After Grades - What did we learn?

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
User avatar
vanwinkle
Posts: 9740
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 3:02 am

Re: After Grades - What did we learn?

Postby vanwinkle » Sat Jan 30, 2010 4:06 pm

betasteve wrote:
JazzOne wrote: It surprises me every time I hear someone say that he cited a bunch of irrelevant law because of a supplement.

Agreed here. People tend to forget that come test time, the applicable law is essentially all common law in the jurisdiction of "My Professor Land"

Haha, this is an excellent way of putting it. The one supplement I used most was for Civ Pro, and that was great for figuring out how to use the rules, but I made sure to never mention a case that we didn't discuss in class, if I brought up any at all on the final.

User avatar
rayiner
Posts: 6184
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:43 am

Re: After Grades - What did we learn?

Postby rayiner » Sat Jan 30, 2010 4:13 pm

betasteve wrote:
JazzOne wrote: It surprises me every time I hear someone say that he cited a bunch of irrelevant law because of a supplement.

Agreed here. People tend to forget that come test time, the applicable law is essentially all common law in the jurisdiction of "My Professor Land"


In the one class I didn't build my outline directly and completely from the casebook (I used Dressler heavily), I ended up writing a lot about stuff that was "irrelevant" and "weird" (quotes from my prof) in "My Professor Land". Maybe other people had an easier time distinguishing between what was taught and what wasn't during the exam itself, but it was all kind of a soup in my head...
Last edited by rayiner on Sat Jan 30, 2010 4:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
rayiner
Posts: 6184
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:43 am

Re: After Grades - What did we learn?

Postby rayiner » Sat Jan 30, 2010 4:16 pm

betasteve wrote:
rayiner wrote:
betasteve wrote:
JazzOne wrote: It surprises me every time I hear someone say that he cited a bunch of irrelevant law because of a supplement.

Agreed here. People tend to forget that come test time, the applicable law is essentially all common law in the jurisdiction of "My Professor Land"


YMMV. My contracts professor taught from the Restatement + UCC, ignoring conflicting common law and not giving points even for using it as a reference. My torts professor taught from a book that covered a specific set of current case law, ignoring conflicting law in the Restatement, again giving no points for mentioning other law. My crim professor's exam was MPC + alterations he set forth in the exam itself, and he repeatedly pointed out that wasted time by making comparisons to common law ("it's irrelevant in an MPC jurisdiction!").

I feel like this basically re-affirms what I said....


Yeah, see my edit. I missed where you were coming from.

User avatar
mac.empress
Posts: 302
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 4:45 pm

Re: After Grades - What did we learn?

Postby mac.empress » Sat Jan 30, 2010 4:38 pm

betasteve wrote:
JazzOne wrote: It surprises me every time I hear someone say that he cited a bunch of irrelevant law because of a supplement.

Agreed here. People tend to forget that come test time, the applicable law is essentially all common law in the jurisdiction of "My Professor Land"


Yep. +1

User avatar
apper123
Posts: 985
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 11:50 pm

Re: After Grades - What did we learn?

Postby apper123 » Sat Jan 30, 2010 6:23 pm

rayiner wrote:
betasteve wrote:
JazzOne wrote: It surprises me every time I hear someone say that he cited a bunch of irrelevant law because of a supplement.

Agreed here. People tend to forget that come test time, the applicable law is essentially all common law in the jurisdiction of "My Professor Land"


In the one class I didn't build my outline directly and completely from the casebook (I used Dressler heavily), I ended up writing a lot about stuff that was "irrelevant" and "weird" (quotes from my prof) in "My Professor Land". Maybe other people had an easier time distinguishing between what was taught and what wasn't during the exam itself, but it was all kind of a soup in my head...


Yeah, and this reinforces why you should use supplements either your professor recommended or that are written by your casebook author (or by your professor himself).

