prepping would have been helpful in this case but have no idea what it is like stateside.

Thanks for the advice

Very, very little guidance is given. Most of my classes almost no info was given about the exam, and where advice was given it was kept generic. For the most part, you're entirely on your own and have no meaningful feedback (much like your international law class) even as a first year.

FlanAl wrote:Applying this fall so have a year between UG and Law school. During this time I plan to grab whatever job I can. Unfortunately the chances of it being completely mindless are high. What would you recommend to stay sharp that could beneficial in law school?

Also how much hand holding is there in first semester of 1L? Where I study law is an undergraduate degree and I was able to take public international law. It was supposed to be a first year course but it was almost exclusively 2nd years and exchange students. I loved the class but got absolutely destroyed because I didn't write in a "legal style" or something along those lines. There was no guidance on what legal style was or how we were meant to write for the class. I just wonder because this was a first year class and there was no guidance on what was expected, just lecturing and discussion of the cases. Just think that some prepping would have been helpful in this case but have no idea what it is like stateside.

Thanks for the advice

In my experience, they hold your hand for the first two weeks or so and then they throw you to the wolves.

mikeytwoshoes wrote:

FlanAl wrote:Applying this fall so have a year between UG and Law school. During this time I plan to grab whatever job I can. Unfortunately the chances of it being completely mindless are high. What would you recommend to stay sharp that could beneficial in law school?

Also how much hand holding is there in first semester of 1L? Where I study law is an undergraduate degree and I was able to take public international law. It was supposed to be a first year course but it was almost exclusively 2nd years and exchange students. I loved the class but got absolutely destroyed because I didn't write in a "legal style" or something along those lines. There was no guidance on what legal style was or how we were meant to write for the class. I just wonder because this was a first year class and there was no guidance on what was expected, just lecturing and discussion of the cases. Just think that some prepping would have been helpful in this case but have no idea what it is like stateside.

Thanks for the advice

In my experience, they hold your hand for the first two weeks or so and then they throw you to the wolves.

Handholding in or out of the classroom? I think they coddle you for the entire three years outside of the classroom. But profs never really gave special attention to the fact that none of us knew what on earth was going on.

I think some people here are not distinguishing the difference between understanding and fluency in the substantive law. The former is necessary for the latter but not sufficient. The latter is what you need to completely dominate a test. It's similar to distinguishing someone by whether they "know" how to speak or are "fluent" in speaking. The former is a stilted and slow process followed by an acceptable product that is prima facie complete but lacking nuance in complexity; the latter is a full grasp of nuance in performance.

One reason to rationalize 0L study is that learning the material once, then forgetting it, and learning it again will be a lot easier during the Fall than learning the material once during the Fall without 0L prep. I think the goal of fluency would be better achieved by the former position rather than the latter. At least for me, if I have prior exposure to material (even if I forget it), the second time learning it comes much easier and things for some reason "click" better -- a precursor to fluency. Of course you could achieve fluency with no prep whatsoever by working extra hard or if you have greater intelligence, but I think to attain fluency there may be some merit in doing some 0L prep as long as long as you don't burn yourself out.

I think I'm going to get a full check-up from my doctor before 1L. I know TTT-LS will mock me for my efforts on this, but this is what I'm going to do. Sometimes you just have to do it and not care that the masses are against you. I might also hit Vegas. Call me a gunner if you must, but I'm just too fucking stupid for my own good. I need all the help I can get.

I can't believe this is starting all over

rando wrote:I can't believe this is starting all over

There are literally 150 or more threads on this exact subject, with the exact same responses on both sides. What's not to believe? Be it here or another "new" thread.... same difference. It's the gift of TLS.

betasteve wrote:

sayan wrote:I think some people here are not distinguishing the difference between understanding and fluency in the substantive law. The former is necessary for the latter but not sufficient. The latter is what you need to completely dominate a test. It's similar to distinguishing someone by whether they "know" how to speak or are "fluent" in speaking. The former is a stilted and slow process followed by an acceptable product that is prima facie complete but lacking nuance in complexity; the latter is a full grasp of nuance in performance.

Do you really, as a 0L, feel knowledgeable enough to give advice on what is or is not sufficient to dominate a law school test?

sayan wrote: One reason to rationalize 0L study is that learning the material once, then forgetting it, and learning it again will be a lot easier during the Fall than learning the material once during the Fall without 0L prep. I think the goal of fluency would be better achieved by the former position rather than the latter. At least for me, if I have prior exposure to material (even if I forget it), the second time learning it comes much easier and things for some reason "click" better -- a precursor to fluency. Of course you could achieve fluency with no prep whatsoever by working extra hard or if you have greater intelligence, but I think to attain fluency there may be some merit in doing some 0L prep as long as long as you don't burn yourself out.

