After Grades - What did we learn? Forum

[ghenderson]

bump for those who actually have gotten all their grades back?

[Grad_Student]

Don't blow off torts lol.

[awesomepossum]

I've learned that waiting for grades is a slow and painful process.

My property prof just sent out an email that grades were submitted and the range of scores (not grades) which sent a ripple of anxiety through my class.

[Arrow]

Yah schools are such a tease in giving back grades.

[18488]

For all the classes, I probably read about 60% of the assigned reading, and where available, supplemented that with the canned briefs.

Civ Pro. A

I felt by far the least comfortable with this material. I read bits and pieces of E&E, BlackLetter, Clermont's Concise Hornbook, etc., and never felt like I was getting a unified picture of the material in my head. A couple days before the final, though, I just started reviewing the actual rules one by one. That definitely helped the most.

Contracts A-

This was my favorite class generally, which probably helped to some degree. I read the Hillman hornbook like a televangelist reads the Bible, and used an upperclassman's outline.

Property B+

I relied heavily on Gilbert's Law Summary, the canned briefs, and Emmanuel's. This was the only class where I actually made my own outline--it was a combination of my class notes plus the above sources. I also did the highest proportion of the reading for this class. I never got good at future interests or that easement/covenant business.

Con Law B+

Relied VERY heavily on the canned briefs and prior students' outlines. This was my only closed book/closed notes exam, so I prepared differently. Basically my study group made a step-by-step formula for approaching each of the kinds of questions we knew would be on the exam, including all the prongs of the various tests and standards, and committed them to memory with acronyms. On the exam, I very mechanically applied the facts to what I memorized, and added psuedo-insightful commentary where I thought it might get me a point.

Lawyering B+

My memo sucks.

[awesomepossum]

Civ Pro - 0.00
Property - 0.00
Contracts - 0.00
Legal Practice - 0.00

I love it.

[Clever username]

So did Eremite end up transferring or not?

[spanktheduck]

Contracts: Favorite class. I found this class by far the easiest, but I also think many other people did as well. Read all the cases and outlined and took sporadic class notes. I sued the professor's hornbook and E&E for examples. The Final was open book, 1/2 issue spotting essays and 1/2 MC. Didn't take many MC questions and this hurt. Prof had his old essay exams and I took them.

Property: Read the cases but did a poor job of it (generally did not even know what was going on). Took very good notes in class because the prof would lay out the elements of each law and then run through hypos of each law. I used E&E and Intro to Prop by Singer. I outlined but my outline was only okay b/c I memorized all of it and knew how it fit in my head. Final was closed book, a split MC and issue spotter essay. I took a ton of MC's and practice exams. The prof didn't supply any old exams but I used them (both MC's and essays) from other schools. I think the practice MC's helped me most b/c other students commented afterwords that the MC were tough but they didnt seem that bad to me b/c I had seen most of the same type. I must have done well on the MC b/c I missed an issue on the essay.

Civ Pro: Took great notes and outlined. The prof lectured, covering the FRCP, evidence, and Erie. He gave hypos, many of which were on the final. I didn't do a good job at reading the few cases assigned. Did not do many practice exams because the prof didn't supply an and the class didn't track other classes very well so most other exams weren't much help. Final was not quite an issue spotter but rather a listing of different rulings and asking us to evaluate it. Open Book. I outlined and used E&E a little:

Con Law: Hated this class and felt the prof hid the ball. Paid little attention in class and basically used E&E and another hornbook. This was my best outline though. Took practice exams but not many (prof supplied 5 but only took 2 because the others were all earlier than 1995 (some being older than me). Final was closed book but an issue spotter. Applied the various tests and gave some commentary from the prof talked about in class but not much.

For all my classes I made an outline starting probably in October and updating it throughout the semester. Throughout the semester I went back periodically and would do a complete overhaul of them to remind myself of the earlier stuff and see how it all fit together. I did not spend a lot of time on reading the cases (I stopped briefing the first week), spending much of my time thinking about how different rulings fit together and would apply in other situations. I also used a hornbook in each class.

