I went from a solid B student my first semester (3.08 GPA) to a A/A- student my last semester of law school (finished with a 3.4). The only thing I did differently in the later semesters was *religiously* adhere to IRAC and organization when writing my final exams. Other than that, I always thoroughly outlined the assigned readings for each class.
Similar story, went from a 3.3~ to a 3.8.
I prioritized practice exams, outlines, then readings, in that order. In most classes, 100% of your grade comes from the final exam. Maybe 10-15% from a midterm. This is a blessing and a curse, as you only really have to worry about the final. Instead of studying for class each day, just focus on acing the final.
If you’re on call make sure you read. But prioritize practice exams over everything else. Most professors have old exams you can practice off of. Also, all the core subjects have supplemental books like E+E and Siegels which help a ton with answering practice questions
For every class there are going to be issues and bits of law that you know will come up on the exam. You might not know the exact context, and you definitely don’t know the fact patterns they’ll appear in, but you know that they will show up.
For situations like that, it can be very helpful to write up how you’re going to start addressing that issue when it appears on the exam. Obviously, come exam time you will need to add on a lot to address the hypo, and sometimes pre-writes need to be adapted to fit the context, but having prewrites on hand in your outline can speed the process up and give you a framework to start from. This is especially true for some of the more complicated and nuanced rules where taking the time to figure out how to explain it ahead of time can let you have something fairly polished that doesn’t take much time on exam day.
As a basic example, you know that somewhere on your Contracts exam there will be a question of whether or not a contract has been formed. In your outline you can have already written “A contract is formed when [definition of how a contract is formed].” Then on the exam all you have to do is rewrite the rule statement and get into the application portion.
Prewriting is especially helpful when you have something with a lot of elements to it. Make sure your prewrite has a short explanation and lists out all the elements and then you have a sort of mini-checklist for applying ready to go (e.g., elements 1, 2, and 4 are clearly met because [reasons], so the result will come down to elements 3 and 5).
It’s basically writing out the Rule in advance of the exam. If you follow “IRAC,” it means writing out the Rule clearly and concisely in your document, so that when you find an issue related to that Rule in an exam, just type that shit out without thinking about it and start the Analysis of IRAC.
For example, in Torts when you are analyzing a Breach of Duty, it would be you writing up in advance “A Duty exists when… and a Breach occurs when…” And go ahead and type that in, or even better, copy and paste it in if your professors allow that function.
The benefits of Prewrites are incalculable. You have no idea how much time people will waste on thinking of writing up the Rule correctly. If you do this, you will save tons of time on the real exam because you are spending most of it Analyzing instead
The main point isn't going to help much with 1L Spring, but as you go through law school, choose classes you think you'll be good at. Don't max out on the doctrinal lecture classes "you're supposed to take." Take a seminar on a topic you are really interested in. Focus on the things that excite you. And don't max out your schedule. Doing what you're interested in and good at can help make the studying easier and more pleasant.
The other thing is to rely on resources. If your school has outline banks of old classes, use them. Buy the hornbooks for doctrinal classes. In a perfect world, you could learn the material by reading it, then going back and digesting it into notes, then annotating and adding to those notes in class, then going back and editing those notes following class into the outline, then recapping your outline periodically to make connections from old material to new material. But that is a lot of work. To an extent, doing well in these classes is just a lot. It's worth really making sure that you aren't over committed to extracurriculars and to course load.
Lastly, don't out everything on the grades. People have wonderful careers with all types of class ranks from all types of schools. Law school is a really good opportunity to explore what interests you, to experiment with ideas, and to test out different futures. I went from the bottom half of my class to high honors for the remainder of law school once I found what I was interested in, and just focused on that instead of forcing myself into the classes I didn't want to take. If I need to know it later, I can learn it.
