vanwinkle wrote:BruceWayne wrote:2. You DO NOT learn much from outlining. I'm sorry, but I don't know why people think that they learn more by rotely typing and reorganizing notes. Let me ask people something: did you ever "outline" in college? Do you know any medical students, MBA's, or other graduate students who "outline"? Do you think that they do not know how to study but that for some strange reason law students do? You are better off spending 40 hours reading, memorizing, and learning a subject from a ready made outline or your notes than by retyping stuff for 40 hours. AKA what EVERY other form of higher education student does. Law has this weird mentality where it thinks that it's unique way of doing things is the best way, even when every other form of academia has abandoned that method. But that's a story for another day...
This is incredibly flawed reasoning. Outlining is unique to law school because law exams are unique to law school, and call for unique study methods. An MBA wouldn't outline for an exam like law students do because an MBA won't be tested in the same manner law students are. Other forms of academia rely less on outlining because rote memorization is more sufficient there.
Law students aren't supposed to just be learning "the law". This is a huge fallacy, I think, among potential and current law students. What you're actually studying is how to think; you're studying how to apply the law. Each class has different subject matter but similar principles of legal application. Like I said in my prior post, not everyone needs to outline, but outlining will teach most people who do it about legal application.
I'm sorry, but one thing I've learned most from going through a year of law school is how much pretentious bullshit people spout. Phrases like "you aren't learning the law, you're learning how to think" is some of the biggest bullshit that's peddled. Frankly, I've seen many A exams at this point, and frankly they basically boil down to 1) An obscene amount of doctrine plastered down as quickly as possible and 2) Whatever opinions the professor's have about said subject tied into that. As far as the outlining being special for law school because other rote memorization is "more sufficient" there is downright laughable. I assure you, rote memorization will not make you understand the FAR more complex subjects covered in medical school, engineering, chemistry etc. But again, that's the kind of thing that law students like to tell themselves because we want to validate our discipline in comparison to other more complex ones.
Anyway, my point, and seemingly DF's as well. Is that outlining is NOT the best choice for all, or frankly even most students. It certainly doesn't teach you how to "apply the law". The main thing for that is taking practice exams.