Law School Discussion

Show Posts

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.

Messages - legalpractitioner

Pages: 1 ... 34 35 36 37 38 [39] 40 41 42 43 44 ... 67
Online Law Schools / Re: Taft, ALU, Concord
« on: July 29, 2012, 08:24:06 PM »
Taft and currently at UNISA.

Online Law Schools / Re: Taft, ALU, Concord
« on: July 26, 2012, 06:20:18 AM »
20 years ago, I am a LLD candidate and university faculty.

Online Law Schools / Re: Taft, ALU, Concord
« on: July 24, 2012, 09:20:43 PM »

Online Law Schools / Re: Taft, ALU, Concord
« on: July 24, 2012, 05:02:09 PM »
Yes, many will try and few will succeed.

If you do a Google search, you can know too.

Online Law Schools / Re: University of London-L.L.B. External Program
« on: July 21, 2012, 05:44:51 PM »
Becoming an English solicitor via distance learning may be a better option for some. Certainly the LLB is more prestigious than a California distance learning degree:

Licensed attorneys take an abbreviated version of the Cal bar and routinely do worse than first time takers. My theory is that increased alcohol and drug consumption is a factor in the lower than expected pass rate:

The pass rate for the 396 lawyers who took the attorneys’ exam was 34.6 percent, a decline from last year’s 41.6 percent pass rate. Of those who took the attorneys’ exam, 26 were disciplined lawyers who took the test as a condition of reinstatement. Four passed. The attorneys’ examination is open to lawyers who have been admitted to the active practice of law in good standing for at least four years in another United States jurisdiction.

The non ABA grads are in an inferior position per se because they cannot forum shop for an easier bar to take. 

California is not that hard?  Look at the data.  I'm not saying other places like DC and Nevada don't have difficult bar exams as well, but California's must be much harder than average.  (Even the format is very different)

maybe the Cal bar is an anomoly.  The standard answer is either the format is difficult or non ABA takers drag down the average pass rate by 10-20%.  However, until other states allow non ABA degree holders to take their exams, we won't know the answer.  Personally, I think it is neither, California wants about a 50% pass rate and adjusts its grading accordingly.  If the pass rate was 80%, California would be flooded with new lawyers. Protectionism pure and simple which is why California also keeps out of state attorneys from motioning into to both the state bar and US District Courts there.

DC has an equal or higher fail rate than California and those are almost all ABA takers.  The bar exams are actually not that different statewide, I believe the high fail rate has to do in part with differing grading rubrics. Illinois on the other hand has a high pass rate, is the bar exam easier?  I doubt it but the grading sure is.

Almost everyone takes a state specific bar review course so there should be no surprises on the exams.

. Keeping in mind that CA has the toughest bar exam in the nation...

Why?  Because so many people fail?  You don't think the fact that so many people fail has something to do with the fact that virtually every other state requires ABA accreditation?

Seems like the bar passage rates for most of the schools in CA is 80% or higher. 

This red herring that California has the hardest bar exam simply because so many people fail it doesn't really bear scrutiny.

The reality is that California lets a whole lot of people sit for the bar exam who are grossly unqualified in most other states.

A few of them pass, and that's great.  But let's not delude ourselves into thinking that so many fail because the bar exam is so much harder.  It's far more likely that so many fail because they shouldn't be sitting for the bar exam in the first place and in most other states, they wouldn't be allowed to.

Pages: 1 ... 34 35 36 37 38 [39] 40 41 42 43 44 ... 67