The problem with this is, what you learn first is not going to have a rational bearing on how you learn it the second time. You read everything, or anything, and you are going to have learned it a certain way. That way is not going to be the way you learn it the second time. And, it won't help learning it the second time. In fact, it may frustrate your efforts.

I've skimmed books on taking law school exams and read people's advice on how to do well on law school exams. From everything I've seen, just superficially knowing the material is not enough. You have to know how to analyze it (obviously) and analysis comes from knowing the material inside and out -- that's fluency. I come from an economics and engineering background and I understand the difference between prima facie knowledge and really KNOWING the material so well you can spit down concepts in application to novel problems on tests. There's a big difference. I think the comparison is relevant to law school exams.

And I suppose I should qualify what I mean by doing prep work. I don't advocate doing E&E's because that's too detailed. However, a general overview of a substantive law branch seems general enough and easy enough to read that it shouldn't frustrate further (more detailed) learning in class. I may be wrong, but I thought I'd speak up so you can point out weaknesses in my reasoning. I'm talking about skimming through books like Chirlestein's contracts.

sayan wrote:I think some people here are not distinguishing the difference between understanding and fluency in the substantive law. The former is necessary for the latter but not sufficient. The latter is what you need to completely dominate a test. It's similar to distinguishing someone by whether they "know" how to speak or are "fluent" in speaking. The former is a stilted and slow process followed by an acceptable product that is prima facie complete but lacking nuance in complexity; the latter is a full grasp of nuance in performance.

One reason to rationalize 0L study is that learning the material once, then forgetting it, and learning it again will be a lot easier during the Fall than learning the material once during the Fall without 0L prep. I think the goal of fluency would be better achieved by the former position rather than the latter. At least for me, if I have prior exposure to material (even if I forget it), the second time learning it comes much easier and things for some reason "click" better -- a precursor to fluency. Of course you could achieve fluency with no prep whatsoever by working extra hard or if you have greater intelligence, but I think to attain fluency there may be some merit in doing some 0L prep as long as long as you don't burn yourself out.

Your premise is flawed. The danger of 0L prep is that you'll remember it. You will "learn" it but you won't know what it means. If you remember some of it, in the back of your mind. For instance, last semester m311 remembered reading a hypo in GTM, decided it was wrong, and we had to discuss it for three days. Similarly and ironically, m311 found a hypo in the back of an Emanuel book about nominal consideration and we had to discuss for three days. One day, m311 (seeing a theme here?) went off about the famous Brooklyn Bridge hypo, IIRC, he thought that every step created another option contract.

What the hell happened to m311?

Mr. Matlock wrote:

rando wrote:I can't believe this is starting all over

There are literally 150 or more threads on this exact subject, with the exact same responses on both sides. What's not to believe? Be it here or another "new" thread.... same difference. It's the gift of TLS.

I can't believe it is starting over in this thread. From ground zero.

betasteve wrote:

mikeytwoshoes wrote: What the hell happened to m311?

Would you come back if you shamed yourself that hard?

He came back all through the semester. He started shaming himself the first week. A strong person doesn't run from failures. Wherever you are, m311, own up to it; come back and tell us what happened in gory detail. The fucking forum is boring without you, m311.

madmartigan wrote:First, I’ve read all the threads on whether to do 0L prep, heard all the arguments, and decided my method.

My question is this. What are the most to least important courses for 0L prep? In the case that I want to read some supplements but may not have time to do each course, in what order would you recommend? I suppose the paramount criterion is which courses will 0L prep help the most/least during 1L.

And consider Legal Writing, in addition to the core 6 classes. More LEEWS and exam practice than memos and motions.

Much obliged,

So, I didn't do any prep before 0L. But I'm a YLS 1L, so our first semester is nongraded. I honestly would do two things before 1L: read Getting to Maybe (again, I have not read it, but I've heard it's good from classmates and from people from other schools) and read the E&E from Civ Pro (I still don't know any Civ Pro, which I think is the mark of a Yale student, but I wish I did.).

I would definitely not read any other hornbooks or anything like that.

If you are considering becoming a Con Law wonk, it is worth brushing up on your U.S. history, especially as regards major legislation, presidencies, and social movements. Also, not sure whether it exists, but it would be fun to read a book about the personal lives of U.S. Supreme Court Justices. I think that would add some color and background to the the boring cases you will be reading for the next few years.

Again, I spent summer before 1L on the beach in Greece. But it's your life. If you are excited to start learning some law, go for it.

tinman wrote:

madmartigan wrote:First, I’ve read all the threads on whether to do 0L prep, heard all the arguments, and decided my method.

My question is this. What are the most to least important courses for 0L prep? In the case that I want to read some supplements but may not have time to do each course, in what order would you recommend? I suppose the paramount criterion is which courses will 0L prep help the most/least during 1L.

And consider Legal Writing, in addition to the core 6 classes. More LEEWS and exam practice than memos and motions.

