Law School Discussion

Law Students => Online Law Schools => Topic started by: legalpractitioner on January 28, 2014, 05:33:18 AM

Title: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: legalpractitioner on January 28, 2014, 05:33:18 AM


http://admissions.calbar.ca.gov/Portals/4/documents/gbx/JULY2013STATS.012214_R.pdf
Overall Passrates

 
CA Unaccredited 
12.6
Law Office/Judges’ Chambers
14.3
Foreign Educated/JD Equivalent + One Year US Education
12.4
Foreign Attorneys Taking the General Bar Exam3
16.1

Title: Re: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: legalpractitioner on January 28, 2014, 05:40:04 AM
So there you go - about a less than one in 5 chance  no matter which alternative route route you take -

Versus 22% for NON ABA California Accredited

My alma mater Taft however had overall  a nore than 20% pass rate
Title: Re: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: legalpractitioner on January 28, 2014, 05:51:49 AM
Cooley lawschool however managed only 15% overall.
Title: Re: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: livinglegend on January 28, 2014, 07:37:16 AM
Granted Cooleys Michigan pass rate is on par with other Michigan ABA schools. Most schools pass rates drop substantially when their students take bars in other states. A lot of it is probably the stress of students simply adjusting to a new environment.

I will also add that I honestly believe whether someone passes the bar or not has more to do with the individual than the school they attend. Whether you went to Harvard or Cooley if you don't put the long hours of studying and practice exams in it is unlikely to go well and whether puts those hours in or chooses to Party, procrastinated or whatever else is up to them.
Title: Re: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on January 28, 2014, 12:53:27 PM
Very interesting results.

I agree with livinglegend that personal motivation is a huge factor. But when I see the incredibly low pass rates of many of the unaccredited and CBE schools it makes me think that they are simply admitting too many people who should not be in law school. A significant number of unaccredited schools had zero first time passers, and that's after the FYLSE has weeded out quite a few. I don't know if the problem is with students, the program, or both but having consistently low pass rates indicates a problem.

I also think it's interesting that many lower ranked CA schools have significantly better pass rates than much higher ranked out of state schools. For example, La Verne beat schools like Boston College, Minnesota, and Notre Dame. Golden Gate beat American, ASU, and many others. Southwestern beat Vanderbilt!

I don't accept that this is necessarily due to the advantage of being able to study CA law. When I was in law school in CA I think I took one CA specific class (community property). All of the other CA law I learned in BARBRI along with the out of staters. Considering how difficult the CA bar exam is, I think it's pretty impressive that a school can take students with lower GPA/LSAT numbers and still beat top ranked schools on the bar exam. Maybe the well known difficulty of the CA bar makes the CA schools strive harder? I dunno, but it's interesting.   
Title: Re: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: legalpractitioner on January 28, 2014, 03:59:45 PM
Concord's rates were fairly dismal given the Washington Post Corp. is the parent company.  Anyone contemplating DL should realize the odds are at least 5 -1 against and in the case of some schools off the charts.   However, I submit the problem is not necessarily schools but the students just not of the requisitie calibre. Low pass rates for foreign educated applicants also indicates that an offshore law school is  bad option.
Title: Re: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on January 28, 2014, 07:14:28 PM
I think you're probably right Jonlevy, but doesn't that mean that the DL schools should be implementing somewhat more stringent admission standards?
Title: Re: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: Citylaw on January 28, 2014, 08:49:07 PM
Maintain:

I don't think poor result have anything to do with the applicable law on the individual bar exam, but it has a lot to do with the stress of adjusting to a new environment. When I was taking the California Bar I was freaking out, but I went to law school in San Francisco and had my friends, girlfriend, apartment, etc in San Francisco and it was somewhat comforting to have a support structure during that time.

Had I moved across the Country to New York and not known a soul, rushed into some random apartment, and knew nothing the stress of all those changes would have been very difficult to deal with and the results may have come out very differently. This is something I don't think many law students take into consideration when studying for a bar or choosing a law school.

