#152: Lisa Blasser - How to Succeed in Law School

Got it—here’s a cleaned transcript with corrected speaker attributions and light copyedits for clarity, grammar, and consistency. All timestamps are unchanged.

Jonah Perlin [00:00:00]:
Welcome to How I Lawyer, a podcast where I talk to attorneys from throughout the profession about what they do, why they do it, and how they do it well. I'm your host, Jonah Perlin, a law professor in Washington, D.C. This episode is sponsored, edited, and engineered by my friends at LawPods. LawPods is a professional podcast production company focused solely on attorney podcasting. I absolutely love working with them, and if you're considering becoming a legal podcaster or just want to learn more, check them out at lawpods.com. And now, let's get started.

Jonah Perlin [00:00:36]:
Hello and welcome back. Today, I’m excited to welcome Lisa Blasser to the podcast for a special law-student–centered episode of How I Lawyer. In addition to owning her own law firm, Lisa’s a former law professor and Director of Academic Success at Western State College of Law, and she’s the founder of the Law School Success Institute. In this role, Lisa teaches a flagship course, the Law School Operating System, both in person across the country and online. She’s also the author of one of the best books on succeeding in law school—at least from my perspective—titled The Nine Steps to Law School: A Scientifically Proven Study Process for Success. Lisa and I met on LinkedIn, and I asked her to join me on the podcast for a special episode of How I Lawyer in advance of law school exams that—by the time this gets published—will be quickly coming up. This episode is obviously targeted at law students, but I hope even if you’re a practicing lawyer, you might give it a listen—maybe a little nostalgia—and share it with anyone you know who’s just getting started to help them succeed at the earliest stage in our profession. So welcome, Lisa.

Jonah Perlin [00:01:36]:
Thank you for being here. I really appreciate it.

Lisa Blasser [00:01:37]:
Hi Jonah, thanks so much for having me—and thanks for that awesome introduction.

Jonah Perlin [00:01:41]:
So, before we dive into everything exam prep—exam-taking nitty-gritty—I’d love to hear a little bit about you. What was your path to law, and what was your decision like to become a lawyer? And maybe even how did you end up doing what you’re doing now?

Lisa Blasser [00:01:56]:
Sure. I went to law school to prove to myself that I was capable of doing something really hard. You know, we all have our voices, our story, and our reason. And for whatever reason, in my history book of life, I was told a lot of “you can’t,” or “you’re all heart, no logic,” “you’re not smart enough,” “you’re not this enough or that enough,” or “law school’s not for people like Lisa—or you.” So when I got out of college, I said, what is something I can do to see if those stories were true or if they were just what someone was saying on their own agenda? So I went to law school. And then in my second semester, I got a letter from my law school saying I was going on academic probation. I had failed to meet the threshold of the law school; my GPA dipped below 2.0. And so in my head I thought, oh my gosh, these stories are true.

Lisa Blasser [00:02:47]:
It is true: I don’t have what it takes. I’m missing that piece that’s going to make me a success in life. And pretty quickly thereafter—I gave myself about a week or two to sit in that disappointment and really feel it—I realized, you know what? My law school’s giving me another semester. So I had an opportunity to shift the mindset and say, “This is your last chance to prove yourself and see if you have what it takes.” And that’s what I did.

Lisa Blasser [00:03:15]:
Jonah, I decided to wear my academic probation status as a badge of honor. I spoke with every professor I could get my hands on—at my law school and other law schools. I wanted to talk to students who were achieving their academic goals because that’s what I wanted to do. I asked: What are you doing? Here’s what I’m doing. It quickly became apparent that despite studying 60-hour weeks and really trying—spinning my wheels—I was super inefficient and ineffective. I was ultimately able to turn that around that semester. I got a 2.02—so 0.02 is what I hung my hat on.

Lisa Blasser [00:03:52]:
Small steps—and I made it. I proved the voices wrong. Every successive semester my GPA increased, luckily and gratefully. I graduated with high honors, passed the California Bar the first time, and I’ve enjoyed a fantastic 22-year career as a personal-injury lawyer, law professor, and all these great things I’ve been able to do.

