If I could do my first semester over again... Forum

[gogators]

i would never have listened to leews

why?

[nmoor1501]

something that may or may not have been mentioned:

look at old exams as early as possible, but not simply for the "practice." look at what the prof tests on. i spent half a semester agonizing over BLL when the final ended up being 90% policy. huge waste of time.

Just a quick question from an obvious OL: What is the difference between BLL and policy?

Edit: Nevermind! The question has been asked. Need to work on my close reading skills.

[XxSpyKEx]

Agreed. Some people think that because policy questions are more akin to liberal arts questions, it is sufficient to "bullshit" the answers (i.e., not prepare specifically for the policy portion of the exam). This is, I think, a bad approach, unless you are extraordinarily skilled at off the cuff policy. The better approach is to look at the policy mentioned in the casebook and in class, and look at law review articles cited in the textbook. Using this information, you can prepare canned policy points for your outline which you can easily copy into your answers.

Don't read law review articles cited in the casebook. Prof's (that aren't shitty) exams will be 100% based on things that were talked about in class and you will get no points whatsoever for going off on a tangent about some crap you read that wasn't talked about in class. If there's a law review article that was assigned reading, or discussed heavily in class, it might not be a bad idea to skim the article in addition to taking good notes in class on it. But in general, there's better ways to spend your time then reading stupid law review articles.

[XxSpyKEx]

You also have to remember that everyone else is asking for advice, everyone else is buying E & Es and doing "all the right things." After having just completed my first year of law school, i have come away with the following conclusion. Yes, i stressed about the other gunners and worried i wasn't doing enough. I made time to go out with friends, see movies, i exercised every day, made time to cook fun meals. I HAD A LIFE. Come grades time, i was top 10% at a T 30 school. I am convinced that, regardless of how much certain people do, there will be certain others who just "have it." What i mean is this, some people just have a natural, almost intuitive-like intelligence when it comes to law school. At my school, all of the top people in my section, for the most part (the people who CALI) are married, have spent some time out of school, had careers, etc. People with real world experience, who weren't necessarily more book smart, but they had already evolved an "it" that made them successful. Of course there are exceptions, but don't stress if you dont do the best your first year. We always think "what could i have done differently?" but sometimes at such competitive institutions, it isn't so much about what a person does wrong, as it is what the other high achievers have that can't be outdone by more studying, etc.

I think a better way of defining "have it" is luck. Luck is THE single factor that differentiates top 15% and top 5% (or better). The unfortunate thing is that the difference in between top 5% and top 15% in terms of law review, employment, and even transferring to a better school are MASSIVE.

[edcrane]

Agreed. Some people think that because policy questions are more akin to liberal arts questions, it is sufficient to "bullshit" the answers (i.e., not prepare specifically for the policy portion of the exam). This is, I think, a bad approach, unless you are extraordinarily skilled at off the cuff policy. The better approach is to look at the policy mentioned in the casebook and in class, and look at law review articles cited in the textbook. Using this information, you can prepare canned policy points for your outline which you can easily copy into your answers.

Don't read law review articles cited in the casebook. Prof's (that aren't shitty) exams will be 100% based on things that were talked about in class and you will get no points whatsoever for going off on a tangent about some crap you read that wasn't talked about in class. If there's a law review article that was assigned reading, or discussed heavily in class, it might not be a bad idea to skim the article in addition to taking good notes in class on it. But in general, there's better ways to spend your time then reading stupid law review articles.

What you say is true of substantive legal questions (prof never asks about law that wasn't discussed in class), but not true of policy questions, at least in my experience. Policy discussions in my class took the form of the prof speaking in extremely general terms about different approaches, students volunteering their ideas, and the prof trying to further stimulate independent thought (e.g., prof closes the class with "you should really think further about the differences between X and Y, and why one approach might be better than the other"). You can try to intuit policy points or produce canned points based exclusively on sometimes limited discussions in the casebook. Or you can browse a few LR articles, find the big policy points/arguments that most academics discuss and that the prof wanted to you to figure out, and profit. The choice is yours. I can tell you that the latter worked out well for me at my T6.

That said, I should emphasize that I'm talking about actual policy questions, not nuggets of policy that you elect to throw at substantive legal questions after you're done applying the law.

[Merriweather]

i would never have listened to leews

why?

because it's dogshit man.

it encourages you to attack things from a very basic and low-level angle that isn't enough at a top school. i paid the price in a class, trust me.

the one thing of value you get i will tell you now: don't brief cases.

[markakis]

i would never have listened to leews

why?

because it's dogshit man.

it encourages you to attack things from a very basic and low-level angle that isn't enough at a top school. i paid the price in a class, trust me.

the one thing of value you get i will tell you now: don't brief cases.

Did you attend a live lecture or purchase the audio material? I just paid a lot of money for the leews system, man; please don't tell me I've just wasted my money...

[Merriweather]

i would never have listened to leews

why?

because it's dogshit man.

it encourages you to attack things from a very basic and low-level angle that isn't enough at a top school. i paid the price in a class, trust me.

the one thing of value you get i will tell you now: don't brief cases.

Did you attend a live lecture or purchase the audio material? I just paid a lot of money for the leews system, man; please don't tell me I've just wasted my money...

even worse dood. he says in the first 5 minutes he encourages people to copy the mp3s and distribute them to their friends. i got a free copy of LEEWS in mp3 form.

[XxSpyKEx]

Agreed. Some people think that because policy questions are more akin to liberal arts questions, it is sufficient to "bullshit" the answers (i.e., not prepare specifically for the policy portion of the exam). This is, I think, a bad approach, unless you are extraordinarily skilled at off the cuff policy. The better approach is to look at the policy mentioned in the casebook and in class, and look at law review articles cited in the textbook. Using this information, you can prepare canned policy points for your outline which you can easily copy into your answers.