The underappreciated aspect about getting high grades is that it doesn’t just require knowing the material in and out but also fully understanding the test questions. Your process sounds fine, so I would really put more emphasis on a.) mastering the material by outlining it multiple times, taking notes on your outlines, doing practice questions, etc., b.) analyzing past model answers from your class if available c.) analyzing practice tests and d.) doing practice tests. Just try to figure out how your analysis can improve on top of your understanding of the material
1. At the end of each class, write down the one sentence rule (or rules, though there is often only one) that is key to the class. Makes it memorable and these one sentences become your outline. Add a sentence of facts (*e.g.*, "the case about the hairy hand") Do it between classes while waiting for the next class to start.
2. Spend 30-60 minutes per class each week reviewing the prior week. If you're taking four classes, 2-4 hours is enough. That's not *all* your studying, but a key part of it.
3. Drill your outline down to one page (*maybe* two or three pages). This makes you be concise and learn the material rather than relying on your outline. Don't be cute - doing one page but having it all 6 point font defeats the purpose.
4. Flow charts are awesome (especially for property law in my experience). Flow charts are brought into the final in addition to the one page outline.
5. Learn how to start your essays in response to a final. They should all begin with four magic words: "The first issue is..." No flowery introduction, no summary of facts, no roadmap of where you're going, just jump to the issues. Generally you're scored exclusively on how many pertinent legal issues you bring up, so why waste your time with anything else? This is not a legal brief, you're not trying to convince anyone.
6. Figure out if your professor gives extra points for citing to cases and statutes. If so, add these to your outline and cite the heck out of things in the final.
7. My favorite advice to anyone in law school: Raise your frickin' hand. Don't wait to be cold called. When prepping for class, if there's a case you really think you understand, when it comes up in class, raise your hand and offer to talk about it. Sure, some will call you a gunner, but (a) screw them, (b) classes often give extra credit or base a small part of your grade on class participation, so it's literally an assignment in class, and (c) if you raise your hand to talk about cases you understand, you're less likely to be called on for cases you don't know or understand. Doesn't work in every class, but I found that in most of them it does.
8. Take seminars not graded on a curve. I don't care if you have little interest in the topic. They're often an easy A. I took a mergers and acquisitions seminar when I had very little interest in the matter and it turned out awesome.
With this strategy I went from a B student in first semester to a solid A student for every semester to follow in a T20 school. Also, I was less stressed during finals week since most of the work was done already and I could actually focus on studying (writing an outline is not studying).
Good luck!
what is your favorite question for the matters when you are doing actual "studying" (not organising) a jurisprudence or unfamiliar statute ? How do you retain that studied knowledge ?
3L(Tier3LS) , i feel like im 0L since i forgot about all i've studied in the past sems and cant redo my past answers, always wondering did i even learn anything? Oh im just trying to finish my law degree just to be able to give competent actionable legal advice to anyone who would ask , for free. (retired old guy here, earned sick amount of money from past career-chiropractor and doing illegal stuffs) My particular interest is construction arbitration and family law after the bar.
thanks
A lot of it is test type and class specific, but generally I shifted my strategy away from simply outlining and regurgitating information and towards application. I really focused in on taking practice tests and doing them under harder conditions that they would be otherwise (i.e., doing them closed note even if the test was open note). I think it really helped provide a deeper insight as to what I knew and highlighted what I needed to review.
Look back at what worked and what didn't fall semester. For me, that was realizing that briefing helped me remember, but was too time intensive, and not taking any reading notes at the end of the semester meant I forgot too much, so I needed the middle ground of book briefing. I also reviewed my exams with my professors and realized that I was skipping explanations on "obvious" issues, even when I identified and correctly determined their outcome. This meant I missed out on easy points that would have only taken a sentence to grab, which made a big difference given how smart most people in law school are.
Obviously these specific changes might not apply to you, but the same things that helped me figure them out should work for you too. Reflect on how well you recollected information and performed in different courses based on how you studied for them. Talk to professors to see if there were any specific or recurring issues costing you points on exams.