Jonah Perlin [00:04:13]:
I love that. Honestly, it gives me tingles to hear, because I think so often people judge themselves by that first attempt at something. The metaphor I stumbled upon five years ago when I started this podcast is: every pilot needs to land a plane the first time, but they don’t get on the loudspeaker and say, “This is my first landing.” Your story reminds me of that graphic of exponential growth—it starts really constant, really low. People tend to stop right at the end of that long line of figuring out how to do it—

Jonah Perlin [00:04:51]:
finding yourself, finding your method, finding what works—and that’s when that hockey stick builds. It sounds like you’ve done that. But you could have just stopped there—you could have had this experience for yourself and then stopped. Instead, helping others succeed has been a huge part of your legal career. Tell me a little bit about that.

Lisa Blasser [00:05:16]:
Absolutely. And I like the hockey-stick analogy—I know exactly the graphic you’re talking about. I love it. I love that you stumbled upon that. That’s a piece of you, too, and that’s what you and I connect with. I’m a huge Jonah Perlin fan.

Jonah Perlin [00:05:29]:
Mutual admiration society.

Lisa Blasser [00:05:32]:
Yeah. It’s part of every fiber of my being to make pathways easier for those coming behind me. I’m a big believer in sharing experiences and information. I started by practicing for about six years as a personal-injury attorney—

Lisa Blasser [00:05:50]:
I cut my teeth doing personal injury, which I love and still do in my own practice today. For a bit, I did city-attorney work as a deputy city attorney for five cities here in Los Angeles, where I live. Around year five, I could feel it brewing: I wanted to give back to students now that I had practical experience. I never wanted someone with those same untrue stories about themselves to think it was over and just say, “I’m done. Law school is not for me. I’m not cut out to be an attorney.”

Lisa Blasser [00:06:20]:
My law school contacted me and said, “Hey, we have a position we think you’d be great for: Assistant Director of Academic Success and Bar Prep.” That was in 2009. I made the switch from my firm and went there. I wanted to work with students on probation—that was my thing. In working with probation students, I realized the law school did a great job in orientation and had skills courses, but no one was taking students and saying, “On day one of your first semester, here’s what you do.” We taught skills in a vacuum—briefing, IRAC, maybe outlining—but it was disconnected. In theory it was great, but in what order? And no one talked about how to make those skills applicable to the student’s own learning preferences.

Lisa Blasser [00:07:18]:
From my own experience of failing and succeeding at the same law school with many of the same professors, I knew what I did. But it makes me cringe when I hear someone say, “I was top 1/3/5%—do this and you’ll thrive.” It’s just not true. Our brains have their own fingerprints. I wanted to do something different. Michael Hunter Schwartz—who I’m a huge fan of, the godfather of academic success—gave me a 10–15 minute meeting at a conference. He said, “Lisa, I love your idea, but it’s just your opinion.

Lisa Blasser [00:08:01]:
“What you need is a qualitative, phenomenological study with law students to understand the lived experiences of students actually in law school attempting to thrive.” So that’s what I did—starting around 2016–2017, finishing in 2018. I did my first study and just finished my second qualitative study. The phenomenon: what do you do from day one of your semester to the final exam to achieve your goals? In the last study, I interviewed 250 law students across 50 U.S. law schools. I asked them to list their steps from the first moment to the final exam. How do you understand the information? How do you organize it? How do you achieve your goals? I was left with a huge picture, Jonah, of study systems—some had three steps, some 12, some 20. I eliminated redundancies across all 250+ student systems—

Lisa Blasser [00:08:59]:
and I was left with the most comprehensive picture of what students can do to succeed in law school. I organized that data from day one to the final exam. I now teach it to law students in a way where they use metacognition to understand how they’re learning while using the system. I use quizzes to understand thought process, learning preferences, personality typology. I show them how to customize the study system to their own learning, how to run that system for every topic, and how to calendar and schedule that weekly studying for each week of their 14–15 week semester or trimester. That’s what I do—and I love it.

Jonah Perlin [00:09:55]:
Wow. That’s fantastic. As someone who—thankfully—had mentors even before law school who said, “Here’s what worked for me,” I’ve tried to pass that on. But there’s always the tension: I’m giving you what worked for me. There’s a fear you’ll lead someone astray—and there are only so many hours in the day. Your approach balances the need for individual paths with meta best practices. That’s such a gift.