[LawandOrder]

I sued the professor's hornbook and E&E for examples.

Did they breach their duty to you?

[Merrill]

I'm not really sure I learned anything. My worst two grades were the ones with the most and the least reading during the semester. My best exams were the ones given first and last. My two best grades were my most favorite and my least favorite classes. I felt about the same after all four exams.

[waytofailself]

I don't really feel like posting my grades for each class, but I'll say this much: it's interesting how in the class I thought I did worst in I did much better than expected, and the two classes I thought I did best in I did worst in. Funny how that goes (yet I did call two of my grades correctly at least).

Things I learned:
1) Practice exams are great, but make sure to go over them with the prof. You'll usually get some insight there that you otherwise normally would not. Take advantage of the opportunity to discuss how your profs test and grade.
2) Don't get cocky. The two classes I did worst in had a common thread: I started feeling a little too good about myself and therefore didn't do the out of class work like I needed to throughout the semester.
3) Prepare for the exam, not for class. There was a common bond between the classes I did best in as well: I didn't always sound very intelligent when I got called on to speak, but that was more because I focused on the broader concepts in the class and not necessarily the specifics of the case.
4) Find people to discuss practice exams with. I did about as well as I thought I would, but I think I would have done better if I could have witnessed my practice tests from multiple perspectives.

Just to reemphasize point #3 one more time, don't rest on your laurels if you did well. Overall, my average was about where I expected, but this is a whole new semester and for most people the slate is totally clean. Take the time to evaluate how you did last semester, even if you did good (or great! or terrible!), as there is still plenty to learn.

[Alexandria]

I feel like the harder the material, the better I seem to do on the curve... but then again, my harder classes have had the best profs, so maybe I just get a lot more engaged in those classes and don't teach myself the material well enough in the others. Like I said above, when I like something, I do tend to go above and beyond.

[seyhey0]

Currently waiting for one last grade... Waiting for grades is the worst... I would much rather have a set date when all the grades are posted rather than waiting for them to trickle in... but in any event... that's a discussion on another thread.

In terms of grades, I won't go through every class in detail, but I'll just say that after one month I scrapped the traditional "read and brief every case" method and started skimming cases, pulling out key facts, issue, and holding in case I was called on, and making sure I understood the main point of WHY we were reading the case. Listened to every word in class, took notes, and created my own outlines. Was happy with results.

Anyway, its just one method - I'm sure many others work too.

[underdawg]

I sued the professor's hornbook and E&E for examples.

Did they breach their duty to you?

you learn not to make these kinda jokes

[nicola.kirwan]

Okay, overall, I am in no way proud of this, but I didn't do much studying at all this semester...some due to my own fault and some to issues that were wholly beyond my control (family, health, etc.). I often missed class, was late, didn't take notes, rarely did the reading, maybe did one half of a practice test for one class, and prepared for about a week before the exams. Property I studied for 2 days before. Not a good thing at all. My results: B's across the board. I honestly expected much worse.

Knowing how hard my classmates worked this semester, I only wonder how far I can bring my grades up this semester. I'm prepared to put in all the work, and given what little was done last semester, anything would be an improvement.

One side of me wants to bow my head in shame, the other part says, "Hey, if I can pull out B's at a competitive school without trying at all, I should be able to knock this thing out next semester by working hard, right?" I guess we'll see.

[nicola.kirwan]

It's funny, because they claim that philosophy prepares you well for law school, and in some respects it has helped a lot. But at the same time, I feel like my philosophy major accustomed me to not having to put in a lot of study hours to be able to generate insight into the text. Law is just not like that at all.

[steve_nash]

/

[Fyzzix]

/

[JeffBuckley]

Contracts: A
Torts: A* (highest grade in class)
Crim Law: A
Civ Pro: A


1. Start early. The importance of this cannot be overstated.

2. Work Diligently -- Read every note after cases when practical -- I find that the different variations of patterns for rules tend to show up here -- and then on exams.