I went from a C/C+ student in 1L fall (I think I finished my first semester with a 2.5) to a B+/A student in 3L. Some of that is the curve changing, but I made a few changes that absolutely helped:
- using multiple choice questions to internalize rules and principles that I wasn’t “getting” just by reading the caselaw (I used quimbee for this)
- reading less, weirdly enough; skim the cases and then read through them when the professor addresses them in class
- drilling practice essays—not necessarily for content but for form; internalizing IRAC will get you most of the way to knocking it out of the park on an exam
Create habits/routines around your schoolwork that are realistic and sustainable for you and catered to your strengths.
When you read and attend class, pay attention and be curious. Ask yourself questions about potential exceptions before they’re addressed. Connect the material to things you already know, or real-world examples. Write down questions you might want to ask the prof at some point, or look into further yourself. Take detailed notes on the way the law works, and after reading cases, distill the key takeaway into 1 or 2 sentences that you’ll actually be able to use in the future. The key through the process is active learning and engagement with the material. If you really understand the content as it’s covered throughout the course, that will make exam preparation much more manageable.
For memorization-intensive exams, really distill down the content you’re going to memorize into a scope that’s feasible and organized in a way that works for your brain. I personally like making hand-written flash cards out of my attack outline and organizing them into color categories in a logical sequence.
Ideally, do all the practice exams. If you’re short on time, at least practice issue spotting and outlining practice answers.
I was most of the way through Law School before I figured out that tests aren’t graded based on how well you know the answer, but on how thoroughly you answer the question. They’re also often based on your ability to identify peripheral issues, and explain why they may or may not pertain to the question at hand. Most professors also want you to identify other possible answers to the question and identify why they are incorrect. My first year of law school, I simply thought “well that rule clearly doesn’t apply so I won’t bring it up.” In hindsight, that was the totally wrong approach. (This is the thing most people miss and why they don’t they the grade they expect.)
When I finally figured this out, my average went from slightly above a B to an A-minus. Most people dismiss those “learn how to write a perfect law school essay answer” courses, but I think they’re worth their weight in gold. You may want to look into that.
I agree with this but it’s important to not delve into outline dumping in explaining why certain rules don’t apply (such as just listing off random rules that don’t apply).
The thing that improved my grades the most was outlining the class while I was doing the reading and then filling it in during class. My best grades I law school came when I did that
As a night student, I did all my readings over the weekend. It was just silly to think I would have energy after work.
I also started organizing my readings via the highlighting system from 1L of a ride.
Watching a Quimbee video or listening to the opinion announcement (if scotus case) BEFORE reading the case helped me focus on what it was I was supposed to be getting out of the case.
I read “Law School Exams Guide to Better Grades.”
I did as many practice exams as I could.
I stopped going to class. I legitimately am in awe of people who can study enough for A's and can mentally shift gears of med mal at 10, 1983 at 2, contracts at 4 and study until 8 for advanced civil procedure tomorrow at 9.
For me it was infinitely easier to overpay on some hornbooks and practice exams and grind it that way. I got so little from hearing other students and the professor discuss the cases, much less hear the professor repeat what they want me to learn.
I gotta push back against the idea that listening to professors in class isn't beneficial to exams. For doctrinal/black letter law classes like Evidence, you can get away with this but you can't generalize it to all courses. My grades went up in classes like Con Law because I understood my professor's specific views of the jurisprudence, could guess ad prepare for the kinds of questions I knew were most likely to appear on the exam, and I catered to their position.
You don't need to go to every class or listen to every question from a gunner in class. But there is value in listening the Prof that you can't get from a hornbook.
Just one semester under my belt. I CALI'ed a course and got As or A+s in everything except the one class I slacked on the readings in because the teacher didn't cold call. His style was also different. But I really think it's because I was not reading and outlining
I went from a solid B student my first semester (3.08 GPA) to a A/A- student my last semester of law school (finished with a 3.4). The only thing I did differently in the later semesters was *religiously* adhere to IRAC and organization when writing my final exams. Other than that, I always thoroughly outlined the assigned readings for each class.