Jonah Perlin [00:10:43]:
We won’t get to all of Lisa’s system and work, but she’s agreed to talk through some big-picture pieces. I was thinking: preparing for class, then preparing for exams, then taking exams—three parts. Sound okay?

Lisa Blasser [00:11:07]:
Absolutely.

Jonah Perlin [00:11:08]:
Okay, let’s talk about class. Obviously every class is a little different; every professor is different. I teach legal practice/legal writing; my class is different than traditional doctrinal classes. What’s the best practice? How do you start getting ready for class?

Lisa Blasser [00:11:24]:
Great question. I view class as an opportunity to confirm what you taught yourself beforehand. You shouldn’t be the expert in the topic, but class becomes an exercise in saying, “Okay, I have a document compiling what I learned from the syllabus, any commercial supplements, my own reading/annotation/synthesis, and even a look at a sample answer beforehand.” For this topic we’re about to cover in class, I ask: Did I do a good job? You can assess that by asking: (1) Was I able to follow along? (2) Could I anticipate the professor’s questions? (3) Could I respond if called on? (4) Could I tune out when a classmate went astray? (5) Did I catch the cues the professor emphasized—on the board or slides? (6) Did I see the chronology of their questioning? If they start the same way each time, odds are I’ll follow that same chronology on the exam. If yes, class becomes a chance to sit back, confirm, learn, and listen.

Lisa Blasser [00:13:07]:
If anything needs clarification, get it. After class, tighten up the outline based on that confirmation. That’s the class process. If you want, I can go into what students are doing before class—the students in my studies.

Jonah Perlin [00:13:28]:
Let’s go there briefly.

Lisa Blasser [00:13:33]:
To get that feeling in class, students are—quote—“studying,” which basically means reading, briefing, and outlining simultaneously. Those are the three big law-school study skills. But before that, they look at the syllabus and identify the main topics for the next 15 weeks. Step one: main topics. If we’re in Torts: intentional torts, negligence, strict liability. Take intentional torts: how many are we learning? Say seven; then defenses. They’re chunking the information, creating a mental framework for where it goes. Then they take the first topic and run it through reading, briefing, and outlining.

Lisa Blasser [00:14:16]:
Which skill goes first depends on whether you’re a big-picture or detail-oriented thinker. Big-picture folks see the end result first and work backward; detail-oriented folks are linear and need step-by-step. Big-picture thinkers tend to outline every couple of weeks; their outline is less comprehensive and looks more like how they’ll write the topic on the exam—the document they will memorize from.

Lisa Blasser [00:14:54]:
Detail-oriented thinkers create a longer document with everything learned, then transform it into the exam-ready “approach” document (pre-writer/attack sheet). They often use sources to save reading time (e.g., Quimbee overviews, Lexis/Westlaw case summaries), then read the case, and outline/brief into one document. That document is what they bring to class for the confirmation process. When the topic is finished—no more information coming—big-picture thinkers look at sample answers and craft how they’ll write it; detail-oriented thinkers transform the 40-page topic outline into the succinct approach.

Jonah Perlin [00:17:07]:
That’s a lot of info. If you’re listening, rewind and break it down—it all makes sense. Concretely, I’m thinking back to my own (dated) experience. What worked for me—this maps to detail-oriented even though I think of myself as big-picture—was: do enough reading to understand class, but not so much that I didn’t have time after class. After class I distilled: 80 pages of notes → 50 → 20 → 2. If I could get it to two pages, I was ready—the other 20 were in my head.

Lisa Blasser [00:18:07]:
Yes—and you may have changed, Jonah. As you’ve become an expert at the process, you might now be a big-picture thinker. I love that you may have changed.

Jonah Perlin [00:18:17]:
I love the growth-mindset approach. Let’s talk briefly about time before class and after class. Students say there are only so many hours. Some front-load with perfect, color-coded briefs and then have no time post-class. Others learn in class and do most work after. Talk about the balance between pre-class, class, and post-class time.

Lisa Blasser [00:19:00]:
We have to stop telling students there’s only one way. If your brain works best doing most of the work post-class—and you can articulate understanding in your professor’s preferred format—do it. Your schedule will look different from the front-loader’s. You should probably be one week ahead on reading so you can do the post-class process and then outline after each class (or every Sunday). I’m not a fan of rigid “X hours per Y class hour.”

