Q's for those who took Law Preview Forum

[billyez]

So, I'm going to be able to attend a Law Preview session before the semester starts. I'm getting it for free, so this isn't a question about whether its worth it or not. The question is did you guys feel like it successfully set the foundation for thinking about your law school classes in the proper frame of mind?

[truthypants]

It's very good--they walk you through how to create an A+ law exam answer and the sample answers they have are gold to prep with. I credit my A in contracts first semester from having taken law preview.

[billyez]

Ah, that's exactly what I was hoping to hear.

[lawschoolftw]

It's very good--they walk you through how to create an A+ law exam answer and the sample answers they have are gold to prep with. I credit my A in contracts first semester from having taken law preview.

Judging by the normal reaction to law previews on TLS im wondering if this is completely sarcastic or not...

[hithere]

I took it. I think it definitely helps you to get better grades your first year. The thing that's good is they give you examples of A+ law exams by subject. Plus, they teach you black letter law so you go in to law school knowing what promissory estoppel is, etc, which gives you an edge over students learning it for the first time. The other good thing is that they teach you what you need to be doing throughout the semester, how to manage your time on the law exam, how to master multiple choice law exams, etc. Definitely worth taking if you're a 0L.

[thesealocust]

edit: n/m

[billyez]

Perhaps the regulars have changed their minds, eh? Anyway, an opportunity is an opportunity and I'd be rather foolish not to take it now that I've had the good fortune of getting it for free. That's why I'm more interested in the assessment of those who have actually taken the course rather than a legion of individuals who deride it as a ploy on the feelings of 0L's who want to get ahead but don't have any experience with it.

While I'm the kind of person who talks more than he listens, I doubt I'm going to sense the need to broadcast my participation in it - it would probably give the wrong impression in the middle of a semester to talk about such things.

[thesealocust]

edit: n/m

[Renzo]

Don't admit to doing it. You're going to my school and if I find out who you are I'm going to go out of my way to find you and make fun of you ;D

Sealocust, I'm just going to follow you around the board an quote you. It'll save me a lot of typing.

[billyez]

But your instincts seem spot on with respect to broadcasting, so if you do it, God Speed and more power to you. Hope it works out.

Geez, I'd never wish GodSpeed on anyone...

[thesealocust]

edit: n/m

[TTT-LS]

.

[truthypants]

I tend to think of Law Preview as another commercial study aid for 1Ls. Some people like certain study aids more than others (e.g. E & E's, Law in a Flash flashcards, etc.). Personally, I found Law Preview to be gold for prepping for 1st year exams. Take it for what it's worth.

[Bosque]

Perhaps the regulars have changed their minds, eh?

Nope.

And if I offered you 10 weeks of shoveling manure for free, it would not be 'an opportunity' you would be foolish not to take because it was free.

But your instincts seem spot on with respect to broadcasting, so if you do it, God Speed and more power to you. Hope it works out.

TITCR. This regular hasn't changed his mind--though out of respect for OP I refrained from commenting until now, since his/her question was directed to people who had taken the LP class.

Same here. He asked for people who have taken it, and I have not. But for the record, I still think it is more likely to hurt you than help you. They might give you those A+ exams, but they are not going to be A+ exams for YOUR professors. Also, your professor might disagree with them about what the "black letter" law actually is. Be forewarned.

[Paladuck]

I thought it was useless. This is both because (1) its useless and (2) it became even more useless once I stopped caring on account of it being useless.

Spending 8 hours each day devoted to one area of law does teach you stuff, but when you actually get to law school you'll probably be learning that subject over the span of 15 weeks. At best it gave me a passing familiarity with a certain case or topic. I still did my reading, though.

Some of their advice was laughable, like a day by day breakdown of how much you should study if you want to be in the top 10% of your class. "Once October begins, you will need to study on Saturday as well." The teacher didn't even qualify the whole sphiel with a "it depends on the individual student, but generally..." I also found a lot of their studying techniques and briefing template to be unecessarily intense. It's as if their operating philosophy is to kitchen sink everything so as to preclude anyone from complaining that their methods, when followed, don't work. Well, sure they work. And a grenade will kill a spider, but its not necessarily the most efficient or practical use of your time.

