Top Law Schools

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!

I'm also curious. A lot of people say LEEWS really helped them, but the CDs go for $160...which is a lot.

To piggyback: how long does the audio course take? (Or is self-paced?)

A quick look at the sticky COMMON 0L Questions or a forum search could do ou wonders

I bought it but have yet to start 1L. If you want to buy it, I suggest you get it from EBay.

arrrggghh the pirates are (org)anizing at the bay, they say "you dont have to pay".

LEEWS is the biggest waste of money ever! I took it a couple of years ago, during my 1L first semester and it basically stressed the importance of adjectives and isolation of issues....essentially common sense. I would not rec this to anyone for that much money. I did so much better my second semester than my first, where I practiced the LEEWS strategies.

Jordan77 wrote:A quick look at the sticky COMMON 0L Questions or a forum search could do ou wonders

that's a fair point, and I read the thread on LEEWS that's in the sticky. But I'm curious to know to what extent people implemented his advice- he seems to have some pretty unorthodox views on briefing, supplements, etc. I definitely plan to do this course, but did you follow it to the letter, or use the exam system, and study your own way?

One more question, kind of related to LEEWS- to brief or not to brief? Successful student Arrow didn't do briefs in the traditional sense of the word, neither did the NYU guy in the TLS article (I think) . LEEWS and Law School Confidential both advise against traditional, extended briefs. But xeoh did brief in full- there must be some benefit from doing this? There's so much contradictory advice, any insights would be much appreciated. And I did search the forum , but didn't turn up this debate. If there's already a thread on this , please excuse my repetitive redundancy and direct me to it, if you'd be so kind.

Jay-Electronica wrote:arrrggghh the pirates are (org)anizing at the bay, they say "you dont have to pay".

I'm currently about halfway through LEEWS and I have enjoyed it. I think it does an excellent job of teaching you to take a long, complex hypothetical and break it down into manageable components that allows you to then spot many issues.

It can be a little redundant at times, but I think he is driving home incredibly important points that perhaps aren't obvious to some.

EDIT: I'd love to hear other comments on this as well, though, especially from current students who have employed some or all of Miller's strategies.

blowhard wrote:

Jay-Electronica wrote:arrrggghh the pirates are (org)anizing at the bay, they say "you dont have to pay".

Can't believe anyone would actually pay for it

as a fellow lemming, I bought it.

ConLawLover wrote:LEEWS is the biggest waste of money ever! I took it a couple of years ago, during my 1L first semester and it basically stressed the importance of adjectives and isolation of issues....essentially common sense. I would not rec this to anyone for that much money. I did so much better my second semester than my first, where I practiced the LEEWS strategies.

Does this mean you used the LEEWS strategies in your first semester or your second? I read it to mean the latter the first time, which doesn't fit with your post. However, if you mean you used the LEEWS strategies first semester, and thus appear to be somewhat indirectly attributing your lesser performance to them, then abandoning them for second semester kind of contradicts your criticism that the strategies (LEEWS) are simply common sense. No?

Cilent21 wrote:

blowhard wrote:

Jay-Electronica wrote:arrrggghh the pirates are (org)anizing at the bay, they say "you dont have to pay".

Can't believe anyone would actually pay for it

He actually says in the beginning that he doesn't mind if you share it with a friend so long as you don't instruct with it. That intro paragraph is about as far into it as I've gotten...

blowhard wrote:

Cilent21 wrote:

blowhard wrote:

Jay-Electronica wrote:arrrggghh the pirates are (org)anizing at the bay, they say "you dont have to pay".

Can't believe anyone would actually pay for it

He actually says in the beginning that he doesn't mind if you share it with a friend so long as you don't instruct with it. That intro paragraph is about as far into it as I've gotten...

lol I laughed when I listened to that intro too. And yeah, I have not listened further than that. (Given I still have like an eternity until ls.)

Cilent21 wrote:

blowhard wrote:

Jay-Electronica wrote:arrrggghh the pirates are (org)anizing at the bay, they say "you dont have to pay".

Can't believe anyone would actually pay for it

Am I the only one who can't find a LEEWS torrent?

fenderjsm88 wrote:

Cilent21 wrote:

blowhard wrote:

Jay-Electronica wrote:arrrggghh the pirates are (org)anizing at the bay, they say "you dont have to pay".

Can't believe anyone would actually pay for it

Am I the only one who can't find a LEEWS torrent?

Edit http://lmgtfy.com/?q=leews+torrent

Thanks for the heads up BH

OMG get LEEWS. It's really sort of a no-brainer, but the system works. I love LEEWS.

megaTTTron wrote:OMG get LEEWS. It's really sort of a no-brainer, but the system works. I love LEEWS.

Would you say you followed the exam writing system extremely closely?

traehekat wrote:

megaTTTron wrote:OMG get LEEWS. It's really sort of a no-brainer, but the system works. I love LEEWS.

Would you say you followed the exam writing system extremely closely?

Yep, almost to a T. The broad structure I never varied from (i.e A v. B for one section, A v. C for the next etc.), unless the exam questions was not an issue spotter (rare). Second semester I didn't really review it that much and I might have varied a little on the exact analytical procedure or whatever. Didn't make a big diff on my grades (did better second semester, lol). It's a great system and when grading exams organization is key. LEEWS gives you organization.

I highly recommend LEEWS.

How long does LEEWS take to complete?

cgs230 wrote: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.

kalvano wrote:How long does LEEWS take to complete?

BUMP

I would like to know this as well. I need to know how many days/hours to set aside.

yellowjacket2012 wrote:

cgs230 wrote: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.

Interesting, what school are you at if you don't mind me asking.

For those wondering about time, I'm about halfway through and I've been at it for 4 days, about 3-4 hours each day. I'm doing it with a friend though, and a couple times we'll stop to just talk or whatever, so you can probably breeze through what I did each day in about 2 1/2 hours.

LEEWS does nothing if you go to a top school. The strategies involved and advice given are too simple and nothing new if you've been on TLS and read some of the articles on how to do well. I suggest just reading the TLS threads on how to do well in LS. Those are better than anything you can buy and helped me do extremely well my 1L year.

It might help if you go to a school that doesn't expect too much analysis from its students (no offense--this is what a professor who teaches at a tier 2 school who also teaches at UCLA has said) or from those who have no idea what a law school exam is like. But aside from these, it's a complete waste of money. I listened to the tapes once and it was a waste of ten hours.

Some people swear by it, but really they're just extremely hard workers and any strategy would've helped them succeed.