California's Tough Bar Exam, Long a Point of Pride, Faces Pushback
| Concupiscible dilemma | 05/31/17 | | nofapping affirmative action | 05/31/17 | | Aqua Out-of-control Candlestick Maker New Version | 05/31/17 | | Rambunctious round eye | 05/31/17 | | Bistre mad-dog skullcap | 05/31/17 | | ruddy boyish parlor | 05/31/17 | | Silver disturbing principal's office corn cake | 05/31/17 | | titillating meetinghouse idea he suggested | 05/31/17 | | soul-stirring white whorehouse sneaky criminal | 05/31/17 | | swashbuckling avocado double fault | 05/31/17 | | Silver disturbing principal's office corn cake | 05/31/17 | | swashbuckling avocado double fault | 05/31/17 | | Silver disturbing principal's office corn cake | 05/31/17 | | Concupiscible dilemma | 05/31/17 | | swashbuckling avocado double fault | 05/31/17 | | Bateful tanning salon | 05/31/17 | | Concupiscible dilemma | 05/31/17 | | swashbuckling avocado double fault | 05/31/17 | | Bearded frisky associate nursing home | 05/31/17 | | Milky Station Athletic Conference | 05/31/17 | | Silver disturbing principal's office corn cake | 05/31/17 | | Useless Misunderstood Heaven Blood Rage | 05/31/17 | | Mildly autistic site | 06/21/17 | | Curious pontificating gas station factory reset button | 05/31/17 | | Silver disturbing principal's office corn cake | 05/31/17 | | painfully honest zippy ratface | 06/21/17 | | frozen violent national | 05/31/17 | | Bateful tanning salon | 05/31/17 | | Rambunctious round eye | 05/31/17 | | dashing jet garrison coffee pot | 05/31/17 | | Unholy Hot Range | 05/31/17 | | Aqua Out-of-control Candlestick Maker New Version | 05/31/17 | | Bearded frisky associate nursing home | 05/31/17 | | Stimulating cruise ship | 05/31/17 | | Bearded frisky associate nursing home | 05/31/17 | | Metal vigorous corner | 05/31/17 | | Bearded frisky associate nursing home | 05/31/17 | | Stimulating cruise ship | 05/31/17 | | 180 locale | 05/31/17 | | Fantasy-prone antidepressant drug state | 05/31/17 | | Bearded frisky associate nursing home | 05/31/17 | | Bearded frisky associate nursing home | 05/31/17 | | Stimulating cruise ship | 05/31/17 | | Bearded frisky associate nursing home | 05/31/17 | | Stimulating cruise ship | 05/31/17 | | Bearded frisky associate nursing home | 05/31/17 | | saffron institution incel | 06/01/17 | | Bearded frisky associate nursing home | 06/01/17 | | passionate yapping school | 05/31/17 | | Bearded frisky associate nursing home | 05/31/17 | | Concupiscible dilemma | 05/31/17 | | supple preventive strike | 05/31/17 | | Bearded frisky associate nursing home | 05/31/17 | | Lime Bawdyhouse Psychic | 05/31/17 | | Fantasy-prone antidepressant drug state | 05/31/17 | | 180 locale | 05/31/17 | | Useless Misunderstood Heaven Blood Rage | 05/31/17 | | Milky Station Athletic Conference | 05/31/17 | | swashbuckling avocado double fault | 05/31/17 | | Bearded frisky associate nursing home | 05/31/17 | | Milky Station Athletic Conference | 05/31/17 | | Bearded frisky associate nursing home | 05/31/17 | | Metal vigorous corner | 05/31/17 | | Cobalt razzmatazz hunting ground location | 05/31/17 | | dull multi-colored address | 05/31/17 | | Citrine thriller philosopher-king mood | 05/31/17 | | Bearded frisky associate nursing home | 05/31/17 | | Brass school cafeteria | 05/31/17 | | Cobalt razzmatazz hunting ground location | 05/31/17 | | Concupiscible dilemma | 05/31/17 | | Bearded frisky associate nursing home | 05/31/17 | | swashbuckling avocado double fault | 05/31/17 | | Cobalt razzmatazz hunting ground location | 05/31/17 | | big puppy abode | 05/31/17 | | Cobalt razzmatazz hunting ground location | 05/31/17 | | exhilarant kink-friendly crotch party of the first part | 05/31/17 | | Wonderful emerald office | 05/31/17 | | Brass school cafeteria | 05/31/17 | | Vibrant Step-uncle's House | 05/31/17 | | Lime Bawdyhouse Psychic | 05/31/17 | | Talented windowlicker | 05/31/17 | | Harsh bright chapel | 05/31/17 | | ruddy boyish parlor | 05/31/17 | | Vivacious lodge sandwich | 05/31/17 | | Talented windowlicker | 05/31/17 | | Motley generalized bond marketing idea | 05/31/17 | | Chest-beating orchestra pit striped hyena | 05/31/17 | | Cobalt razzmatazz hunting ground location | 06/07/17 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: May 31st, 2017 3:39 PM Author: Concupiscible dilemma
LOS ANGELES—California’s notoriously difficult bar exam has long been a point of pride among the state’s lawyers. Now it is prompting blowback.