Much obliged,

So, I didn't do any prep before 0L. But I'm a YLS 1L, so our first semester is nongraded. I honestly would do two things before 1L: read Getting to Maybe (again, I have not read it, but I've heard it's good from classmates and from people from other schools) and read the E&E from Civ Pro (I still don't know any Civ Pro, which I think is the mark of a Yale student, but I wish I did.).

I would definitely not read any other hornbooks or anything like that.

If you are considering becoming a Con Law wonk, it is worth brushing up on your U.S. history, especially as regards major legislation, presidencies, and social movements. Also, not sure whether it exists, but it would be fun to read a book about the personal lives of U.S. Supreme Court Justices. I think that would add some color and background to the the boring cases you will be reading for the next few years.

Again, I spent summer before 1L on the beach in Greece. But it's your life. If you are excited to start learning some law, go for it.

HOLY SHIT! A Yalie came down from his cloistered medieval palace to give advice to mere mortals (which was wrong!). It's like talking to Jesus!

I kid, I kid.

.

mikeytwoshoes wrote:
HOLY SHIT! A Yalie came down from his cloistered medieval palace to give advice to mere mortals (which was wrong!). It's like talking to Jesus!

I kid, I kid.

This made me LOL.

I hope I don't sound condescending. I tried to give sincere advice based on what I wish I had done before 1L.

TTT-LS wrote:

rando wrote:I can't believe this is starting all over

Every year, dude. Every. Freaking. Year.

Do you think a mod would combine all "0L seeking summer prep advice" threads into a meta-thread, and pin it? Maybe that could help stem the flow...

macattaq wrote:

TTT-LS wrote:

rando wrote:I can't believe this is starting all over

Every year, dude. Every. Freaking. Year.

Do you think a mod would combine all "0L seeking summer prep advice" threads into a meta-thread, and pin it? Maybe that could help stem the flow...

Nah, that'd take away the instant gratification that only comes from having 1L's pwn your questions immediately.

macattaq wrote:

TTT-LS wrote:

rando wrote:I can't believe this is starting all over

Every year, dude. Every. Freaking. Year.

Do you think a mod would combine all "0L seeking summer prep advice" threads into a meta-thread, and pin it? Maybe that could help stem the flow...

Don't we already have such a thread? Oh, that's right, too inconvenient for 0Ls. In reality, searching through the links in that thread might actually be useful as "prep."

mikeytwoshoes wrote:

macattaq wrote:

TTT-LS wrote:

rando wrote:I can't believe this is starting all over

Every year, dude. Every. Freaking. Year.

Do you think a mod would combine all "0L seeking summer prep advice" threads into a meta-thread, and pin it? Maybe that could help stem the flow...

Don't we already have such a thread? Oh, that's right, too inconvenient for 0Ls. In reality, searching through the links in that thread might actually be useful as "prep."

Then how would we be able to tell them that they are special .

I'd like to ask a stupid 0L question tangentially related to this, and please don't throw molotov cocktails at me.

Is there anything you would recommend getting before law school starts? I'm not into doing all the reading, but I would like to be as prepared as possible. Any pesky things you had to make a special trip to Target for in the middle of the semester, things you realized you needed at 4:45 on a Friday afternoon and everything was closing, etc? Sorry if this has been asked before.

Some students say they get by in civ pro by reading the E&E and doing virtully nothing else. Why wouldn't a 0L gain from reading the same E&E?

I've read the criticisms of 0L prep and they make sense. A lot of it would be wasted time because your professor won't cover all topics mentioned. However, I heard the curriculum for civ pro is pretty standardized. Would reading the E&E thus be helpful for a 0L?

I understand why it would be a waste for classes that are less standardized (i.e. the property example given earlier in this thread).

disco_barred wrote:Most important 1L prep: Advanced beach lying, competitive drinking, stress management.

This is fantastic news since my plans for the upcoming summer include all three of these things and almost nothing else.

umichgrad wrote:I'd like to ask a stupid 0L question tangentially related to this, and please don't throw molotov cocktails at me.

Is there anything you would recommend getting before law school starts? I'm not into doing all the reading, but I would like to be as prepared as possible. Any pesky things you had to make a special trip to Target for in the middle of the semester, things you realized you needed at 4:45 on a Friday afternoon and everything was closing, etc? Sorry if this has been asked before.

Now this is a damn good question! I hereby grant you thread-making privileges.

mac.empress wrote:

umichgrad wrote:I'd like to ask a stupid 0L question tangentially related to this, and please don't throw molotov cocktails at me.

Is there anything you would recommend getting before law school starts? I'm not into doing all the reading, but I would like to be as prepared as possible. Any pesky things you had to make a special trip to Target for in the middle of the semester, things you realized you needed at 4:45 on a Friday afternoon and everything was closing, etc? Sorry if this has been asked before.

Now this is a damn good question! I hereby grant you thread-making privileges.

thanks

also thanks for posting, so your avatar pops up right when my boss walks by.