Generic 2/3L courses that can be self taught from supps Forum

[Nova]

What courses typically have generic law that can I teach myself through supplements?

Im guessing Crim Pro and Evidence. Is that right?

Any other suggestions?

[09042014]

Admin

Enviro

Trusts and Estates

Basically anything EE makes a book for.

[target]

I was thinking any classes that has a supplement for. Why do you have to teach yourself?

[Nova]

Why do you have to teach yourself?

I just learn better that way.

I have a hard time staying engaged during class.

[target]

The materials that are taught usually are only abstracts of what you need. This year, I have to learn an area of law for this moot court competition, so I just spent days and weeks reading treatises. I definitely came out knowing more than a person who took the class.

edit to clarify

[ph14]

Corporations
Antitrust
Evidence
Federal Courts
Trusts and Estates
Administrative Law
First Amendment
Constitutional Law
Public International Law
Securities Regulation
Bankruptcy

[Bikeflip]

Basically anything EE makes a book for.

[romothesavior]

Unless you have an oddball prof or a unique class, all of them.

[MinEMorris]

Unless you have an oddball prof or a unique class, all of them.

This.

I don't understand the concept of something that can be learned in class but cannot be learned in supplements. Is there something that a professor can say, but not write? Is there something that can be put in a power point slide, but not in a book? The only real advantage of a live professor is the chance for her/him to react to difficulties the students are having, but I feel like this is outweighed by the fact that supplements are carefully planned and edited. Not to mention, how many of us actually raise our hands or go to office hours, anyway? In terms of substantive material that I've learned in law school, I have little doubt that I could replace my entire law school education with 3 months of dedicated supplement reading.

As I understand it, especially if you're doing litigation, the vast majority of questions you deal with will be things you've never taken a class on. Even if it's something you've taken a class on, it will very rarely be an issue you dealt with in class. As an attorney, you'll be expected to teach yourself virtually everything and anything.

I intend no offense to law schools or people that have truly valued their education experience, by the way. I know people learn in different ways, and I also know that there's a lot of advantages to a law school class beyond what the professor says (i.e. networking, communicating with other students and hearing their thoughts, etc.). But for me personally, I fantasize about a world where I can just buy a supplement and take an exam without paying the many thousands of dollars for the privilege to hear everything explained live.

[09042014]

A lot of 2-3L classes are kinda unique, especially if you stray from bar classes. And sometimes the professors teach it really oddly. I've never liked supplements anyway. They often don't use the same cases.

[MinEMorris]

A lot of 2-3L classes are kinda unique, especially if you stray from bar classes. And sometimes the professors teach it really oddly. I've never liked supplements anyway. They often don't use the same cases.

True that. For a lot of classes there is no such thing as a supplement. Also, some classes focus on the professor's perspective/interpretation, which is obviously unique.

[KidStuddi]

Unless you have an oddball prof or a unique class, all of them.

This.

I don't understand the concept of something that can be learned in class but cannot be learned in supplements. Is there something that a professor can say, but not write? Is there something that can be put in a power point slide, but not in a book? The only real advantage of a live professor is the chance for her/him to react to difficulties the students are having, but I feel like this is outweighed by the fact that supplements are carefully planned and edited. Not to mention, how many of us actually raise our hands or go to office hours, anyway? In terms of substantive material that I've learned in law school, I have little doubt that I could replace my entire law school education with 3 months of dedicated supplement reading.

I feel like you kind made law school that way by your own decisions. At least after 1L anyway. If you purposefully avoid clinics and seminars and opt for classes where you get lectured at all semester, what else would you expect? Reading canned lectures will always be an option in those courses.

[MinEMorris]

Unless you have an oddball prof or a unique class, all of them.

This.

I don't understand the concept of something that can be learned in class but cannot be learned in supplements. Is there something that a professor can say, but not write? Is there something that can be put in a power point slide, but not in a book? The only real advantage of a live professor is the chance for her/him to react to difficulties the students are having, but I feel like this is outweighed by the fact that supplements are carefully planned and edited. Not to mention, how many of us actually raise our hands or go to office hours, anyway? In terms of substantive material that I've learned in law school, I have little doubt that I could replace my entire law school education with 3 months of dedicated supplement reading.

I feel like you kind made law school that way by your own decisions. At least after 1L anyway. If you purposefully avoid clinics and seminars and opt for classes where you get lectured at all semester, what else would you expect? Reading canned lectures will always be an option in those courses.

You're absolutely right, and I have taken primarily skills courses since I finished 1L. Sorry, I wasn't clear that I was only talking about substantive courses/substantive material.

[Nova]

Thanks for the info, everyone. Very helpful.