And even THEN pay close attention to what is covered in class and what is not. I even take special care to highlight in my supplement table of contents what is covered in class and/or in the casebook and not, this way I don't forget before finals and learn the wrong stuff.

Snooker
Posts: 360
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 2:50 pm

Re: After Grades - What did we learn?

Postby Snooker » Sat Jan 30, 2010 10:40 pm

rayiner wrote:
Snooker wrote:No not sucking at life at all, this term definitely conformed to my expectations (model answers included). Moreover I practiced my westlaw skills over the break to see if there's any empirical evidence & theory to explain all of this. There is, and it seems like the typical strategies don't actually correlate up with grades - it's been studied.


Why would there be a correlation between study strategy and grades? The end product is what matters - how you get there doesn't.

It's really not rocket science. You apply the law to the facts. Occasionally, you justify your conclusion with a public policy argument (but only occasionally unless you have a professor you know cares about policy). You explore the contours and ambiguities in the law itself, guided by what highlights the professor noted in class. How you learn the law is irrelevant as long as you have internalized it. I used mostly the casebook, with supplements only for verification*. I know several people who have had good success wih supplements, on the other hand. The key is to figure out what works for you, then do it.

What do you think a study will prove?

*) The one class were I did use a supplement to make my outline (crim) I ended up bringing up all sorts of irrelevant law, and my professor specifically mentioned that I probably got the stuff from a supplement when I went over the exam with him.


In other fields, the particular study strategy that's adopted has a significant impact on the student's ability to master the material. That this trend doesn't follow in law school is a bit perplexing to say the least. The different study methods shouldn't all result in basically one big tie. My hypothesis is that the various study methods are basically student-made, and until the last few years, there'd been very little interest among law professors in legal education.

User avatar
rayiner
Posts: 6184
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:43 am

Re: After Grades - What did we learn?

Postby rayiner » Sat Jan 30, 2010 11:39 pm

Snooker wrote:In other fields, the particular study strategy that's adopted has a significant impact on the student's ability to master the material.


Since when?

User avatar
prezidentv8
Posts: 2821
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 5:33 am

Re: After Grades - What did we learn?

Postby prezidentv8 » Sat Jan 30, 2010 11:44 pm

rayiner wrote:
Snooker wrote:In other fields, the particular study strategy that's adopted has a significant impact on the student's ability to master the material.


Since when?


ditto.

Snooker
Posts: 360
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 2:50 pm

Re: After Grades - What did we learn?

Postby Snooker » Sat Jan 30, 2010 11:48 pm

rayiner wrote:
Snooker wrote:In other fields, the particular study strategy that's adopted has a significant impact on the student's ability to master the material.


Since when?


Since around the early 20th century.

User avatar
vanwinkle
Posts: 9740
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 3:02 am

Re: After Grades - What did we learn?

Postby vanwinkle » Sun Jan 31, 2010 12:12 am

Snooker wrote:In other fields, the particular study strategy that's adopted has a significant impact on the student's ability to master the material.

This is so, so true. For example, once I tried studying for a history exam by osmosis, putting the book under my pillow while I slept and trying to absorb all the information. This particular study strategy led to an F, teaching me that the right study strategy for the class is truly important.

:mrgreen:

User avatar
mac.empress
Posts: 302
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 4:45 pm

Re: After Grades - What did we learn?

Postby mac.empress » Sun Jan 31, 2010 5:22 am

vanwinkle wrote:
Snooker wrote:In other fields, the particular study strategy that's adopted has a significant impact on the student's ability to master the material.

This is so, so true. For example, once I tried studying for a history exam by osmosis, putting the book under my pillow while I slept and trying to absorb all the information. This particular study strategy led to an F, teaching me that the right study strategy for the class is truly important.

:mrgreen:


:mrgreen: I too discovered the need for a good study strategy after attempting the same exercise before a Philosophy exam. :mrgreen:

Inygma
Posts: 629
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 7:11 pm

Re: After Grades - What did we learn?