Don't read law review articles cited in the casebook. Prof's (that aren't shitty) exams will be 100% based on things that were talked about in class and you will get no points whatsoever for going off on a tangent about some crap you read that wasn't talked about in class. If there's a law review article that was assigned reading, or discussed heavily in class, it might not be a bad idea to skim the article in addition to taking good notes in class on it. But in general, there's better ways to spend your time then reading stupid law review articles.

What you say is true of substantive legal questions (prof never asks about law that wasn't discussed in class), but not true of policy questions, at least in my experience. Policy discussions in my class took the form of the prof speaking in extremely general terms about different approaches, students volunteering their ideas, and the prof trying to further stimulate independent thought (e.g., prof closes the class with "you should really think further about the differences between X and Y, and why one approach might be better than the other"). You can try to intuit policy points or produce canned points based exclusively on sometimes limited discussions in the casebook. Or you can browse a few LR articles, find the big policy points/arguments that most academics discuss and that the prof wanted to you to figure out, and profit. The choice is yours. I can tell you that the latter worked out well for me at my T6.

That said, I should emphasize that I'm talking about actual policy questions, not nuggets of policy that you elect to throw at substantive legal questions after you're done applying the law.

Ahh, I had a douchebag prof that did something like that at times. I just filed him under the one shitty prof I had all year.

[jennylynn]

I really can't feel bad for you with an A-.

[Merriweather]

I really can't feel bad for you with an A-.

yeah gtfo

[XxSpyKEx]

.

[Merriweather]

I really can't feel bad for you with an A-.

yeah gtfo

[Chuch]

.

[underdawg]

^
y'know, you could've just deleted your post

oops too late

[markakis]

I really can't feel bad for you with an A-.

yeah gtfo

lol. it was my worst grade last semester.

[ruleser]

You also have to remember that everyone else is asking for advice, everyone else is buying E & Es and doing "all the right things." After having just completed my first year of law school, i have come away with the following conclusion. Yes, i stressed about the other gunners and worried i wasn't doing enough. I made time to go out with friends, see movies, i exercised every day, made time to cook fun meals. I HAD A LIFE. Come grades time, i was top 10% at a T 30 school. I am convinced that, regardless of how much certain people do, there will be certain others who just "have it." What i mean is this, some people just have a natural, almost intuitive-like intelligence when it comes to law school. At my school, all of the top people in my section, for the most part (the people who CALI) are married, have spent some time out of school, had careers, etc. People with real world experience, who weren't necessarily more book smart, but they had already evolved an "it" that made them successful. Of course there are exceptions, but don't stress if you dont do the best your first year. We always think "what could i have done differently?" but sometimes at such competitive institutions, it isn't so much about what a person does wrong, as it is what the other high achievers have that can't be outdone by more studying, etc.

I remember one of my professors, after I met with him to discuss the exam (which I had done well on), told me something very similar. I didn't believe him at the time, but the more I think about it, the more I'm starting to believe it.

Um, it's like that in everything. Thousands can train to swim, even be Olympic quality and trained by the same in the same way, but a Michael Phelps is an MP, Michael Jordan is MJ. There's only so much training, the right school, work can do. For me, I can train in dance and get pretty darn good, but I'll never be as good as some people just are with a lot less work.

[kritiosboy]

.

[Zannie1986]

would successful 1Ls agree with this method of study? http://www.top-law-schools.com/success- ... chool.html

[mac.empress]

would successful 1Ls agree with this method of study? http://www.top-law-schools.com/success- ... chool.html

Don't think it is so much a method as advice.

[Zannie1986]

would successful 1Ls agree with this method of study? http://www.top-law-schools.com/success- ... chool.html

Don't think it is so much a method as advice.

okay, and good advice? bad advice? advice that you would second as well? he was calling it his "system" for studying and packaged it like he was proposing some rarely used technique..

[kimber1028]

.

[m311]

I'd spend more time typing and less time outlining.

[mac.empress]

I'd spend more time typing and less time outlining.

Our exams [Commonwealth/British law] are 2 hours to answer 3 questions. F-ing hard but only doable for me if I spend 10 mins outlining and 30 writing per 40 min block. That's the sweet spot.

[joesrevenge]

Despite not having grades for another month and still having one more final - my K's final on Tuesday - I pretty much know what I would have/will change(d) and what I will keep the same.

Change-
1. Read the E&Es along with the casebook or instead of in some cases (Glannon taught me joinder)
2. Read throughout the week instead of saving everything for Sunday
3. Go to more office hours during the semester instead of just during finals time
4. Leave my computer at home unless absolutely necessary (I get distracted easily)
5. Not freak out as much about finals (If you actually prepare they aren't that bad...duh)
6. Not give my outlines to everybody that asked for them (not before long everyone had them bc people kept sharing them)
7. Not be intimidated the first few weeks of class. (If you made it in then you're fine - I was convinced I was going to be the 'dumb' one)

Same-
1. Attend the bar reviews/have fun on the weekends. Its not the real world yet.
2. Use my notes to supplement an older outline (I learned way better this way than when I made my own)
3. Workout daily and eat healthy.
4. Start preparing for finals a month before (I wouldn't have time to sleep now if I hadn't)
5. Study in the library more than at home
6. Apply for summer jobs when Dec. 1st came. It was/is one less thing to worry about during finals (not that anyone hires without grades anyways though, but still)

As a note to 0Ls: I skimmed the E&Es and read Getting to Maybe before the semester and it did not help me much if at all. You have no idea whats important until classes start. You won't get an advantage. Just enjoy your summer.