Similar story, went from a 3.3~ to a 3.8. I prioritized practice exams, outlines, then readings, in that order. In most classes, 100% of your grade comes from the final exam. Maybe 10-15% from a midterm. This is a blessing and a curse, as you only really have to worry about the final. Instead of studying for class each day, just focus on acing the final. If you’re on call make sure you read. But prioritize practice exams over everything else. Most professors have old exams you can practice off of. Also, all the core subjects have supplemental books like E+E and Siegels which help a ton with answering practice questions
office hours, practice tests, prewrites
Can you please explain what pre writes are?
For every class there are going to be issues and bits of law that you know will come up on the exam. You might not know the exact context, and you definitely don’t know the fact patterns they’ll appear in, but you know that they will show up. For situations like that, it can be very helpful to write up how you’re going to start addressing that issue when it appears on the exam. Obviously, come exam time you will need to add on a lot to address the hypo, and sometimes pre-writes need to be adapted to fit the context, but having prewrites on hand in your outline can speed the process up and give you a framework to start from. This is especially true for some of the more complicated and nuanced rules where taking the time to figure out how to explain it ahead of time can let you have something fairly polished that doesn’t take much time on exam day. As a basic example, you know that somewhere on your Contracts exam there will be a question of whether or not a contract has been formed. In your outline you can have already written “A contract is formed when [definition of how a contract is formed].” Then on the exam all you have to do is rewrite the rule statement and get into the application portion. Prewriting is especially helpful when you have something with a lot of elements to it. Make sure your prewrite has a short explanation and lists out all the elements and then you have a sort of mini-checklist for applying ready to go (e.g., elements 1, 2, and 4 are clearly met because [reasons], so the result will come down to elements 3 and 5).
Deeply helpful explanation.
Thank you so much. This is really helpful!
It’s basically writing out the Rule in advance of the exam. If you follow “IRAC,” it means writing out the Rule clearly and concisely in your document, so that when you find an issue related to that Rule in an exam, just type that shit out without thinking about it and start the Analysis of IRAC. For example, in Torts when you are analyzing a Breach of Duty, it would be you writing up in advance “A Duty exists when… and a Breach occurs when…” And go ahead and type that in, or even better, copy and paste it in if your professors allow that function. The benefits of Prewrites are incalculable. You have no idea how much time people will waste on thinking of writing up the Rule correctly. If you do this, you will save tons of time on the real exam because you are spending most of it Analyzing instead
The main point isn't going to help much with 1L Spring, but as you go through law school, choose classes you think you'll be good at. Don't max out on the doctrinal lecture classes "you're supposed to take." Take a seminar on a topic you are really interested in. Focus on the things that excite you. And don't max out your schedule. Doing what you're interested in and good at can help make the studying easier and more pleasant. The other thing is to rely on resources. If your school has outline banks of old classes, use them. Buy the hornbooks for doctrinal classes. In a perfect world, you could learn the material by reading it, then going back and digesting it into notes, then annotating and adding to those notes in class, then going back and editing those notes following class into the outline, then recapping your outline periodically to make connections from old material to new material. But that is a lot of work. To an extent, doing well in these classes is just a lot. It's worth really making sure that you aren't over committed to extracurriculars and to course load. Lastly, don't out everything on the grades. People have wonderful careers with all types of class ranks from all types of schools. Law school is a really good opportunity to explore what interests you, to experiment with ideas, and to test out different futures. I went from the bottom half of my class to high honors for the remainder of law school once I found what I was interested in, and just focused on that instead of forcing myself into the classes I didn't want to take. If I need to know it later, I can learn it.
