I recently was able to take part in a discussion with a very well respected and recognizable civ-pro professor. The question I asked the professor was: “is there anything you recommend that an incoming student learn or be aware of before they come into your classroom?” The professor answered with a very relaxed response that essentially stated: you could skim a commercial outline over the summer but you don’t have to, mostly relax and maybe read a novel [Paraphrase].

I found the answer shocking but it is also indicative of a response one gets quite often when asking this question. Some of the forms this answer takes are: “don’t bother learning anything.” “Don’t bother learning any substantive law, you don’t know what your professor is going to focus on.” Before I continue I should with full disclosure state that:

-I have yet to attend law school (This August I will be: God willing!)

-I did not study law in school formally and have never worked a legal job, my interest in law mainly comes from life experiences and my own independent watching of the news in my home country of the USA.

So ultimately because I come to this issue from a particularly inexperienced perspective, I might be completely wrong about my analysis so wanted to start this discussion as an open and transparent way of evaluating the arguments for and against doing 0L prep and to what extent.

My position:

Is a student in a better position if they go into an American law school not knowing anything at all about the law? Is that student going to be better prepared for a Con law class for instance if they have never heard of the 5th Amendment or the 14th amendment beyond a law and order rerun? Is that student going to be better prepared for a property class if they have never heard of the legal concept of trespass? Is a student better off as a “blank slate” to both learn the law, understand how that law might be applied to cases and then contextualize that information to such a degree that they can both effectively issue spot and know what is important for their professor come exam season?

I think the resounding answer to each of these questions is no, if we define “better off” as engaging with the material in a more meaningful way and doing better on exams, a student that knows something: what the basic elements of a contract are for instance, will be better prepared for the rigors of 1L than a student that knows nothing. As I have stated previously, I don’t know of any other domain of knowledge acquisition where an individual would be better off coming into something as a complete blank slate, think of how these pieces of advice (that are routinely uttered online in response to the 1L prep question) would sound:

1.The summer before med school, it doesn't help to know what the major functions of the liver are

2.The weeks before auto mechanic school, it is a waste of time to know what the major components of a car's fuel injection system are.

These pieces of advice hinge on a key assumption: that everything you could possibly need to know for the grades that largely (but not exclusive) determine your future employment will be dispensed in the classroom time. Could this be true? Airing on the side of caution, I would say no, but of course, my experience here is limited. Even if this is true, even if the exams are exclusively determined by what is stated in class, doesn't it help to come into the class with some background knowledge of the topic to be able to distill that information effectively? So for me personally, I just don’t believe the professor, respectfully. Civ-Pro is one of the most convoluted subjects I have ever looked into, with all due respect, I would rather struggle now when I have 2 hours per day to spare with the basics, then to struggle later, when 1L grades are on the line and my anxiety is running high and the cases we are reading are based on the foundations I’’m struggling at the very same time to learn. For me personally the question is not should one spend any time studying, but rather: how much time should be spent?

With that position outlined I should take the time to ask other 7Sagers:

-Did you 1L prep?

-If you did, did you feel better able to engage with the material?

-If you didn’t, do you wish you did?

-If you didn’t, did you feel “behind”?

-What do you wish you did differently?

*Fallacy alter: we might not be able to tell what the causal mechanism for being “prepared” here is. 1L prep or not.

So for me personally the question becomes: how much should I study? I have never heard the blank slate idea defended properly. I’m open to hear this case.

So for me, my plan is to read some outlines, continue taking the 7Sage courses, explore LarryLawLaw’s practice exam, read “getting to maybe” as well as some other 1L resources for bout 2 hours per day, schedule permitting. My plan is to be ready with the basics of each subject so I can build upon that knowledge and take practice exams. I don’t plan on writing a masters thesis on the origins of the 5th Amendment in British Common Law, lol, but giving myself some tools to be ready for the material. Gunner much? maybe… But as of this writing I simply cannot buy the blank slate approach.

*Full disclosure, no one paid me for this as an endorsement for anything, I receive no monetary kickback from anything I mentioned, this post is rooted in genuine curiosity and an attempt to stimulate engaging conversation with the users on this forum.

Questions for my fellow 0Ls:

-Are you prepping for 1L and if so, why and how?

-If not, why?

-Want to form an online study group, maybe reach out to some professors as guest speakers and review material together?

I should note here that I will commit myself to following up come 1L the best I can on these boards, particularly trying to answer the question: how much did 1L prep help me?