[Agreddor]

Doing law at uni now, and some of the books on my reading list are written terribly; poorly structured and organised, dry material, innumerable amount of superflous words etc...

How would you go about tackling this?

[kosko]

What I try to do is get a team together to split it up.

Hopefully you have a group of friends or people you can trust in the program, maybe not all are sharp as nails but I personally value the trust factor more as they will not snake you on this (go radio silent on their readings half way and mess up the group reading schedule for instance).

But essentially it is very simple. The reading list the same for your class so just divide it up. Instead of EVERYBODY suffering reading the same junk it gets broken up to each person only having to suffer evrey few/other week.

The only expectation is that there must be a need to take more effort to make very detailed notes and summaries so that somebody could read them and not of read the material and still know the core details and core points of what your Prof wanted to you all to figure out.

Just make sure you stay on top of monitoring the quality of the notes being passed around and get on those who might try to slack on it (this will involve more work initially from the leader who will have to shadow some readings to spot check and make sure quality is good). Once evreyone sees the value and time saved of it they will buy in 100%.

Why more people don't do this is amazing. I blame the passive nature of this generation and the fact you need a leader in this reading group to crack the whip if somebody's notes are sub par since it is affecting so many others.

Try with 4 people even just 2 is enough to save each from some misery. Also just make sure the notes stay in house. No freebies for others not in on the hustle, fuck them (which is why I say go for people you trust more).

Again, why more people don't do this leaves me amazed.

[The Beast1]

A friend of mine who went through law school decided to take a solid risk and not do the readings. Instead, since you only have two tests in the middle and end of the term that instead you should study strictly for the test. If a professor calls on you during class just look like a jack ass and say you didn't do the reading.

He ended up not doing that bad if I recall correctly. He got a solid 3.5, though he was at the tail end of the T14 school list and since he wasn't at the top of his class it wouldn't have guaranteed him access to a good paying gig after college ended.

Proceed at your own risk!

[Easy_C]

Learn how to skim. While you skim highlight and take notes of key definitions and concepts. The goal here is just to identify your learning expectations and familiarize yourself with key concepts.

Then immediately ditch the textbook and use Whatever library or internet resources you can to learn the material.


I do exactly what I recommend for my finance and economics courses.

[H1N1]

I did law at a top English Uni. It is shit. It's even worse than everyone tells you it will be. As Easy C suggested, skim the textbooks, read the commentary immediately surrounding the key cases, know the name of the key cases, the judge's commentary and famous dissensions from it, the key precedent it sets, and the chronological order of the cases relating to a particular doctrine. That right there is easily enough to secure a solid 2:1 at the best law schools. If you can recall famous diktats, 'He who comes to equity must come with clean hands' etc, and apply them correctly, and can quote certain commentators on the law who give an opposing view - EG 'Tort is often referred to as the law of wrongs, however, Stevens has presented an alternative analysis, which posits that torts are actually rights, generally enforceable...' then you are already heading well into First Class territory, irrespective of where you are at uni (obviously you need to be more rigorous and more analytical yourself to get really top marks, the above is purely illustrative).

You do not have to do a tremendous amount of work to get a solid 2:1, which if you're at a Russel Group University is probably enough to get you an interview with the magic circle, or silver circle, if that's what you want.

If you're struggling for motivation, remember that you are paying a shitload of money for the privilege of a soon to be meaningless qualification, which you will be paying for long after its usefulness has been exhausted. If you're going to pay all that money, and spend three years of your life on the treadmill to a qualification you could get in three months of hard study, you might as well not fuck it up by failing to read and understand the bare minimum required to get a useful grade at the end of it.

[Merenguero]

(11-08-2015 01:49 PM)The Beast1 Wrote:  

A friend of mine who went through law school decided to take a solid risk and not do the readings. Instead, since you only have two tests in the middle and end of the term that instead you should study strictly for the test. If a professor calls on you during class just look like a jack ass and say you didn't do the reading.

He ended up not doing that bad if I recall correctly. He got a solid 3.5, though he was at the tail end of the T14 school list and since he wasn't at the top of his class it wouldn't have guaranteed him access to a good paying gig after college ended.

Proceed at your own risk!

First year at my school, there was only one test, the final exam, in each class. Second and third year, some classes had midterms and others just had papers. First year, you could literally do nothing and if you studied an outline and were a great test taker, you could get really good grades. The real secret is just to get the outlines (both store bought and from students who took the course in prior years) and work on your exam writing skills. I didn't know that then and therefore struggled horribly my first year.

[LINUX]

I'd be willing to bet 80% of your classmates are on adderall or some alternative option.