JonLevy:

As to distance learning schools I don't know if they need more stringent requirements. I strongly believe people should have a right to choose whether or not to attend law school. If they have a mental disability or something they should not be taken advantage of, but if someone is capable of obtaining a bachelor's degree they are smart enough to figure out their odds at a CBA school.




Title: Re: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on January 29, 2014, 09:28:26 AM
Maintain:

I don't think poor result have anything to do with the applicable law on the individual bar exam, but it has a lot to do with the stress of adjusting to a new environment. When I was taking the California Bar I was freaking out, but I went to law school in San Francisco and had my friends, girlfriend, apartment, etc in San Francisco and it was somewhat comforting to have a support structure during that time.

Had I moved across the Country to New York and not known a soul, rushed into some random apartment, and knew nothing the stress of all those changes would have been very difficult to deal with and the results may have come out very differently. This is something I don't think many law students take into consideration when studying for a bar or choosing a law school.

Yes, I agree that it's definitely a factor but to what degree? The pass rates for many out of state schools in CA is really low, like 25-50% even for first tier schools. A lot of those students are actually from CA and are returning home after law school, so they do have a support network. But as you say, others don't.

I just wonder if CA law schools prepare students for the difficulty level they will face on the CA bar exam, whereas other states prepare students for their own level of difficulty? It would interesting to see the rates at which CA students pass/fail other states' bar exams. I've never taken another state's bar, but I know people who have. With a few exceptions (NY and TX), most of the people I've to felt that CA's bar was more difficult, and in some cases significantly so.
Title: Re: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: Citylaw on February 01, 2014, 05:17:06 PM
I think there is no question California is the hardest bar. Almost every other has only two days of testing while California requires three, which means there is a whole lot more material that is tested on.

Additionally, the mental strain of three days of intense testing is a lot worse than two. I think a lot of smart people just burn out on day three, which doesn't happen in New York or Texas.

Out-of-State schools understandably do not go out of their way to teach students California subjects or that it is more difficult than other states since they focus on the state they are located in.

I truly think if you want to be a lawyer in California you should attend an ABA school in California, but I am just a guy on the internet.

Title: Re: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: legalpractitioner on February 02, 2014, 04:55:14 PM
Among big bars, DC and California have the hardest bars, Illinois one of the easiest.  If someone passes the FYLSE exam they should get a ticket to the bar. Low pass rates by DL applicants may have to do with:

1.  Poor performance on the essay questions.
2.  lack of preparation time due to employment and other responsibilites.

If DL students were allowed to take some of the easier bars like South Dakota with a consistent 90% pass rate - we would see those pass rates at least double or tiple.
Title: Re: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on February 04, 2014, 10:41:36 PM
Low pass rates by DL applicants may have to do with:

1.  Poor performance on the essay questions.
2.  lack of preparation time due to employment and other responsibilites.

As far as the essay questions, why is that? Do most DL programs use the basic IRAC format, or are many DL students simply coming in to the program with less college level writing?

As far as employment, many ABA part time programs have employed/married, etc students, but still have decent pass rates. Do you think this is due to the more stringent admission criteria?

If DL students were allowed to take some of the easier bars like South Dakota with a consistent 90% pass rate - we would see those pass rates at least double or tiple.

I completely agree. If we required ALL law students to take the FYLSE, and allowed DL to take more than California's crazy bar, we'd see fewer ABA lawyers and more DL lawyers as a result.
Title: Re: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: CA Law Dean on February 05, 2014, 04:26:50 PM
If I can jump back in here after being away from the discussion since last summer . . . IF the answer to why the California bar exam pass rate is so low was simple to figure out . . . trust me, our pass rate at Monterey College of Law would be 100%. First, remember that there are 21 ABA law schools, 17 California accredited law schools, and another 20 unaccredited and distance education law schools that feed applicants into the California bar exam. Compare that, for example, to 11 New York law schools, the next most populous state for law schools and other states that range to 1 school for Nevada and 0 for Alaska. This means that the applicant pool is dramatically different than for any other state . . . socio-economic, age, income, primary language, etc. Second, you need to realize that California deliberately scales the multi-state (MBE) scores so that a range of the raw scores that are passing in all 48 other states fail to make the cut in California. This "artificially" lowers the California overall pass rate and disproportionately affects non-traditional students, many of whom fall in the margin of difference. The three-day bar exam means that 2/3rds of the exam is timed essay and 1/3 multiple choice vs. 50-50 in most states. The exams are graded by lawyers who are 100% from traditional ABA schools and who were trained to answer law school exams in a homogenized environment that has changed little over the past 100 years. All in all, what it means is that the cumulative pass rates (not first-time and NOT Repeater - a nonsense number for this conversation) in California are far better comparisons for the state-by-state comparisons. Although the small cohorts of Monterey College of Law (one of the CALS) graduates could range from 0-80% first-time pass rates, the five-year cumulative pass rate of 66-68% is competitive in the context of the California scores.