That being said, only good can come of taking Law Preview, unless you count wasted time and unecessary stress as downsides. Since its free (or if you are rich) I'd recommend it under the theory of "why not?"

[Hiei]

For the people have never taken the thing, how are you able to say with such certainty that not only will it not help, but that it will probably hurt as well? Are you clairvoyant or something?

[TTT-LS]

,

[Hiei]

For the people have never taken the thing, how are you able to say with such certainty that not only will it not help, but that it will probably hurt as well? Are you clairvoyant or something?

(1) We know what they "teach;" and (2) we've had several semesters of law school each, so we understand what helps and what doesn't. What they teach doesn't help. QED.

1 and 2 are not enough for you all to say with such absolute certainty that the program will not help someone, especially if you've never even taken it. The people's opinion on this that really count are the ones who have number one and number 2 on your list, but who have (3) taken law preview. There were some posters in the thread who replied that have all 3 and that said it did help them; why would someone discount their more enlightened opinions for the chorus of people who have never taken it and deride it? Also what a lot of the detractors are saying goes against a common claim that many of them commonly make---that there is no one way to do well in law school and that what may not work for one person may work for someone else. I don't think anyone is foolish enough to believe that this program is guaranteed to work for everyone. However, it is equally unwise to make the blanket statement that it will not help (or not be worthwhile) anyone either.

In addition a lot of posters constantly say that if you are an "0L" you cannot know anything about employment prospects or what law school is like because "0L's" have never been in law school (actually didn't some posters start saying this and start using the term "0L" during first year orientations last year?). Based off of that line of reasoning Law Preview "OL's" or Law Preview "never L's" cannot make claims as to the the programs value. The program may or may not be worthwhile, I just find it a bit odd that those who have never taken it are treating their opinions on the program as if they are facts.

[thesealocust]

nm

[Bosque]

1 and 2 are not enough for you all to say with such absolute certainty that the program will not help someone, especially if you've never even taken it.

That would be why we say "more likely" to hurt and not "certain" to hurt.

The people's opinion on this that really count are the ones who have number one and number 2 on your list, but who have (3) taken law preview. There were some posters in the thread who replied that have all 3 and that said it did help them; why would someone discount their more enlightened opinions for the chorus of people who have never taken it and deride it?

Reasons someone might discount the opinions who liked law preview: because they know and trust the opinions of the detractors, because those people might be the exception and not the rule, because there don't seem to be very many success stories out there, because the supporters might be fake identities created to shill the product, because they can. Those are just a few examples.

Also what a lot of the detractors are saying goes against a common claim that many of them commonly make---that there is no one way to do well in law school and that what may not work for one person may work for someone else. I don't think anyone is foolish enough to believe that this program is guaranteed to work for everyone. However, it is equally unwise to make the blanket statement that it will not help (or not be worthwhile) anyone either.

Again, that is not what we are saying. We are saying it will not help most people, not all people. A few people might really like it, but then again a small portion of the population enjoys slamming it's nose, ears, and other fleshy appendages in doors.

[Hiei]

1 and 2 are not enough for you all to say with such absolute certainty that the program will not help someone, especially if you've never even taken it.

That would be why we say "more likely" to hurt and not "certain" to hurt.

The people's opinion on this that really count are the ones who have number one and number 2 on your list, but who have (3) taken law preview. There were some posters in the thread who replied that have all 3 and that said it did help them; why would someone discount their more enlightened opinions for the chorus of people who have never taken it and deride it?

Reasons someone might discount the opinions who liked law preview: because they know and trust the opinions of the detractors, because those people might be the exception and not the rule, because there don't seem to be very many success stories out there, because the supporters might be fake identities created to shill the product, because they can. Those are just a few examples.