[CodyB]

(11-08-2015 12:00 PM)Agreddor Wrote:  

Doing law at uni now, and some of the books on my reading list are written terribly; poorly structured and organised, dry material, innumerable amount of superflous words etc...

How would you go about tackling this?

Been there. LLB done in NZ, LLM started in Australia (incomplete, no use).

I went to Ebooks in my second year. Started control + F'ing all relevant content. Got by. Talk to your lecturers and tutors as well as this shits them just as much (unless they wrote the textbook, happens occasionally), they will tell you what is relevant and what is not. Get them after lecture as they're often more candid.

When it comes to superfluous wording, I feel that. It's not only a pain in the ass but archaic and unneccesary. You will find these textbooks are written by the RP speaking upper class Brits who actually suck as lawyers. If you ever have a choice, gravitate towards textbooks written by people of Indian/Pakistani or Jewish names. Am I generalising? Maybe. But I find them far more concise, practical and engaging.

However. This is a degree in LAW. Get used to reading and reading and reading. If you intend to be a lawyer, it will only get worse. Being learned is only half of the mission, learning how to skim and not miss anything is the other half.

[CodyB]

double post.

[Filbert]

A while ago, an acquaintance of mine, who is of hindu heritage, told me he used a simple sanskrit mantra for memory when studying. He said he rememered everything after just reading sth once. He had amazing results, but he also didn't drink or smoke. I used it sporadically, having moderate results, but I smoked, etc. Besides improving memory, it also makes reading very easy.

Mantra to increase memory power
AIM HREEM NAMAH
It has been said that the continuous chanting of the mantra increases memory power.It has also been recommended that this mantra need to be recited 1188 times to show results.

Read more: http://www.prophet666.com/2011/09/mantra...z3qyNsk8el

http://www.prophet666.com/2013/04/best-b...ntras.html

[GIMME BACK MY SON]

(11-09-2015 01:45 AM)Filbert Wrote:  

A while ago, an acquaintance of mine, who is of hindu heritage, told me he used a simple sanskrit mantra for memory when studying. He said he rememered everything after just reading sth once. He had amazing results, but he also didn't drink or smoke. I used it sporadically, having moderate results, but I smoked, etc. Besides improving memory, it also makes reading very easy.

Mantra to increase memory power
AIM HREEM NAMAH
It has been said that the continuous chanting of the mantra increases memory power.It has also been recommended that this mantra need to be recited 1188 times to show results.

Read more: http://www.prophet666.com/2011/09/mantra...z3qyNsk8el

http://www.prophet666.com/2013/04/best-b...ntras.html

Sounds very, very, very legit. Did all the talk of IRT now bring the affiliate marketing spammers to the forum?

[Agreddor]

(11-08-2015 05:35 PM)H1N1 Wrote:  

I did law at a top English Uni. It is shit. It's even worse than everyone tells you it will be. As Easy C suggested, skim the textbooks, read the commentary immediately surrounding the key cases, know the name of the key cases, the judge's commentary and famous dissensions from it, the key precedent it sets, and the chronological order of the cases relating to a particular doctrine. That right there is easily enough to secure a solid 2:1 at the best law schools. If you can recall famous diktats, 'He who comes to equity must come with clean hands' etc, and apply them correctly, and can quote certain commentators on the law who give an opposing view - EG 'Tort is often referred to as the law of wrongs, however, Stevens has presented an alternative analysis, which posits that torts are actually rights, generally enforceable...' then you are already heading well into First Class territory, irrespective of where you are at uni (obviously you need to be more rigorous and more analytical yourself to get really top marks, the above is purely illustrative).

You do not have to do a tremendous amount of work to get a solid 2:1, which if you're at a Russel Group University is probably enough to get you an interview with the magic circle, or silver circle, if that's what you want.

If you're struggling for motivation, remember that you are paying a shitload of money for the privilege of a soon to be meaningless qualification, which you will be paying for long after its usefulness has been exhausted. If you're going to pay all that money, and spend three years of your life on the treadmill to a qualification you could get in three months of hard study, you might as well not fuck it up by failing to read and understand the bare minimum required to get a useful grade at the end of it.

I am at a Russel group uni as a matter of fact.

What really really irks me is having to skim through all the superflous material to find the relevant information I need.

Bought some summary books to help, but I have to go back to my textbooks at the end of the day because the summary books are too skimpy.

Emailed my lecturer asking him to indicate which chapters in our constitutional law book is less relevant and this is the Email i received in response.

The best advice is simply to consult all the other textbooks in the library and find one you like. They all do the same job though in different way.

"Exam questions are based on the entire syllabus. Don't worry you will have plenty of practice before then.

With best wishes,

Richard." Fucking cunt.


Also, I have no interest in studying law (My parents made me do this).