Likewise, Concord Law School, the largest distance learning law school has about a 60% cumulative pass rate once you factor out their out-of-state and international students who have no interest in practicing in CA and rarely invest in the type of bar prep resources necessary to have a chance to pass in CA.

If you want to make your head hurt, here are the most recent 2012 statistics comparing national bar pass rates.

http://www.ncbex.org/assets/media_files/Bar-Examiner/articles/2013/8201132012statistics.pdf
Title: Re: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: legalpractitioner on February 06, 2014, 06:08:44 AM
Law Dean - thanks for the stats.  Note that DC has it right - more admissions by motion than anyone else by far.  Most states including California are violating the Commerce Clause by engaging in restraint of interstate trade by erecting barriers to practice and free movement.  Surely, one can expect a competent attorney with 5-10 years continuous experience to be able to seamlessly move between jurisdictions.  The differences in law between DC and California for example are minimal - at least DC thinks so and permits all California attorneys including non ABA to motion in after 5 years practice.  Even going to another commmon law country is not difficult for a seasoned lawyer who can read the rules and statutes.

Apparently the "public" needs protection from lawyers who  cannot read or comprehend statutes but then again what bar did they pass I wonder? 

Then there is the crazy quilt of federal district court jurisidictions - I can be a member of federal court bar for example in North Dakota but not Nevada - why?  Bar protectionism and restraint of trade.

Title: Re: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: cusc2011 on May 17, 2014, 11:14:05 AM
My good friend was notified yesterday that  they passed the Cali. They passed after their 2nd attempt.  They said the bar prep course was a waste of time for them, the biggest help was hiring a tutor.  My friend was a DL student.
Title: Re: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: barprephero on May 17, 2014, 01:58:16 PM
Among big bars, DC and California have the hardest bars, Illinois one of the easiest.  If someone passes the FYLSE exam they should get a ticket to the bar. Low pass rates by DL applicants may have to do with:

1.  Poor performance on the essay questions.
2.  lack of preparation time due to employment and other responsibilites.

If DL students were allowed to take some of the easier bars like South Dakota with a consistent 90% pass rate - we would see those pass rates at least double or tiple.
There is a lot of guessing in that. Perhaps SD has a higher pass rate BECAUSE they don't let them in?
Title: Re: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: legalpractitioner on May 17, 2014, 05:58:21 PM
Non ABA law students may have some effect on the cal bar pass rate but not enough to make a huge difference. California is acknowledged as a tough bar to pass.
Title: Re: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: barprephero on May 17, 2014, 08:23:01 PM
Non ABA law students may have some effect on the cal bar pass rate but not enough to make a huge difference. California is acknowledged as a tough bar to pass.
True, but that isn't what I was trying to get at. It was said that online grads would double their pass rate if in another state. My point is that I don't think that is true. I think that they'd still have a low pass rate. If you look at the stats in CA, they don't test even with ABA (even though its a tough test) they still have a much lower pass rate.

