MPT is the stupidest thing i've ever heard of.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Budlaw, Mqt, and pickle: how many would you say you've done and reviewed an answer explanation? Do you find it helpful to do them without looking at an explanation?
I find that most of the ones I am missing, I can't just look at the right answer and know why I missed it, I have to review an explanation.
I've been about 8-10, but I'm mostly sitting on my couch typing up my final "review" outlines for each subject (seems to be one of the only ways I can learn things, apparently). With law and order on the TV, I'm probably averaging less than 8.
Next week, when I'm going nothing but essays punctuated some mixed MBE sets, I'll aim for 8, but I really don't know how close I'll actually get to that.
I am sorry that you got academically dismissed and my heart goes out to you. I wanted to know if you took any practice exams prior to the actual test. You mention that you didnt test well.
I searched for practice exams, but all profs test differently and none of them have old exams available.
We mostly used law in a flash, E&E, and Q&A books for test review, along with emmanuels, and I did really well - often explaining why I answered the way I did to my study buddies who got the questions wrong and didn't understand the material.
I took an old practice exam for Contracts and scored 90%, but it wasn't at school, wasn't under the stress of a room full of law school students, and I didn't take the test thinking that it was representative of my entire grade in class. I just took the test under a 2 and a half hour time contraint.
The LD hit hard the day of the exams, my friends were all freaking out, and I was very nervous (and thought about my grandfather nonstop during the tests).
Note to pickle:
I'm still not buying the correlation between first semester grades and Bar exam scores either. I know dozens of lawyers, some who passed the bar first time, and some who passed it second go around. Some straight A law students passed first time and some had to retake, which is the same for people who barely squeaked by.
Then there's the old adage:
The A students become professors, the B students become judges and the C students make all the money
"To test this theory, Rush and Matsuo documented every student’s courseload for five different graduating classes at the St. Louis Law School, analyzing the number of bar topic courses taken against bar passage rates the first time the students sat for the exam. Their results were unequivocal: no relationship existed between law school courseloads and the passage rate of students ranked in the first, second or fourth quarters of their law school class, while only a weak relationship existed for students who ranked in the third quarter. Overall, Rush writes, “students in the upper two quartiles passed the exam at an extremely high rate and those in the fourth quartile failed at a high rate, regardless of which classes they took in law school.” The researchers repeated the test in 2007 using data from the Hofstra University School of Law, with identical results (which do not appear in the study)."
I think you might be misinterpreting the purpose, and thus the validly for your argument, of this study. The fact that a lower pass rate was found for 4th quartile was in passing, not the focus of the study. The focus of the study was whether or not taking “bar courses” in law school has any effect on bar passage rates. Therefore, the data on 4th quarter passage rates in general is suspect for the point you’re tying to make. This is because, as it was not the focus of the study, it’s not likely other factors were considered in making the conclusion. For example, my guess would be that a number of students in the 4th quartile by end of 3L are there because they have lost interest in the law, but did not want to walk away from law school/debt. It’s likely folks that really don’t want to practice law don’t put as much effort into preparing for the bar as those that do (regardless of GPA). If the study was looking at simple bar passage rates as they compare to GPA these and other issues would need to be accounted for, for the study to be a good measure. However, as I said, that was not what was being studied here.
My school has done similar studies with the same results, no bearing on bar passage to bar courses taken in law school (i.e. Those that took primarily Wills, Trusts, Estates and other bar tested courses in law school did not do any better than those that took primarily (or even exclusively at my school) courses that were not tested on the bar. I’m not necessarily discounting the idea that lower GPA means lower bar passage rate, but I think a study focused on that would have to factor in other variables than this study did for it to be the kind of measure you are trying to use it for.