[Agreddor]

(11-08-2015 07:12 PM)CodyB Wrote:  

(11-08-2015 12:00 PM)Agreddor Wrote:  

Doing law at uni now, and some of the books on my reading list are written terribly; poorly structured and organised, dry material, innumerable amount of superflous words etc...

How would you go about tackling this?

Been there. LLB done in NZ, LLM started in Australia (incomplete, no use).

I went to Ebooks in my second year. Started control + F'ing all relevant content. Got by. Talk to your lecturers and tutors as well as this shits them just as much (unless they wrote the textbook, happens occasionally), they will tell you what is relevant and what is not. Get them after lecture as they're often more candid.

When it comes to superfluous wording, I feel that. It's not only a pain in the ass but archaic and unneccesary. You will find these textbooks are written by the RP speaking upper class Brits who actually suck as lawyers. If you ever have a choice, gravitate towards textbooks written by people of Indian/Pakistani or Jewish names. Am I generalising? Maybe. But I find them far more concise, practical and engaging.

However. This is a degree in LAW. Get used to reading and reading and reading. If you intend to be a lawyer, it will only get worse. Being learned is only half of the mission, learning how to skim and not miss anything is the other half.

Great idea. Ctrl Fing keywords on E-books.

Next question: how would you deal with all the feminist propoganda? Equal gender rights, few female judges in the judiciary etc... When you've been assigned to argue for gender rights.

[H1N1]

(11-09-2015 08:56 AM)Agreddor Wrote:  

(11-08-2015 05:35 PM)H1N1 Wrote:  

I did law at a top English Uni. It is shit. It's even worse than everyone tells you it will be. As Easy C suggested, skim the textbooks, read the commentary immediately surrounding the key cases, know the name of the key cases, the judge's commentary and famous dissensions from it, the key precedent it sets, and the chronological order of the cases relating to a particular doctrine. That right there is easily enough to secure a solid 2:1 at the best law schools. If you can recall famous diktats, 'He who comes to equity must come with clean hands' etc, and apply them correctly, and can quote certain commentators on the law who give an opposing view - EG 'Tort is often referred to as the law of wrongs, however, Stevens has presented an alternative analysis, which posits that torts are actually rights, generally enforceable...' then you are already heading well into First Class territory, irrespective of where you are at uni (obviously you need to be more rigorous and more analytical yourself to get really top marks, the above is purely illustrative).

You do not have to do a tremendous amount of work to get a solid 2:1, which if you're at a Russel Group University is probably enough to get you an interview with the magic circle, or silver circle, if that's what you want.

If you're struggling for motivation, remember that you are paying a shitload of money for the privilege of a soon to be meaningless qualification, which you will be paying for long after its usefulness has been exhausted. If you're going to pay all that money, and spend three years of your life on the treadmill to a qualification you could get in three months of hard study, you might as well not fuck it up by failing to read and understand the bare minimum required to get a useful grade at the end of it.

I am at a Russel group uni as a matter of fact.

What really really irks me is having to skim through all the superflous material to find the relevant information I need.

Bought some summary books to help, but I have to go back to my textbooks at the end of the day because the summary books are too skimpy.

Emailed my lecturer asking him to indicate which chapters in our constitutional law book is less relevant and this is the Email i received in response.

The best advice is simply to consult all the other textbooks in the library and find one you like. They all do the same job though in different way.

"Exam questions are based on the entire syllabus. Don't worry you will have plenty of practice before then.

With best wishes,

Richard." Fucking cunt.


Also, I have no interest in studying law (My parents made me do this).

For your specific issue on constitutional law textbooks, use Dawn Oliver's. She is pretty much accepted as the queen of constitutional law, and it is her ideas your professors will most likely be drawing on.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Changing-Con...0199579059



Law is full of tedious crap. It is essentially a cartel designed to profit of the uninitiated and their fear of incarceration and destitution. If you're not going to drop out, the best thing you can do is accept that the next couple of years are going to be shit, try to find aspects of it that are interesting to you. For example, Trust Law is fascinating, but requires you not be a moron to properly get to grips with it. If there is a defining characteristic of the modern law student, it is that they are chronic overachievers incapable of balancing complex and seemingly contradictory thoughts in their head. Seminars on Trust law can be deeply enjoyable, and border on spectator sports at times. There is a special moment in every trust seminar when you watch the perfect students who have laboured their way to unblemished academic records realise that there is a minimum threshold of intelligence required to understand these complex concepts properly, beneath which no amount of studying will allow you to truly grasp the point. Try to find these little moments of joy, and accept that the rest of the time your studies are going to be pretty tedious.

[WestIndianArchie]

I was about to seriously reply but realized you're not in the States.

WIA