3. Supplement -- I used E & E's for every class, plus a Hornbook for Torts and Contracts. I felt that the Hornbook gave me an advantage on a few topics that we didn't cover in depth in class.

4. Practice Exams -- I worked about 75% of the practice exams available for every class. This is the easiest way to figure out exactly what things you need to be able to discuss in detail on an exam.

5. Writing Matters -- I think you need to not only learn what kinds of questions end up on your professors' finals, but also how to WRITE on a law school exam. Like it or not, how clearly you communicate an idea can have a big bearing on your grade.

I was an English major in college, and I consider myself a strong writer. I think this gave me a leg up on many in my class.

[savagedm]

Do practice tests until your eyes and fingers bleed. At "top" law schools (and even not-so-top schools), everyone there is pretty bright. What is important is being able to write to your professor's liking quickly and fully.

Also, though others have suggested otherwise, office hours are entirely worth it for three reasons. First, every professor I've had has a policy of bumping grades. The grading is blind, and then, based on "performance," they are willing to raise your grade one notch (though rarely). Why pass up the opportunity for a free 0.33 GPA points? Second, if you're not an asshole, they will be references and recommenders. Finally, if you happen to soak up something while you're there, you're set. So few students actually go to office hours, you can be fairly certain what you are garnering there is relatively unique.

Incidentally, noting that your grades were good is not taboo. Mine were great. I totally had a 12.5 (4.33 scale). I'm amazed that you people did so well in school with such a penchant for missing the point.

I am a 0L, about to be a 1L in fall and have no experience with the practice tests everyone speaks of. However, I was wondering, if you do the practice exams, would you be able to take them to the prof. and see if it is something to their satisfaction? Would they help you with your writing for their exams if you go in and visit them in their office regularly?

I had a few upper div. profs that were massive GPA boosts because I was able to utilize this technique in UG and I'm hoping I can do the same in law school

[06072010]

Do practice tests until your eyes and fingers bleed. At "top" law schools (and even not-so-top schools), everyone there is pretty bright. What is important is being able to write to your professor's liking quickly and fully.

Also, though others have suggested otherwise, office hours are entirely worth it for three reasons. First, every professor I've had has a policy of bumping grades. The grading is blind, and then, based on "performance," they are willing to raise your grade one notch (though rarely). Why pass up the opportunity for a free 0.33 GPA points? Second, if you're not an asshole, they will be references and recommenders. Finally, if you happen to soak up something while you're there, you're set. So few students actually go to office hours, you can be fairly certain what you are garnering there is relatively unique.

Incidentally, noting that your grades were good is not taboo. Mine were great. I totally had a 12.5 (4.33 scale). I'm amazed that you people did so well in school with such a penchant for missing the point.

I am a 0L, about to be a 1L in fall and have no experience with the practice tests everyone speaks of. However, I was wondering, if you do the practice exams, would you be able to take them to the prof. and see if it is something to their satisfaction? Would they help you with your writing for their exams if you go in and visit them in their office regularly?

I had a few upper div. profs that were massive GPA boosts because I was able to utilize this technique in UG and I'm hoping I can do the same in law school

Generally, no. Some will offer a one-time review, but most don't.

[Da Stain]

I kept up with all my readings, went to all my classes, and basically did the bare minimum to be prepared. Outlining started after Thanksgiving. The result: right on the curve. I had a good time, and this was basically what I was trying to do. Learn the ropes without kiling myself or screwing myself grade-wise while I figured it out. Ultimately, my goals don't really hinge on being in the top 10% of my class and never really have. Top half was always fine to me.

Lesson Learned: Just staying on pace will make the curve most of the time. This semester, I just want to start outlining a bit earlier so that I have the time in the last 3 weeks to refine outlines and what I know, and not make outlines and learn the material. Also, this should give me more time to really do practice exams, which from what I saw, end up being about 50% of your final in most cases. If I had put more time into practice exams, there would have been 2 surprise questions out of the 12 or so that comprised my exams.