Also what a lot of the detractors are saying goes against a common claim that many of them commonly make---that there is no one way to do well in law school and that what may not work for one person may work for someone else. I don't think anyone is foolish enough to believe that this program is guaranteed to work for everyone. However, it is equally unwise to make the blanket statement that it will not help (or not be worthwhile) anyone either.

Again, that is not what we are saying. We are saying it will not help most people, not all people. A few people might really like it, but then again a small portion of the population enjoys slamming it's nose, ears, and other fleshy appendages in doors.

To be honest I wasn't including your response when I was discussing the detractors; your response was reasonable. I was talking more about the one's who were speaking as if they were the absolute authority on the subject (yet had never taken the class) and that there was absolutely no way that the program could help anyone. Your response left room for the possibility that it could be helpful for some, some others did not (as if these posters were omniscient or something). I would assume it's basically common sense that the program may or may not help a specific individual.

[Bosque]

1 and 2 are not enough for you all to say with such absolute certainty that the program will not help someone, especially if you've never even taken it.

That would be why we say "more likely" to hurt and not "certain" to hurt.

The people's opinion on this that really count are the ones who have number one and number 2 on your list, but who have (3) taken law preview. There were some posters in the thread who replied that have all 3 and that said it did help them; why would someone discount their more enlightened opinions for the chorus of people who have never taken it and deride it?

Reasons someone might discount the opinions who liked law preview: because they know and trust the opinions of the detractors, because those people might be the exception and not the rule, because there don't seem to be very many success stories out there, because the supporters might be fake identities created to shill the product, because they can. Those are just a few examples.

Also what a lot of the detractors are saying goes against a common claim that many of them commonly make---that there is no one way to do well in law school and that what may not work for one person may work for someone else. I don't think anyone is foolish enough to believe that this program is guaranteed to work for everyone. However, it is equally unwise to make the blanket statement that it will not help (or not be worthwhile) anyone either.

Again, that is not what we are saying. We are saying it will not help most people, not all people. A few people might really like it, but then again a small portion of the population enjoys slamming it's nose, ears, and other fleshy appendages in doors.

To be honest I wasn't including your response when I was discussing the detractors; your response was reasonable. I was talking more about the one's who were speaking as if they were the absolute authority on the subject (yet had never taken the class) and that there was absolutely no way that the program could help anyone. Your response left room for the possibility that it could be helpful for some, some others did not (as if these posters were omniscient or something). I would assume it's basically common sense that the program may or may not help a specific individual.

Fair enough.

[MD/JD2B]

I took the course and had a great time! Nice intro to the main first year courses and excellent lecturers. I learned how to brief a case and have some idea of what it takes to get a case to court. The writing portion was a nice intro as to what resources you may want to use to start researching a case. If all this is old hat to you or youve been using Westlaw since you were two, or you figure you'll get in law school anyway, don't waste your money. For me it was worthwhile just to learn how attorneys apply coomon law or statutes to the case at hand and begin to "think like a lawyer" rather than memorizing things with no contextual framework.

[billyez]

Perfect time for a bump. I just started today. A lot of substantive matters from the start and the presenters seemed rather enthusiastic.

[chicagolaw2013]

Just took it last week. Granted, I haven't taken any classes yet, so I can't give any "proof" that it necessarily worked.

However, I feel that I grasp the "big picture" quite a bit after the substantive law classes. I know I have WAY more to learn, but my ability to at least have some kind of a big picture view of each subject I think will prove invaluable come exam time.

The thing I feel that helped most was the legal research and writing seminar on Saturday. I feel much more prepared to tackle my LR&W class in an efficient manner, instead of feeling like a lost puppy in the law library.

Overall, I'll say that I think the price was a bit much upfront, but I feel like if it ends up improving your grades, it's worth it.

Since you are getting in for free, you have nothing to lose. I had a few people in my class last week who were getting it for free, and they said it was the best time investment they could have made.