Lisa Blasser [00:19:52]:
I tell students: give yourself a track. “I’ll read/brief/outline 10 pages—let’s see how long that takes.” If 10 pages takes an hour, you can estimate the week’s load. Then slot work around fixed obligations. I still recommend being a week ahead so you can keep the system going. And don’t be afraid to use Friday/Saturday/Sunday: finish a course’s week of reading on Friday so Monday class feels calm and ready.

Jonah Perlin [00:21:05]:
That’s also a great practice skill. One of the best litigators I worked for never waited until the deadline—he’d find pockets to improve a brief. The best ideas often came in those low-stress 30-minute blocks, not the five-hour crunch.

Lisa Blasser [00:21:43]:
Couldn’t agree more. Test your schedule. It may change next week. Notice peak brain times and down times—use that data.

Jonah Perlin [00:22:03]:
Brass tacks: it’s mid-October; exams are 4–8 weeks away. What’s the plan of attack?

Lisa Blasser [00:22:27]:
You can’t memorize a 50–80 page bullet-point document. If you try, your exam will mirror that “brain barf.” Do what you described: compress to 10 → 5 → 2. But you must understand your professor’s preferences. Two biggest grade levers: (1) format (professor-specific), and (2) analysis. Schedule time with the professor: Do you prefer IRAC/CREAC/something else? Sample answers? Feedback? In analysis, do you want both sides or strongest side? Conclusion? Roadmap paragraph? Issue statements with facts or short headers?

Jonah Perlin [00:24:18]:
Great example—classic battery.

Lisa Blasser [00:24:22]:
Exactly. Know the number of topics, the exam preferences, write every topic in that format, then hone analysis. There’s fact-based analysis (“This fact proves/disproves the element because…”) and case-based analysis. The mistake in case-based analysis is “same facts → applies; different facts → doesn’t.” Instead, articulate why the court reached its outcome (the reason), then ask whether your exam facts share that reason.

Lisa Blasser [00:26:05]:
When I grade, I first scan to see if I taught well. The formatted answers go in one pile; others in another. Well-formatted answers are easier to grade—I’m in a happy place and want to award points. Even if the analysis is weaker, I can see comprehension.

Jonah Perlin [00:26:20]:
Two takeaways. First, classic issue-spotter exams are like being an ER doctor: patients don’t say “fractured fibula”—they say “my leg hurts.” You diagnose. Second, use the word because a lot—force the rule-to-fact connection. Reaction?

Lisa Blasser [00:27:19]:
100%. Also, go in with an approach. Step one is listing main topics—the potential “ailments.” Spend 45 seconds writing your one-page checklist before typing. Then, when you identify an issue, drop in your prewritten approach and spend saved time on analysis. Allocate time by fact density across issues. Everything is a system: organize, study, prepare topics, and execute on exam day—checklist, call of the question, read facts, element grids, drop approach, analyze, move on.

Jonah Perlin [00:29:11]:
Some professors bristle at “formula,” but I use it in the mathematical sense—reasoning from rules. Little bicycles: you just have to ride them. Identify the right formula and apply. If I taught doctrinal classes, I’d say bring your formula sheet—identifying rules is table stakes; application is the hard part. But formula creation isn’t always taught directly through the case method.

Lisa Blasser [00:31:12]:
Absolutely. I don’t get why “series of formulas” is looked down upon. Students still do it in their own way. Analysis templates are what I use in practice. I had a tough case recently—used my law-school operating system templates in a demand letter and got my client an additional $500,000. The company even updated its employee handbook based on the analysis. It’s not rocket science—yes, facts vary, but the method is consistent.

Jonah Perlin [00:33:10]:
Back to professor preferences. Many schools (mine included) provide past best answers/feedback memos. If you have access and don’t look, you’re doing yourself a disservice. Reverse-engineer your judge (professor). It’s a brand-new exam; you won’t learn substantive answers—but you’ll learn format and expectations.

Lisa Blasser [00:34:22]:
And don’t bring an 80-page outline to ask, “Is this good?” That shows you haven’t done the real work. Creating the outline should generate targeted questions—that’s what you bring to office hours.

Jonah Perlin [00:35:02]:
The outline is a learning document, not a freestanding deliverable.

Lisa Blasser [00:35:10]:
Yes—and we’re preparing for the final from day one.

