I recently read a blog post from a few years back by Ken DeLeon, the guy who founded toplawschools.com. He was encouraging first year law students (commonly referred to as \”1Ls\”) to focus on exam prep as the fast track to success in law school. I\’ve been out of law school for several years now, but still welcomed his discourse as a generally needed and refreshing strategy for students to consider. The final exam is indeed the point of all one\’s efforts for most law school courses. Much like any other defining test process that students encounter, success is primarily a function of how well you mastered the test format, and the underlying knowledge to a secondary degree.

So, great advice. I\’m a fan.

Still, his strategy makes some assumptions about learning styles and student mindset that gave me pause.

First, DeLeon\’s advice assumes a student who has considerable self-discipline to create a whole separate curriculum for her/himself that runs parallel to the official coursework throughout a substantial portion of each semester. DeLeon advocates creating a battery of law exams that one will march through during the final third of each semester. This is a material amount of work to do for each class, and a near impossible demand on anyone who struggling to keep pace with the reading and completing their course outlining in a sane and value-adding way. (Of course, DeLeon advocates just embracing the idea of being less than prepared for class, which does not work so well with any professor who accounts for class participation in his or her grading.)

Second, DeLeon assumes that a person can excel with a fairly independent learning process–it\’s clear from his writing that his study process was a solo act. Learning style differences are one reason this advice won\’t work for many. Another issue is the role of dialogue in the development of legal reasoning skills. For example, the all-important \”reasonable person\” one encounters in law school is, effectively, a diversity of mindsets and world views that figure into defining the objective person\’s actions and motivations. There is great benefit, therefore, in talking through cases and law concepts with classmates, as this will improve understanding of the \”reasonable person.\”

As I thought through these assumptions, I felt compelled to offer a few recommendations to neutralize their effect and thus extend the relevance of DeLeon\’s core proposition (see DeLeon\’s original column at bit.ly/S6Hj7W) to more 1Ls:

1. DO have a study group, but be aggressive about managing the agenda of every meeting, and be sure to consistently spend time on the entire path to academic success. So, rather than talking about cases in most sessions, vary the content to include practice exams, course outline development and law exam writing skill development. And don\’t wait until the last 3rd of the semester to start a diversified approach. Rather, start doing it absolutely no less than a bit before 50-60% from the end of the course.

2. DO get hold of past exams to get a feel for how the professor tests, always taking them under test conditions. You just need to understand what the law exam experience is like in order to know how your brain is likely to respond and what that implies about the complexity of the outline you bring into the final. Many would do well, however, to avoid those reviews into a whole parallel curriculum. Instead, use that time instead to put your legal writing coursework into practice and/or take a commercial course on exam writing. Again, a big part of doing well on a law exam is just knowing how to write it.

3. DO start doing practice problems/\”hypotheticals\” that force you to integrate your knowledge as early as your knowledge base will allow. Most study supplements review one topic at a time. However, most law exams are essay exams designed to integrate all the topics studied, thereby assessing a student\’s unified understanding of an area of law. Practice exams will help, but a good answer key is not always available.

Paige Green is with AddisonPapers.com, a 1L study aid that assists first year law students in integrating contract law knowledge so that they can handle final exam fact patterns effectively. Addison is unique among 1L law study supplements because it uses fiction heavily to enhance the study experience. For other areas of law, Emmanuels Crunchtime is a good choice because of the long form drills in the back of the book.

Paige Green is with http://Addisonpapers.com, a 1L study aid that assists first year law students in integrating contract law knowledge so that they can handle final exam fact patterns effectively. For other areas of law, Crunchtime is a good choice because of the long form drills in the back of the boo,

Author Bio: Paige Green is with AddisonPapers.com, a 1L study aid that assists first year law students in integrating contract law knowledge so that they can handle final exam fact patterns effectively. Addison is unique among 1L law study supplements because it uses fiction heavily to enhance the study experience. For other areas of law, Emmanuels Crunchtime is a good choice because of the long form drills in the back of the book.

Category: Education
Keywords: 1L, law student, advice for 1L year, law exam prep, law study supplement, success in law school