I think it has less to do with the online format of the school than the students themselves. I did a lot of CALI lessons and TWEN and other online lessons while in law school and a few pure online ones in undergrad. I think that if someone with a 4.0 undergrad and 171 LSAT went to Taft that they would have almost  the same odds of passing (if they took their studies seriously) but the average online grad does so due to not being able to get into ABA schools. 60 credits at 2.5 GPA and  a 140 LSAT is closer to the average for most. Being non trad students for the most part is a factor too. Even ABA grads who are non trad statistically do worse than trad students. (for a variety of reasons: work,family,etc) And they tend to have a lower bar pass rate on average for those same reasons.  Plus although there is no doubt some socratic method online I can't imagine its the same pressure as standing up in person being called on by the Prof in front of the class, for the correspondence offline ones I can't imagine anything even close to that. That pressure helps. As does the in person camaraderie that being facebook friends and on instant messages can't equal out to (heck even at the pub your studies accidently come up with classmates)

Remember too that often after a few years of practice other states let people petition to sit the exam in their state. Statistically non ABA do worse in those states too, as do those who "read for the law" in other states too.

Overall point being I don't think it mattes what state they sit it in, they would still have the same MBE. If you score a 129 MBE in CA you will score a 129 MBE in any other state too. The rest of it varies, that is uniform. If you can't get a 140 MBE you really shouldn't have gone to law school to begin with IMHO.
Title: Re: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on May 18, 2014, 10:08:31 AM
It's impossible to say exactly what DL bar pass rates would look like if more states allowed them to sit for the bar, but I think it is safe to say that they would increase.

These are pass rates from the July, 2013 CA bar:

Mich State   36%
Univ of Arizona  21%
Syracuse  25%
Suffolk  10%
Univ Nevada  29%

Each of these schools has a 70-90% pass rate in their home state. Clearly, the CA bar is tougher. It stands to reason that if DL students could sit for easier exams they would have a higher pass rate. That said, even if DL pass rates doubled they'd still be comparatively low.
Title: Re: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on May 18, 2014, 10:24:25 AM
There is a lot of guessing in that. Perhaps SD has a higher pass rate BECAUSE they don't let them in?

It's a common misconception that CA has low pass rates because of all the non-ABA takers. Here are the actual numbers:

                    July, 2013:  6635 first timers
                    95 from unaccredited schools, 337 from CA accredited schools

The pass rate is low because the exam is brutal, not because of DL/unaccredited takers. If every single non-ABA grad failed it would affect the rate by about 6%. The actual effect is probably 4%. What brings down CA's rates are the thousands of ABA grads who fail.
Title: Re: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: barprephero on May 18, 2014, 03:49:00 PM
Those are all out of state schools. Not the best comparison.

What about in state ABA?
Title: Re: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on May 18, 2014, 06:13:17 PM
Out of state pass rates are relevant because they demonstrate how much tougher CA's bar exam is. I think it's reasonable to assume that if DL students were permitted to take easier bar exams they would have a higher (though not necessarily high) pass rate. 

What about in state ABA?

In state ABA schools generally do better, which leads me to a theory I've been kicking around for a while.

It's possible that lower ranked California ABA schools (and some CBE schools) are better institutions than their admissions criteria would indicate. What I mean is, if a school can take students with relatively low GPAs and LSATs and get them to pass the hardest bar exam in the country at a rate of 65-80%, that's not bad. Especially considering that many T1 schools can't seem to do it. 
Title: Re: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: barprephero on May 18, 2014, 07:11:07 PM
Berkley has a good rep no one can deny that, but I suspect it more has to do with "home team advantage" you see this with other in state school grads in other states too.
Title: Re: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: CA Law Dean on May 27, 2014, 10:59:23 PM
Maintain FL350,
When we get the individual school statistics for the February bar exam in a few weeks, I believe that your theory on which institutions are better educators vs. which are merely selecting and processing high achievers (and taking credit for their success) will be apparent. As an example, Monterey College of Law's median entering LSAT scores are 30-34% but our five-year cumulative bar pass rate for the California bar exam is over 60%. Several years ago, Stanford's median entering LSAT scores were 98%, but their first-time pass rate fell to 88%. Obviously 88% pass rates are better than 60%, but as you are suggesting, if you use the LSAT as a performance predictor . . . MCL has performed at twice the predicted outcome, while Stanford has underperformed by 10%. Maybe an investigation is needed to determine what Stanford did to "ruin" so many talented prospects, while MCL weaves straw into gold.
Title: Re: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: barprephero on May 28, 2014, 12:26:40 AM
Maintain FL350,
When we get the individual school statistics for the February bar exam in a few weeks, I believe that your theory on which institutions are better educators vs. which are merely selecting and processing high achievers (and taking credit for their success) will be apparent. As an example, Monterey College of Law's median entering LSAT scores are 30-34% but our five-year cumulative bar pass rate for the California bar exam is over 60%. Several years ago, Stanford's median entering LSAT scores were 98%, but their first-time pass rate fell to 88%. Obviously 88% pass rates are better than 60%, but as you are suggesting, if you use the LSAT as a performance predictor . . . MCL has performed at twice the predicted outcome, while Stanford has underperformed by 10%. Maybe an investigation is needed to determine what Stanford did to "ruin" so many talented prospects, while MCL weaves straw into gold.