Jonah Perlin [00:35:16]:
Totally.

Lisa Blasser [00:35:17]:
If 90% of your grade is the final—and grading is anonymous—don’t panic about cold calls. Learn steadily and gear up for the final.

Jonah Perlin [00:35:36]:
We haven’t talked practice exams; I’m a big fan. Your take on the last 5–10 days—or even 2–3 days—before the exam?

Lisa Blasser [00:36:00]:
In my nine-step system (not everyone uses all nine), the moment you finish a topic and create the topic approach (step seven), steps eight and nine are: write practice exams and assess performance. If you finish a topic in week two, start writing practice exams in week two using that approach. Do this week four, week ten, etc. The beauty is a calendar where you can see topic status, send me the outline and approach, then we review practice answers against your approach.

Lisa Blasser [00:37:16]:
So it’s not just the last 5–10 days. Some say “don’t outline until week six”—that’s a big-picture preference. But if you build approaches earlier, you’d have accumulated practice and be on autopilot in the final week—just memorizing approaches. If you understand something, it’s like riding a bike.

Lisa Blasser [00:37:54]:
Concrete target: write 3–5 full hypotheticals per topic. For multiple choice, pick a total number early, then distribute across weeks to hit the target before exams.

Jonah Perlin [00:38:17]:
At 50,000 feet: understand the law; get experience issue-spotting; apply to new facts. Build all three, and you’ll be better off.

Lisa Blasser [00:38:44]:
Boom. To Jonah right now for the mic drop.

Jonah Perlin [00:38:47]:
Love it. Last question: with your high-level view of successful students, any common themes—or surprises—that help people stand out?

Lisa Blasser [00:39:15]:
Surprisingly, study systems from 2015 to 2025 are very similar. I’m writing the second edition of my book; while I’m making changes, the basics haven’t shifted much—even with bar-exam changes. Students use new apps and note methods that save time, but the core is similar. I’m rarely surprised by how a student learns—I don’t expect one way. I start with goals, then see what they’re doing, then make it more efficient. Same process.

Jonah Perlin [00:40:31]:
As someone engaged in legal education, that’s a conversation we’re having. The tension of the new bar exam is present; not sure if it’s cause or solution. You’re right: we teach much like we were taught, so what succeeds hasn’t changed much. Will generative AI or the new bar change that? Maybe. But if you’re listening right now, you probably want concrete steps more than futurism.

Jonah Perlin [00:41:34]:
So I’ll leave it there. Thank you, Lisa, for opening your system to my listeners. If you’re about to take exams—whether for the first time or again—you can do this. Even if the exam is tomorrow morning—in six hours—you can get better. It takes time. Have confidence. Don’t tell those negative stories. You belong.

Lisa Blasser [00:41:40]:
Oh, I love that. The negative stories are just stories. Regardless of entering credentials—LSAT, GPA, UGPA—those are irrelevant to achieving your academic goals. Moving forward, there’s always a way, and all of us belong. If you’re here and listening and your heart is beating, you have an opportunity to achieve those goals.

Jonah Perlin [00:42:04]:
Amen. Love it. Lisa, thank you so much for being here. If people want to find your book or course or more about you, where are the best places?

Lisa Blasser [00:42:16]:
Thank you so much. It’s LisaBlasser.com—that’s my website, and everything is there. It’s been such an honor speaking to you, Jonah. You rock, dude.

Jonah Perlin [00:42:25]:
Mutual admiration society. Thanks for doing this. And if you’re taking exams—good luck. Lisa and I both have faith in you. You got this.

Lisa Blasser [00:42:33]:
You got this.

Jonah Perlin [00:42:33]:
Thanks again. I’m Jonah Perlin, and this is the How I Lawyer podcast. Thanks to podcast sponsor LawPods for their expert editing. If you’re a lawyer considering starting your own podcast, definitely check them out at lawpods.com. And thanks to you for listening. If you enjoyed the episode, I hope you’ll consider sharing it with friends and colleagues or on social media. And of course, if you haven’t already done so, please sign up for the email list at howilawyer.com or subscribe to the show wherever you listen to podcasts. As always, if you have comments, suggestions, or ideas for the show, please reach out to me at howilawyermail.com or @naperlin on Twitter. Thanks again for listening, and have a great week.