|
Restored my confidence in the pursuit of a law degree. This truly is the book I've been looking for. Read 140 pages in first sitting, and expect to read and re-read many times. This is the first law school study aid that has made sense of the vast material being studied, along with a road map to successfully using this knowledge to answer essay questions. Highly recommended. It maps patterns in questions and answers. It's a construct. I struggled with "IRAC" -- which seemed too simplistic, never seemed to fit, and didn't afford the kind of depth of thinking and analysis graders expect to see, or that a future client would expect to hear.
It should be required reading for all entering 1Ls. This book is about thinking like a lawyer. No other book breaks down the "taxonomy" of legal problems like this book.
As a struggling 1L who didn't do so well her first semester, I would highly recommend this book. Professors/study groups do not teach you HOW to ace exams, they merely teach you the law.
I'd recommend this book to anybody attending (or about to be attending) law school. I suggest reading this before you even start your first term in law school because the concepts discussed in the book--such as issue spotting--are useful (even necessary) to know before going to class you 1L year. This book is a classic for a reason: it provides practical advice that can actually help you improve your scores on law school exams. I don't know of a better book out there on this topic (though there are many similar books on the market).
"Twin forks". This book breaks down issues you'll find on exams categorically. This is all great. Although some of them seem to require specific legal knowledge, which isn't particularly useful to you if you're a first year student just starting out.
It will certainly take up valuable study time to memorize these categories and how to spot them, with very limited utility. On the up side, there are sample problems at the end of the book, and some sample questions throughout. Restricting yourself to this formalization that the authors constructed might actually detract you from seeing the obvious. People think differently.
somewhat arbitrary. I suppose my biggest concern is that anyone who did well enough on the LSAT likely can see the legal issues themselves. Then you can study each category and learn to spot similar issues on exams (the idea is that you can develop strategies to handle each issue). Etc.
But then the categorization gets taken to excess with divisions and subdivisions of categories. The unfortunate thing is that these categories overlap and are. I follow the "forks in the facts" vs "forks in the law" distinction, factual issues vs legal issues.
|