I'm pretty confident just that little change in time management should be enough to get some nice marks.

[incroyable]

General advice: I only missed two classes, stayed up with my reading, started outlining seriously in week 3, started taking practice tests in week 3. A lot of people ask how I knew enough material to start so early. I didn't but later on when I learned the law, an issue from a practice exam would pop into my head and I would make the connection. Then I knew the issue cold and could spot it each and every time because I knew what kind of facts triggered the issue and let that guide me to the relevant law. Used High court Summary briefs for all classes but generally read the actual case as well (albeit quickly). Book briefed.

Property: A
Took spotty notes. Failed to make my own outline. Read the Bar Bri. Sort of did Law in a Flash. More importantly, took every single practice test twice, evolving my outline into a hardcore 3 page checklist of issues I needed to touch on during the course of the exam. Printed all class notes and reviewed them from start to finish. Wrote 14 pages in an hour. Printed all class notes and reviewed them from start to finish.

Civ Pro: A
Took verbatim notes. Diligently made my own outline. Obtained 3 other outlines from 2L's/3L's, read them and cross referenced my own outline with them. Bar Bri. Law in a Flash. Glannon E & E. Glannon Multiple Choice. Made my own flashcards. Took all available practice exams, some twice. Printed all class notes and reviewed them from start to finish.

Contracts: A-
Took spotty notes. Diligently crafted outline. Realized prof was hiding the ball and created BBL outline from Law in a Flash. Memorized. Took all available practice tests, some twice. E & E. Bar Bri. Printed all class notes and reviewed them from start to finish.

It appears that my methods were relatively similar from class to class, as were my grades. I guess I'll employ similar tactics this semester.

Thanks for starting this thread, PKSebben. I learned a lot!

EDIT: Lest I forget-- LEEWS, Law School Confidential and Getting to Maybe. I did them all before school started and then reviewed applicable portions through out the semester. I'm still looking them over because, hell, I could do better.

[incroyable]

Do practice tests until your eyes and fingers bleed. At "top" law schools (and even not-so-top schools), everyone there is pretty bright. What is important is being able to write to your professor's liking quickly and fully.

Also, though others have suggested otherwise, office hours are entirely worth it for three reasons. First, every professor I've had has a policy of bumping grades. The grading is blind, and then, based on "performance," they are willing to raise your grade one notch (though rarely). Why pass up the opportunity for a free 0.33 GPA points? Second, if you're not an asshole, they will be references and recommenders. Finally, if you happen to soak up something while you're there, you're set. So few students actually go to office hours, you can be fairly certain what you are garnering there is relatively unique.

Incidentally, noting that your grades were good is not taboo. Mine were great. I totally had a 12.5 (4.33 scale). I'm amazed that you people did so well in school with such a penchant for missing the point.

I am a 0L, about to be a 1L in fall and have no experience with the practice tests everyone speaks of. However, I was wondering, if you do the practice exams, would you be able to take them to the prof. and see if it is something to their satisfaction? Would they help you with your writing for their exams if you go in and visit them in their office regularly?

I had a few upper div. profs that were massive GPA boosts because I was able to utilize this technique in UG and I'm hoping I can do the same in law school

Generally, no. Some will offer a one-time review, but most don't.

I did it in every class. Results varied but I got at least one review from each prof, multiples from some.

[Arrow]

So many A's out there. Good job everyone. TLS is definitely populated by some sexy people.

I can put everything out in detail, but I did the same thing as everyone else. (A/A/A/A+ and B- on my memo ).

My plan was simple. I literally followed pretty closely the LEEWS and PLS method. I did short briefs, outlined early, took a lot of practice exams, followed the professor's approaches, still read the cases (albeit quickly too), participated in TLS discussions, and really went with the unconventional method advocated by many. Since I did the same thing in every class and not surprisingly, my grades were fairly consistent (except for the stupid memo )

For me, only two of my professors agreed to look at practice exams. It was nice, but they were not too helpful (and I felt like it was because they didn't want to make the exam too easy).