Postby Inygma » Sun Jan 31, 2010 4:44 pm

mac.empress wrote:
vanwinkle wrote:
Snooker wrote:In other fields, the particular study strategy that's adopted has a significant impact on the student's ability to master the material.

This is so, so true. For example, once I tried studying for a history exam by osmosis, putting the book under my pillow while I slept and trying to absorb all the information. This particular study strategy led to an F, teaching me that the right study strategy for the class is truly important.

:mrgreen:


:mrgreen: I too discovered the need for a good study strategy after attempting the same exercise before a Philosophy exam. :mrgreen:


Philosophy is one of the few classes where "sleeping on it" works :P

User avatar
prezidentv8
Posts: 2821
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 5:33 am

Re: After Grades - What did we learn?

Postby prezidentv8 » Sun Jan 31, 2010 5:17 pm

Dual studying and facebook ftw

User avatar
mac.empress
Posts: 302
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 4:45 pm

Re: After Grades - What did we learn?

Postby mac.empress » Sun Jan 31, 2010 9:07 pm

prezidentv8 wrote:Dual studying and facebook ftw


This.

User avatar
deneuve39
Posts: 128
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm

Re: After Grades - What did we learn?

Postby deneuve39 » Mon Feb 01, 2010 5:21 pm

I'm sure this has been said in this thread, but knowing what the professor wants you to get out of the class is by far the most important thing. Of course you need to do all the reading, look at supplements, outline, be organized, write well, etc. But on the class I spent the most time prepping for I got the worst grade in. Likewise in the exam where I barely knew what I was writing about but went out of my way to link in concepts the professor emphasized, I got my best grade. Look up law review articles they've written and go into office hours. Also pay really, really close attention in class. In the other class I did well on one his exam questions was literally something he had just talked about randomly for 30 minutes one day that was a tangential aside from a major case. If I hadn't been taking good notes that day I would have had no idea how to answer the question on the exam.

User avatar
Unemployed
Posts: 699
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 12:35 am

Re: After Grades - What did we learn?

Postby Unemployed » Mon Feb 01, 2010 8:30 pm

deneuve39 wrote:I'm sure this has been said in this thread, but knowing what the professor wants you to get out of the class is by far the most important thing. Of course you need to do all the reading, look at supplements, outline, be organized, write well, etc. But on the class I spent the most time prepping for I got the worst grade in. Likewise in the exam where I barely knew what I was writing about but went out of my way to link in concepts the professor emphasized, I got my best grade. Look up law review articles they've written and go into office hours. Also pay really, really close attention in class. In the other class I did well on one his exam questions was literally something he had just talked about randomly for 30 minutes one day that was a tangential aside from a major case. If I hadn't been taking good notes that day I would have had no idea how to answer the question on the exam.


Bolded = not true. But your point about giving the professors what they want is TCR.

Snooker
Posts: 360
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 2:50 pm

Re: After Grades - What did we learn?

Postby Snooker » Mon Feb 01, 2010 9:49 pm

Supplements recommended by the professor might be helpful. My professor recommends a particular supplement highly and I see stuff that was not covered in the casebook, or presented differently in the casebook, taken from the hornbook and then presented in class. The casebooks generally give a convoluted presentation to the various issues you'll face, though the difficulty of learning the different legal rules should not be exaggerated.

The best advice in this thread is probably to figure out what the professor wants, and then do that. But the Socratic method is designed specifically to destroy all chances of learning except as to what the cases in themselves say, which frustrates the whole law school enterprise.

legends159
Posts: 1089
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 4:12 pm

Re: After Grades - What did we learn?

Postby legends159 » Mon Feb 01, 2010 11:48 pm

Snooker did you end up rocking all your exams?

User avatar
prezidentv8
Posts: 2821
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 5:33 am

Re: After Grades - What did we learn?