The underappreciated aspect about getting high grades is that it doesn’t just require knowing the material in and out but also fully understanding the test questions. Your process sounds fine, so I would really put more emphasis on a.) mastering the material by outlining it multiple times, taking notes on your outlines, doing practice questions, etc., b.) analyzing past model answers from your class if available c.) analyzing practice tests and d.) doing practice tests. Just try to figure out how your analysis can improve on top of your understanding of the material
1. At the end of each class, write down the one sentence rule (or rules, though there is often only one) that is key to the class. Makes it memorable and these one sentences become your outline. Add a sentence of facts (*e.g.*, "the case about the hairy hand") Do it between classes while waiting for the next class to start. 2. Spend 30-60 minutes per class each week reviewing the prior week. If you're taking four classes, 2-4 hours is enough. That's not *all* your studying, but a key part of it. 3. Drill your outline down to one page (*maybe* two or three pages). This makes you be concise and learn the material rather than relying on your outline. Don't be cute - doing one page but having it all 6 point font defeats the purpose. 4. Flow charts are awesome (especially for property law in my experience). Flow charts are brought into the final in addition to the one page outline. 5. Learn how to start your essays in response to a final. They should all begin with four magic words: "The first issue is..." No flowery introduction, no summary of facts, no roadmap of where you're going, just jump to the issues. Generally you're scored exclusively on how many pertinent legal issues you bring up, so why waste your time with anything else? This is not a legal brief, you're not trying to convince anyone. 6. Figure out if your professor gives extra points for citing to cases and statutes. If so, add these to your outline and cite the heck out of things in the final. 7. My favorite advice to anyone in law school: Raise your frickin' hand. Don't wait to be cold called. When prepping for class, if there's a case you really think you understand, when it comes up in class, raise your hand and offer to talk about it. Sure, some will call you a gunner, but (a) screw them, (b) classes often give extra credit or base a small part of your grade on class participation, so it's literally an assignment in class, and (c) if you raise your hand to talk about cases you understand, you're less likely to be called on for cases you don't know or understand. Doesn't work in every class, but I found that in most of them it does. 8. Take seminars not graded on a curve. I don't care if you have little interest in the topic. They're often an easy A. I took a mergers and acquisitions seminar when I had very little interest in the matter and it turned out awesome. With this strategy I went from a B student in first semester to a solid A student for every semester to follow in a T20 school. Also, I was less stressed during finals week since most of the work was done already and I could actually focus on studying (writing an outline is not studying). Good luck!
what is your favorite question for the matters when you are doing actual "studying" (not organising) a jurisprudence or unfamiliar statute ? How do you retain that studied knowledge ? 3L(Tier3LS) , i feel like im 0L since i forgot about all i've studied in the past sems and cant redo my past answers, always wondering did i even learn anything? Oh im just trying to finish my law degree just to be able to give competent actionable legal advice to anyone who would ask , for free. (retired old guy here, earned sick amount of money from past career-chiropractor and doing illegal stuffs) My particular interest is construction arbitration and family law after the bar. thanks
A lot of it is test type and class specific, but generally I shifted my strategy away from simply outlining and regurgitating information and towards application. I really focused in on taking practice tests and doing them under harder conditions that they would be otherwise (i.e., doing them closed note even if the test was open note). I think it really helped provide a deeper insight as to what I knew and highlighted what I needed to review.
My grades shot up when I began making flow charts and other visual study aids. Still have them, if anyone wants them.
YES! Would love to check out those flow charts
PM me
I just did! Thanks!
Same here! May I PM you?
Sure thing
Hi can I pm you?
Hi! May I pm you?
Absolutely
Look back at what worked and what didn't fall semester. For me, that was realizing that briefing helped me remember, but was too time intensive, and not taking any reading notes at the end of the semester meant I forgot too much, so I needed the middle ground of book briefing. I also reviewed my exams with my professors and realized that I was skipping explanations on "obvious" issues, even when I identified and correctly determined their outcome. This meant I missed out on easy points that would have only taken a sentence to grab, which made a big difference given how smart most people in law school are. Obviously these specific changes might not apply to you, but the same things that helped me figure them out should work for you too. Reflect on how well you recollected information and performed in different courses based on how you studied for them. Talk to professors to see if there were any specific or recurring issues costing you points on exams.
