Truthfully, it didn't give me anything too terrifically earth-shattering, and some of the advice I flat-out can't use! For instance, the LEEWS approach is about issue-spotting, and not every exam is an issue-spotting exam. The LEEWS program will tell you that you can adapt their approach to any sort of exam, but that isn't true. If the biggest question on your Contracts exam tells you to write a contract.... well, LEEWS won't help. If your Property exam asks you to write conveyances for X that will allow him to keep control of the property while he is alive, give immediate possessory rights upon his death to his son, give delayed possessory rights to his daughter until she graduates from law school, and provides a steady source of income for his niece, all while avoiding probate... LEEWS won't help. And if you have a professor that despises the issue-spotting approach to exam-taking so much that he will sink instructions into the last quarter of his exam instructing you NOT to discuss personal jurisdiction with regards to A or B... LEEWS will hurt you. That's just my take on it, so take it with a grain of salt... and a shot of tequila. Exams are over!!!
Edited to add: The major exercise in the LEEWS program is a torts problem, and for good reason- I will TOTALLY use this approach for TORTS! I can't imagine a torts exam that is anything other than an issue-spotter, and the sheer mass of confusion that such an exam presents would make the approach worthwhile. So I mispoke when I said it wasn't useful... it's just not universally useful.