LEEWS worth it? Forum

[megaTTTron]

I'm starting 1L in mid-August, and though I have some free time, I'm debating whether to purchase Leews CD's. I bought the Delaney book on exams and skimmed through Getting to Maybe. Obviously there's only so much a pre-1l student can absorb or even understand at a base level.
Does anyone have any recommendations on either further reading, study, or their experience with Leews?

Thanks!

LEEWS doesn't seem to be so effective for top law schools, I have heard of a lot of people who did well with it - but they've all been at lower ranked law schools. I've also known a ton of kids at Northwestern who took LEEWS, and just from conversation - they don't seem to have done that well. You really have to make a sophisticated legal argument (analysis) to diff. yourself from the other equally effective issue spotters at top law schools, I don't think LEEWS trained me in terms of how to construct an awesome analysis. Leews "Effective but ugly" method doesn't really work when the professor specifically says they want good writing - and 5 out of my 7 profs through 1L wanted good writing and spelled that out.

I did LEEWS in Fall, got so-so results, dropped it ENTIRELY in the Spring term, and I had a monster term.

Okay, but the UBE format is not what you use when writing the exam. It's just to help you remember the process. Good legal writing is being simple and clear, which LEEWS helps you establish. I think your post is misleading. LEEWS just helps you organize and figure out how to tackle the problems. Of course your arguments need to be "sophisticated" or whatever.

I did only go to a T30, so I can't really argue with your anecdotal evidence. But I will say that LEEWS in no way made my writing "not good" or "less sophisticated." I think you're right that you cannot rely solely upon LEEWS to do well, but I do not think LEEWS = bad writing.

[SAE]

I did the audio course comfortably in 2 days while working 5-6 hours/day with frequent email checking and internet browsing breaks.

Set aside another day or two if you want to read the primer, which is basically a regurgitation of the audio (yet, I would still recommend doing so).

Yes, the package costs $160, but they are currently going for around $140-150 on eBay. Buy a used copy to begin with and you might come out ahead.

[megaTTTron]

I did the audio course comfortably in 2 days while working 5-6 hours/day with frequent email checking and internet browsing breaks.

Set aside another day or two if you want to read the primer, which is basically a regurgitation of the audio (yet, I would still recommend doing so).

Yes, the package costs $160, but they are currently going for around $140-150 on eBay. Buy a used copy to begin with and you might come out ahead.

Yea, it's WAY overpriced.

[traehekat]

So did you guys find this method really worked for ALL hypotheticals, regardless of course and instructions given (like, "What result?" or "Draft legislation...")?

[legends159]

I did the audio course comfortably in 2 days while working 5-6 hours/day with frequent email checking and internet browsing breaks.

Set aside another day or two if you want to read the primer, which is basically a regurgitation of the audio (yet, I would still recommend doing so).

Yes, the package costs $160, but they are currently going for around $140-150 on eBay. Buy a used copy to begin with and you might come out ahead.

Yea, it's WAY overpriced.

Read the TLS guides and save the money for E&E. Of course naive 0Ls who are freaking out will spend the money and then bitch about it after their 1L year about how it wasn't that helpful.

[SAE]

My only beef with LEEWS so far (0L here) is the way that the primer is written. The author seems to love footnotes to a point where each page has 2 or 3 of them on average. 90% of them could either be avoided or integrated into the text, making it much more readable.

[yellowjacket2012]

.

[SAE]

So did you guys find this method really worked for ALL hypotheticals, regardless of course and instructions given (like, "What result?" or "Draft legislation...")?

I've seen anti-leews threads on tls (too lazy to search right now), which say that pretty much the only class that it helped with is torts.

[legends159]

to whoever asked - I did Northwestern 1L year - I've practiced exam-taking with about over a dozen kids from my section, and I was blown away by the quality of their analysis when we compared notes, which makes the LEEWS method (which btw shortchanges a lot of things where a number of points lie) kinda useless. Issue spotting is easier than actually formulating and presenting a strong legal argument. Sure, you can jump from party to party and see things from both sides' perspective, but that has nothing to do with advocating a strong argument for either side. I found LEEWS lacking in this latter aspect, which really impresses professors.

You can't really compete with high quality analysis by just spotting an issue and arguing it two ways, while not getting bogged down by the time, which is basically what LEEWS is - a time-managed approach to arguing in the alternative . . . I basically studied the living crap out of all the cases and knew what each case stood for during my second term, I practiced a ton of cases - but mostly focused on making really strong legal arguments which my professor had clued us in on during class. LEEWS is helpful if you're competing in a checklist issue-spotter method, but although profs at Northwestern said thats exactly what they were doing - I found out that my grades improved more - the more I deviated from the LEEWS methods.

I completely agree. Analysis is key and is what will differentiate you from other students. Most students at top schools know how to spot issues. It's easy and almost intuitive for most people who are intelligent enough to get in. However, the analysis and the ability to make compelling arguments is much harder and not something that LEEWS teaches. At best LEEWS is an introduction to exam taking. Something I would recommend if it were free since it really doesn't hold a candle to the free TLS guides written by people who rocked their 1L year, not some guy who went to Yale (which doesn't have grades) 20-30 years ago.

[traehekat]

to whoever asked - I did Northwestern 1L year - I've practiced exam-taking with about over a dozen kids from my section, and I was blown away by the quality of their analysis when we compared notes, which makes the LEEWS method (which btw shortchanges a lot of things where a number of points lie) kinda useless. Issue spotting is easier than actually formulating and presenting a strong legal argument. Sure, you can jump from party to party and see things from both sides' perspective, but that has nothing to do with advocating a strong argument for either side. I found LEEWS lacking in this latter aspect, which really impresses professors.

You can't really compete with high quality analysis by just spotting an issue and arguing it two ways, while not getting bogged down by the time, which is basically what LEEWS is - a time-managed approach to arguing in the alternative . . . I basically studied the living crap out of all the cases and knew what each case stood for during my second term, I practiced a ton of cases - but mostly focused on making really strong legal arguments which my professor had clued us in on during class. LEEWS is helpful if you're competing in a checklist issue-spotter method, but although profs at Northwestern said thats exactly what they were doing - I found out that my grades improved more - the more I deviated from the LEEWS methods.

I completely agree. Analysis is key and is what will differentiate you from other students. Most students at top schools know how to spot issues. It's easy and almost intuitive for most people who are intelligent enough to get in. However, the analysis and the ability to make compelling arguments is much harder and not something that LEEWS teaches. At best LEEWS is an introduction to exam taking. Something I would recommend if it were free since it really doesn't hold a candle to the free TLS guides written by people who rocked their 1L year, not some guy who went to Yale (which doesn't have grades) 20-30 years ago.

Which articles out there do a good job of explaining the analysis and arguments portion of exam taking? I've got a number of em bookmarked but I'm just curious to see the difference between what some TLS users say and LEEWS (or perhaps the gap filled in the LEEWS approach by TLS users).

[yellowjacket2012]

.

[RUQRU]

...