With passing rates hitting historic lows, the state’s law schools are pushing for a controversial change: lowering the score required to pass.
The educators argue that California holds graduates to an unreasonably high standard that no longer can be justified, especially as the price of law school skyrockets.
Others say lowering the bar would pander to a recent cohort of law students with weak credentials, and that law schools should either raise their own standards or shut their doors.
The issue came to a head after the announcement that just 35% of takers passed the most recent California exam, given in February. Only 43% passed last July’s test, the lowest mark for the summer exam in more than three decades.
Bar-passage rates nationally have trended downward since 2014. While some states have begun to see rebounds, others haven’t. Florida, for instance, continued a four-year downward slide on last July’s test, to 68% passing, down from a recent high of 80% in July 2012.
The declining rates have coincided with a steep drop in applicants to law school, spurring the programs to shrink class sizes and, in some cases, admit students with weaker grades and test scores. From 2010 to 2016, first-year enrollment at American Bar Association-accredited schools nationwide fell nearly 29%.
One camp of law-industry watchers blames the drop in passing rates on the declining credentials of incoming classes. Others point to changing study habits of millennials, who grew up with the ability to find information at their fingertips and aren’t accustomed to the intensive memorization and writing skills needed to pass a bar exam. Law schools point to the test’s required score as the problem.
The issue has been acute in California, which licenses the second-largest number of lawyers each year after New York and houses 10% of the nation’s ABA-accredited law schools.
Deans of 20 of California’s nationally accredited law schools earlier this year unsuccessfully tried to persuade the California Supreme Court, which oversees the state bar and regulates the exam, to temporarily lower the passing standards. The controversy soon reached the statehouse, where the Senate Judiciary Committee called a hearing to analyze the decline.
Now, the State Bar of California is racing to answer a series of existential questions: Is the stringent test—with a passing standard higher than all states but one—serving the public interest? And does the exam even test what incoming lawyers need to know?
A study released this week by two Pepperdine University School of Law professors, Robert Anderson IV and Derek Muller, concluded that California lawyers with lower bar exam scores were more likely to be disciplined or disbarred during their careers, based on limited publicly available data.
The format of the exam hasn’t changed substantially in decades, though the test will be reduced from a three-day undertaking to two days starting in July. A California state bar analysis concluded that the two-day test shouldn’t affect passage rates.
At University of California Hastings College of the Law in San Francisco, Dean David Faigman said he was shocked and disappointed last fall to learn that just 51% of his graduates taking the test for the first time passed the July exam.
While accepting that his school had to do more to help students prepare, his ire soon turned to the exam.
Each state sets its own passing score on a common multiple-choice section of the bar developed by a national organization. Since 1984, California’s so-called cut score has been 144, higher than every state but Delaware. New York uses 133; 16 other states set it at 135.
If California used the same passing score as New York on last July’s test, 87% of graduates from nationally accredited schools in the state would have passed, compared with the 62% who passed, according to an analysis commissioned by the state bar.
“Does California know something the rest of the country doesn’t?” Mr. Faigman said. “The more I dug, the worse it smelled in terms of what California was doing.”
Mr. Faigman and other deans say lowering the standard isn’t a matter of catering to students who are no longer equipped to pass. Instead, they argue there is no good reason passing the exam ever had to be so hard.
Weily Yang, a 2015 graduate of Whittier Law School in Southern California, failed the bar three times before finally passing February’s test. Whittier College announced in April it would close the law school, in part because of low bar passage rates.