I question the math used in this. By what you wrote they didn't "ruin" anymore compared to you, and I am not sure if straw to gold compared to them is a good analogy either since you say you got a 75% pass rate and they got an 88%. 
Based on what you wrote earlier today:
"Monterey College of Law's 2014 graduates who took the February CA bar exam achieved an 86% pass rate (6/7). Our total first-time takers is 75% (6/9). Our cumulative five year pass rate remains over 60%, even with our "anomaly" of last July that was previously discussed. "

I don't think anyone expects them to have a bar pass rate exactly the same as their average LSAT percentile if that is what you are trying to get at either. 
Title: Re: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: Burning Sands, Esq. on May 28, 2014, 04:59:49 AM
I'd also have to confirm that individual bar passage rates have little to do with LSAT scores. In fact, the bar has little to do with anything,  especially the practice of law. It's just a licensing exam that serves as a rights of passage to regulate the number of people who can practice law in any given state.  In real life, nobody will lock you in a room for 8 hours and require you to provide professional legal advice to multiple issues off the top of your head without conducting any research.  Indeed, that would probably be considered malpractice in most jurisdictions.

With regard to the CA bar specifically,  it has one of the lowest pass rates primarily because it permits anyone to sit for the bar irrespective of whether or not they graduated from an ABA accredited law school. Most other states, by contrast, only allow ABA grads to sit for their respective bar exams. When you compare ABA stats to ABA stats, it becomes apparent that California is not the "hardest bar exam in the country" that most think it is.
Title: Re: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on May 28, 2014, 09:13:43 AM
With regard to the CA bar specifically,  it has one of the lowest pass rates primarily because it permits anyone to sit for the bar irrespective of whether or not they graduated from an ABA accredited law school. Most other states, by contrast, only allow ABA grads to sit for their respective bar exams. When you compare ABA stats to ABA stats, it becomes apparent that California is not the "hardest bar exam in the country" that most think it is.

Take look at the statistics available on Calbar's site. Non-ABA grads made up a whopping 6% of first time test takers last February. If every single non-ABA grad failed, the effect would only be 6%.

Fully accredited ABA schools from out of state often have pass rates in CA that are 20-30%, even though their in state pass rates are 80-90%. The fact that CA has a tougher than usual bar exam is evidenced not by the handful of non-ABA grads who fail, but by the thousands and thousands of fully accredited ABA grads who fail.
Title: Re: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: barprephero on May 28, 2014, 03:36:02 PM
I'd also have to confirm that individual bar passage rates have little to do with LSAT scores. In fact, the bar has little to do with anything,  especially the practice of law. It's just a licensing exam that serves as a rights of passage to regulate the number of people who can practice law in any given state.  In real life, nobody will lock you in a room for 8 hours and require you to provide professional legal advice to multiple issues off the top of your head without conducting any research.  Indeed, that would probably be considered malpractice in most jurisdictions.

