Smarter Law Study Habits: An Empirical Analysis of Law Learning Strategies and Relationship with Law GPA

Abstract

Non-empirical school study advice that emphasizes reading and briefing cases, memorizing rules, and outlining without frequent self-testing and formative self-assessment is contrary to cognitive science and leads to a law school learning trap. Law students fall into a law school learning trap by focusing on memorization of cases and rules for class prep, putting off practice application of the as Law students and legal educators misjudge the power of testing as a learning tool, instead relying on non-empirical, anecdotal resources to guide student study methods. Empirical research from a Law Student Study Habit Survey shows that practice application of the through self-testing, self-quizzing, and elaborative strategies positively correlates with academic success in school, while reading and briefing cases, weak critical reading skills, and rote memorization of rules without practice applying the negatively correlates with academic success in school. Both legal educators and students need to incorporate testing and formative assessment as a study and learning strategy to learn each new topic, not just exam prep. Self-testing and formative assessment are not only critical for success in school, but help students develop successful learning strategies for the bar exam and as lifelong learners in practice.