Preparing for the bar multiple times taught Mr. Yang how to pass the test, he said, but “I don’t think it helped me at all at becoming a better lawyer.”
The 33-year-old has been living with his parents since graduating, and now has a job at a trusts-and-estates law firm. The time spent retaking the test, he said, “hindered my finances, it hindered my quality of life.”
Some practicing lawyers say the problem isn’t the difficulty of the test but that there are too many law schools churning out graduates with little chance of finding decent employment.
“The focus should not be on dumbing down the ability to pass the bar,” said Jeremy Rosen, a partner at California appellate firm Horvitz & Levy. Rather, Mr. Rosen said, the takeaway should be that “a lot of people shouldn’t be in law school. We have too many law students nationwide.”
The state bar is now working to complete a series of studies by the fall that will help the state Supreme Court decide what to do. Some states have moved their passing score down in past decades, though more have raised it.
“We intend to let the results of these studies guide the direction we take and the recommendations we make,” said Leah Wilson, the chief operating officer of the state bar, who added that the agency is concerned about the falling passage rates.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/californias-tough-bar-exam-long-a-point-of-pride-faces-pushback-1496242494
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3632051&forum_id=2#33438699) |
Date: May 31st, 2017 3:44 PM Author: Bistre mad-dog skullcap
Weily Yang, a 2015 graduate of Whittier Law School in Southern California, failed the bar three times before finally passing February’s test. Whittier College announced in April it would close the law school, in part because of low bar passage rates.
Preparing for the bar multiple times taught Mr. Yang how to pass the test, he said, but “I don’t think it helped me at all at becoming a better lawyer.”
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3632051&forum_id=2#33438757) |
Date: May 31st, 2017 3:50 PM Author: swashbuckling avocado double fault
It's a stupid test. I am studying for the bar in another state, and actually just bombed the essay in my practice area because the model answer was completely fucking wrong.
If it was just the MBE and the MPT that would be fine. But its the essays that are a problem because you can write a completely perfect and correct response and still fail if you don't address even incorrect issues. It's sort of like the common core for legal studies.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3632051&forum_id=2#33438793) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2017 4:03 PM Author: swashbuckling avocado double fault
I already passed the bar easily in another state.
And you're missing the point that there can be incorrect analysis. I'd analogize my situation to a wills question where a will was electronically signed online. I gave a succinct answer saying X statute says wills can be signed online and focused on more relevant issues. I ended up "failing" the practice essay because the model answer went through four paragraphs of case law from the 1530s that is no longer relevant, and also ignored how esignatures are actually dealt with.
The bar exam does not deal with real law, and it is not graded by real lawyers. It's a make up believe universe graded and created by people who have never practiced.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3632051&forum_id=2#33438922)
|
|
Date: May 31st, 2017 4:06 PM Author: Silver disturbing principal's office corn cake
the bar exam is a formula, and anybody with half a brain can figure out the formula.
if you're smart enough to have passed "easily" in another state, you should be smart enough to figure out the system.
the bar exam is not a bad basic 105 iq intelligence test.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3632051&forum_id=2#33438943) |
|
Date: May 31st, 2017 4:32 PM Author: Curious pontificating gas station factory reset button
"there's no such thing as an "incorrect issue" in issue spotting."
That's horseshit. You have to have some way of determining whether there's an "issue" in the first instance.
Otherwise, everything is an issue.
I doubt you believe that.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3632051&forum_id=2#33439233) |
Date: May 31st, 2017 4:12 PM Author: Stimulating cruise ship
“The focus should not be on dumbing down the ability to pass the bar,” said Jeremy Rosen, a partner at California appellate firm Horvitz & Levy. Rather, Mr. Rosen said, the takeaway should be that “a lot of people shouldn’t be in law school. We have too many law students nationwide.”
Horvitz & Levy are a bunch of smart people who literally wrote the book on CA appeals and writs. Hopefully the CA SCOTUS pays attention to them.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3632051&forum_id=2#33439000) |
|
Date: June 1st, 2017 12:11 AM Author: saffron institution incel
"can guarantee that within 20 years, at least 95% of trannies will be out of work"
Several years now of interest in automation and corporate law yet still no company has produced a product for automating drafting of corporate agreements...
Your prediction is dumb.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3632051&forum_id=2#33443192) |
|
|