With regard to the CA bar specifically,  it has one of the lowest pass rates primarily because it permits anyone to sit for the bar irrespective of whether or not they graduated from an ABA accredited law school. Most other states, by contrast, only allow ABA grads to sit for their respective bar exams. When you compare ABA stats to ABA stats, it becomes apparent that California is not the "hardest bar exam in the country" that most think it is.
The bar exam is not like real practice, I agree with you on that.
Statistically higher LSAT score, GPA, and even the school one attends do play factors in bar pass rates though
Title: Re: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: Citylaw on May 28, 2014, 09:59:50 PM
I think there is no question that an ABA grad is more likely to pass the bar exam than a CBA grad and someone who obtained a 180 LSAT score is more likely to pass the bar than someone who scored 150. It is entirely possible however, for both to pass, both to fail, or the 180 LSAT Harvard grad to not pass and the 150 LSAT CBA grad to pass.

At the end of the day whether you succeed or not in anything is up to the individual, but some people have an easier road to success than others. If you have the raw intelligence to score a 180 on the LSAT the road will be easier for you than someone who despite their best efforts achieved a 145 LSAT score.

Title: Re: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: Burning Sands, Esq. on May 28, 2014, 11:50:37 PM
I think there is no question that an ABA grad is more likely to pass the bar exam than a CBA grad and someone who obtained a 180 LSAT score is more likely to pass the bar than someone who scored 150. It is entirely possible however, for both to pass, both to fail, or the 180 LSAT Harvard grad to not pass and the 150 LSAT CBA grad to pass.

At the end of the day whether you succeed or not in anything is up to the individual, but some people have an easier road to success than others. If you have the raw intelligence to score a 180 on the LSAT the road will be easier for you than someone who despite their best efforts achieved a 145 LSAT score.

Exactly right.  I've known friends from Harvard Law who have failed the bar and friends from much lower tiered schools who have passed on their first attempt.  It all comes down to amount of preparation one puts in before the exam.  Raw intelligence will make it easier for one to learn the material but make no mistake about it - you still have to actually sit down and spend a significant amount of time LEARNING the material. 

Indeed, in the same year I had a friend from Cal Berkeley, a friend from U. Chicago, and a friend from Harvard who all failed the NY bar exam; they all procrastinated on studying until there were about 2 weeks left. Ironically, they each were extremely gifted at taking standardized tests like the LSAT and had grown accustomed to doing well with little to moderate preparation. When they applied that same strategy to the bar, not so good.   

Conversely, students who have regularly struggled with standardized tests tend to be fearful of failing the bar and thus become that much more motivated to putting in the time to study the material.  That doesn't necessarily mean that they will pass, but if they don't it's usually not due to a lack of effort.
Title: Re: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: Burning Sands, Esq. on May 29, 2014, 12:35:23 AM
With regard to the CA bar specifically,  it has one of the lowest pass rates primarily because it permits anyone to sit for the bar irrespective of whether or not they graduated from an ABA accredited law school. Most other states, by contrast, only allow ABA grads to sit for their respective bar exams. When you compare ABA stats to ABA stats, it becomes apparent that California is not the "hardest bar exam in the country" that most think it is.

Take look at the statistics available on Calbar's site. Non-ABA grads made up a whopping 6% of first time test takers last February. If every single non-ABA grad failed, the effect would only be 6%.

Fully accredited ABA schools from out of state often have pass rates in CA that are 20-30%, even though their in state pass rates are 80-90%. The fact that CA has a tougher than usual bar exam is evidenced not by the handful of non-ABA grads who fail, but by the thousands and thousands of fully accredited ABA grads who fail.

I wouldn't use data from the February exam as the standard for bar passage in any state because the February exam is typically comprised of repeat takers who were unsuccessful during the July exam.  Studies show that your chances of passing actually diminish after your first attempt, thus the February passage rates in most any state, including California, will historically be lower for February than they are for July.

That said, many claim that the California bar exam is the most difficult based on its July passage rate which, for ALL takers is usually around 55%. However, "ALL" takers literally means everyone, including the repeat takers who, as discussed above, typically do not do well on their subsequent attempts.  When you look at only the first-time takers of the CA bar exam, the bar passage rate is actually 68%.  When we look at first-time takers from CA's ABA schools, that number jumps up to a 79% pass rate. As far as bar exams go, a 79% pass rate is actually pretty high.

http://www.protectconsumerjustice.org/california-bar-exam-pass-rates-by-law-school.html

http://abovethelaw.com/2011/01/california-bar-exam-results-open-thread/

For an apples to apples comparison, the bar passage rate for first-time takers at New York's ABA accredited law schools hovers around 85%. That's only a 6 point difference between the two states.