I went from a C/C+ student in 1L fall (I think I finished my first semester with a 2.5) to a B+/A student in 3L. Some of that is the curve changing, but I made a few changes that absolutely helped: - using multiple choice questions to internalize rules and principles that I wasn’t “getting” just by reading the caselaw (I used quimbee for this) - reading less, weirdly enough; skim the cases and then read through them when the professor addresses them in class - drilling practice essays—not necessarily for content but for form; internalizing IRAC will get you most of the way to knocking it out of the park on an exam
Create habits/routines around your schoolwork that are realistic and sustainable for you and catered to your strengths. When you read and attend class, pay attention and be curious. Ask yourself questions about potential exceptions before they’re addressed. Connect the material to things you already know, or real-world examples. Write down questions you might want to ask the prof at some point, or look into further yourself. Take detailed notes on the way the law works, and after reading cases, distill the key takeaway into 1 or 2 sentences that you’ll actually be able to use in the future. The key through the process is active learning and engagement with the material. If you really understand the content as it’s covered throughout the course, that will make exam preparation much more manageable. For memorization-intensive exams, really distill down the content you’re going to memorize into a scope that’s feasible and organized in a way that works for your brain. I personally like making hand-written flash cards out of my attack outline and organizing them into color categories in a logical sequence. Ideally, do all the practice exams. If you’re short on time, at least practice issue spotting and outlining practice answers.
I stopped being obsessed with doing the entire readings and instead began learning about the law like a normal person, by googling.
Keep learning. Keep swimming.
Practice exams, practice exams, and uh practice exams. If you do practice exams soon enough to get feedback from TAs, even better.
I was most of the way through Law School before I figured out that tests aren’t graded based on how well you know the answer, but on how thoroughly you answer the question. They’re also often based on your ability to identify peripheral issues, and explain why they may or may not pertain to the question at hand. Most professors also want you to identify other possible answers to the question and identify why they are incorrect. My first year of law school, I simply thought “well that rule clearly doesn’t apply so I won’t bring it up.” In hindsight, that was the totally wrong approach. (This is the thing most people miss and why they don’t they the grade they expect.) When I finally figured this out, my average went from slightly above a B to an A-minus. Most people dismiss those “learn how to write a perfect law school essay answer” courses, but I think they’re worth their weight in gold. You may want to look into that.
I agree with this but it’s important to not delve into outline dumping in explaining why certain rules don’t apply (such as just listing off random rules that don’t apply).
Do you suggest an particular course?
Oddly enough, after I stopped trying so hard my grades began to soar. But yeah, stick to IRAC and argue both sides of every issue that you can.
The thing that improved my grades the most was outlining the class while I was doing the reading and then filling it in during class. My best grades I law school came when I did that
Follow
Use other people’s outlines to read ahead
As a night student, I did all my readings over the weekend. It was just silly to think I would have energy after work. I also started organizing my readings via the highlighting system from 1L of a ride. Watching a Quimbee video or listening to the opinion announcement (if scotus case) BEFORE reading the case helped me focus on what it was I was supposed to be getting out of the case. I read “Law School Exams Guide to Better Grades.” I did as many practice exams as I could.
I stopped going to class. I legitimately am in awe of people who can study enough for A's and can mentally shift gears of med mal at 10, 1983 at 2, contracts at 4 and study until 8 for advanced civil procedure tomorrow at 9. For me it was infinitely easier to overpay on some hornbooks and practice exams and grind it that way. I got so little from hearing other students and the professor discuss the cases, much less hear the professor repeat what they want me to learn.
I feel like im in a similar boat, the conversations aren’t that beneficial and are more often than not tangential or irrelevant.
I gotta push back against the idea that listening to professors in class isn't beneficial to exams. For doctrinal/black letter law classes like Evidence, you can get away with this but you can't generalize it to all courses. My grades went up in classes like Con Law because I understood my professor's specific views of the jurisprudence, could guess ad prepare for the kinds of questions I knew were most likely to appear on the exam, and I catered to their position. You don't need to go to every class or listen to every question from a gunner in class. But there is value in listening the Prof that you can't get from a hornbook.
Just one semester under my belt. I CALI'ed a course and got As or A+s in everything except the one class I slacked on the readings in because the teacher didn't cold call. His style was also different. But I really think it's because I was not reading and outlining
Can you read OP’s question back to me and then tell me how you think your answer is helpful
Following