On Making Summaries and Maps
I built summaries from my case briefs, which mostly involved going through my lecture notes and adding things the prof had said that I hadn’t picked up on while reading the case. For cases where I did not have a brief, I made one from what the prof had said about the case in class. Then I colour-coded everything (e.g., in Torts, every time a public policy argument appeared, it was blue). Then I put little nerdy jokes in my summaries because it was funny or maybe because my brain had fried by then, I don’t remember which.
Start your maps EARLY! Look at other maps and try and emulate their format, but make your own. It is time consuming but there is no replacement for the overview that doing maps give you over the material.
Try to reduce cases to what they stand for in one sentence—what makes this case important? Then take the time to see the larger points of comparison—e.g., does the judge’s reasoning reflect a policy or rights based perspective?
Don’t go into too much detail. Most of the law can be distilled back to a few principles. For instance, torts is really about the defendant acting reasonably/reasonable foreseeability. Tie everything back to that.
Only use maps that you have used in test exams so you know they actually work.
On Using Other People’s Summaries and Maps
I know a lot of people who did well by studying from other people’s maps and summaries, but I credit what little success I had with making my own. It helped me understand and remember what was going on in a way that reading someone else’s summaries wouldn’t have.
Don’t read all the cases. Read upper year maps and summaries. If you need some of these documents, visit the SLS Wiki or hit up an upper year who did well. “But these maps are all different,” you may say. That’s the point. Reconcile them with each other, your own understanding of the cases, and MOST IMPORTANTLY, what your professor thinks.
Ask others for help. Use other people’s notes and summaries. […] I didn’t do this. I just kept reading in a panic. That’s a terrible strategy. Don’t do that. Don’t be a one-person island.
On Getting Help From Professors
The one thing I wish I knew from the beginning was that most of the professors are happy to talk to students. If you are confused about something, just go ask and you will probably get an answer or at least some help on how to get there.
Go talk to your profs. Email them first. Do this.
On Keeping Yourself Sane
Avoid your colleagues who congregate outside classrooms wanting to go through the exam you just wrote. Instead, run away to a great brunch spot with pals to clear your head, reward yourself and reset for your next study session. Make a solemn pact with your brunch crew not to discuss the exam you just wrote—it will just distract you from your next exam and lead to unhelpful paranoia/disagreements.
Study with friends who are not competitive, who can discuss issues (without being egotistical if they are wrong) and who make you laugh. Don’t feel compelled to work with friends who are otherwise great but turn into jerky stressballs around exams—you can return to being 24/7 BFFs after exams.
It’s important to maintain your extra-curricular commitments—to see them as adding to your education and your quality of life, rather than detracting from it. I have a two part test that I use, which I learned from the great legal scholar Missy Elliott. “Is it worth it? Let me work it.” In the first branch of the test, you must ascertain whether the activity is valuable, by whatever metric is relevant. Is it helpful or community building or politically worthwhile? The second branch of the test is to work it.
The best advice I got was from Maya Ollek, when we were both 1Ls. She told me, “Get lots of sleep and trust your brain.” I kept sharing that little aphorism with our classmates, and apparently people repeating it back to Maya third hand. Oh, law school. You can’t keep anything secret around here.
On Actually, You Know, Studying
Think up essay questions and write some examples based on the cases—it forces you to make connections and to know the cases quickly. If you need to look at your map to remember what the cases stand for, you are not prepared enough. Know that one case stands for this proposition and be able to explain how the reasoning of another case contrasts with it.
You should be able to argue both sides of an issue, but you should practice giving an opinion. That is what legal advice requires—what would a judge decide based on the facts? If you just argue on one hand and then on the other hand, you will not demonstrate your ability to synthesize the facts and law. What would your advice be to a client based on the facts and your knowledge of the case law? Write with confidence! This is the most important step, and I would say the toughest.
The day before each exam, I wrote a practice exam from a previous year and met with a group of 4 or 5 people to compare answers. That was really helpful. There’s nothing like arguing with someone about how a legal principle works to help you understand it.
Fifthly, get a good study group together and share your deepest and darkest secrets and insights with them. You never know how your super brilliant insight will hold up to scrutiny — better to test it out on your peers than make an ass out of yourself by writing it on an exam. Teach them and they will teach you. Befriend these people.