You said that:
Quote
"Fully accredited ABA schools from out of state often have pass rates in CA that are 20-30%"

That's actually not true.  For the July 2013 California Bar Exam, the bar passage rate for ABA schools from out of state was 64.2% (906 out of 1,411 out of state students passed). That same stat for July 2012 was 63.6% (907 out of 1,425). In other words, the majority of out of state students at ABA schools pass the California bar exam.

That's not to take away from the difficulty of the California bar exam.  It is, without question, one of the most difficult bar exams in the country. However, people should understand that it's not much worse than other states when you look at ABA schools (which is what most of us have attended, are attending, or will attend).
Title: Re: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: barprephero on May 29, 2014, 12:24:09 PM
I think there is no question that an ABA grad is more likely to pass the bar exam than a CBA grad and someone who obtained a 180 LSAT score is more likely to pass the bar than someone who scored 150. It is entirely possible however, for both to pass, both to fail, or the 180 LSAT Harvard grad to not pass and the 150 LSAT CBA grad to pass.

At the end of the day whether you succeed or not in anything is up to the individual, but some people have an easier road to success than others. If you have the raw intelligence to score a 180 on the LSAT the road will be easier for you than someone who despite their best efforts achieved a 145 LSAT score.

That statement implies that everyone can pass if they try hard enough. That isn't true. Some do not have the ability to ever pass , no matter how hard they try. Its depressing but it is a fact.
Title: Re: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: Citylaw on May 29, 2014, 07:04:09 PM
Perhaps there was a miscommunication certainly some people are not capable of passing the bar no matter how hard they try. Perhaps they cannot handle the pressure of the exam, cannot grasp the concept of IRAC, which is not tested on the LSAT etc.

My point was simply that passing the bar is easier for some and harder for others. There are people no matter how hard they try will not be able to pass.

Title: Re: July 2013 Bar Exam Results
Post by: Maintain FL 350 on June 02, 2014, 09:44:49 AM
@Burning Sands:

By any metric (overall pass rate, first time pass rate, in-state, out of state, etc), California consistently ranks at or near the bottom in terms of pass rates. The pass rates don't exist in a vacuum, and have to be compared to other states' pass rates.

The overall pass rate (55%) is low in comparison to other states' overall pass rates, which are often in the 75-85% range. The first time pass rate is also quite low, compared to other states' first time pass rates. A few other jurisdictions such as D.C. and Louisiana also have similarly low rates.

You said that:
Quote
"Fully accredited ABA schools from out of state often have pass rates in CA that are 20-30%"

That's actually not true.  For the July 2013 California Bar Exam, the bar passage rate for ABA schools from out of state was 64.2% (906 out of 1,411 out of state students passed). That same stat for July 2012 was 63.6% (907 out of 1,425). In other words, the majority of out of state students at ABA schools pass the California bar exam.

Once again, I would argue that 63-64% is comparatively low. But here's something to consider: that statistic is an average. California attracts large numbers of out of state applicants, many from elite or at least well respected schools. Some of these schools have very high pass rates, and others look like this:

Michigan State 36%
Univ of Arizona 21%
Syracuse 25%
Univ of Nevada 29%
Suffolk 10%

(These are from the July, 2013 bar)

Each of these schools has an 75-90% pass rate in their home state. The 64% rate you mentioned averages these performances with those of Harvard and Yale. If anything, the out of state pass rate is probably somewhat inflated by the number of elite law grads who flock to California. I mean, how many Harvard/Columbia/Chicago, etc. grads are taking the Louisiana bar?

This article is by a prof at Pepperdine. It's interesting. He took numerous factors into account, not just pass rates, to rank the difficulty level of bar exams. Guess which ranks as most difficult?

 http://abovethelaw.com/2013/04/which-state-has-the-most-difficult-bar-exam/