Postby prezidentv8 » Tue Feb 02, 2010 12:01 am

Snooker wrote:The best advice in this thread is probably to figure out what the professor wants, and then do that. But the Socratic method is designed specifically to destroy all chances of learning except as to what the cases in themselves say, which frustrates the whole law school enterprise.


Nailed it.

Esc
Posts: 724
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 4:09 pm

Re: After Grades - What did we learn?

Postby Esc » Tue Feb 02, 2010 12:22 am

prezidentv8 wrote:
Snooker wrote:The best advice in this thread is probably to figure out what the professor wants, and then do that. But the Socratic method is designed specifically to destroy all chances of learning except as to what the cases in themselves say, which frustrates the whole law school enterprise.


Nailed it.


Disagree. I think the Socratic Method is the best way of learning to think quickly, articulate rationally, and digest knowledge. The best way to learn is to teach. The best thing about it is that it doesn't teach to the test....a problem which is the bane of grade schools.

Snooker
Posts: 360
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 2:50 pm

Re: After Grades - What did we learn?

Postby Snooker » Tue Feb 02, 2010 12:28 am

legends159 wrote:Snooker did you end up rocking all your exams?


!
Last edited by Snooker on Tue Feb 02, 2010 12:36 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
prezidentv8
Posts: 2821
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 5:33 am

Re: After Grades - What did we learn?

Postby prezidentv8 » Tue Feb 02, 2010 12:30 am

Esc wrote:
prezidentv8 wrote:
Snooker wrote:The best advice in this thread is probably to figure out what the professor wants, and then do that. But the Socratic method is designed specifically to destroy all chances of learning except as to what the cases in themselves say, which frustrates the whole law school enterprise.


Nailed it.


Disagree. I think the Socratic Method is the best way of learning to think quickly, articulate rationally, and digest knowledge. The best way to learn is to teach. The best thing about it is that it doesn't teach to the test....a problem which is the bane of grade schools.


Possibly. My opinion on the matter is that if you want people to actually learn to "think like a lawyer" (I hate that phrase), then the best thing for them to do is to practice doing so. Lots of written analysis and feedback along the way would be ideal, rather than hearing classmates and professors blab on about random policy implications which may or may not be relevant while trying to separately prepare for a final which is the only thing you have an incentive to do well on in the class in the first place. Not that the Socratic method in theory is bad, but it stinks in practice because it doesn't line up with working on actual improvement or incentives that the average law student encounters.

User avatar
prezidentv8
Posts: 2821
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 5:33 am

Re: After Grades - What did we learn?

Postby prezidentv8 » Tue Feb 02, 2010 12:30 am

Snooker wrote:
legends159 wrote:Snooker did you end up rocking all your exams?


um yes and why do people keep asking this question?


Snooker did you end up rocking all your exams?

Snooker
Posts: 360
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 2:50 pm

Re: After Grades - What did we learn?

Postby Snooker » Tue Feb 02, 2010 12:36 am

Esc wrote:
prezidentv8 wrote:
Snooker wrote:The best advice in this thread is probably to figure out what the professor wants, and then do that. But the Socratic method is designed specifically to destroy all chances of learning except as to what the cases in themselves say, which frustrates the whole law school enterprise.


Nailed it.


Disagree. I think the Socratic Method is the best way of learning to think quickly, articulate rationally, and digest knowledge. The best way to learn is to teach. The best thing about it is that it doesn't teach to the test....a problem which is the bane of grade schools.


Is there any evidence for that proposition?

(granted, my above proposition was hyperbole. I think it's a fine way to teach reading cases. But can singular reliance on the socratic method train effective lawyers?)

Snooker
Posts: 360
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 2:50 pm

Re: After Grades - What did we learn?

Postby Snooker » Tue Feb 02, 2010 12:37 am

prezidentv8 wrote:
Snooker did you end up rocking all your exams?


A little part of me just died!




Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 8 guests