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 - jennid1234
« on: December 28, 2012, 07:26:01 PM »
Statistics on the last bar exam in Jun 2012 state the passage rate percentage for CA Accredited was 31% for first time takers, repeaters 10% and all takers 19%. For all takers in the unaccredited category - 15%, not much difference between CA Accredited and the Unaccredited and the repeaters for unaccredited was 12% HIGHER than the accredited 10%. Feb 2012 - first time takers - same percentage 33% in both categories. I don't know seems to me the CA ABA pass rate not anything to boast about either at 68% and 53% on the same respective tests. Tightening standards will mean what? No more distance learning or correspondence schools? We shall see.
« on: December 14, 2012, 06:53:14 PM »
It was posted on my admissions status on the Ca Bar Future Lawyers website
« on: December 14, 2012, 02:36:25 PM »
I failed the June FYLSE, I didn't call anyone to complain at Concord. Concord has a program called Concord First - which was really valuable and a lot of my classmates did pass on the first try. I passed the FYLSE in OCTOBER, I did e-mail Professor Dodge to thank him for his assistance to all of us (2nd timers) in a Concord program called Second Time Sucess, guess some of us just needed a dry run.
What a great way to end the 2L year. Took finals on Tuesday and Thursday - but on Wednesday when I checked the Ca Bar website my FYLSE requirement was satisfied! Due to SNAIL mail I don't know my scores yeat and will post later
« on: December 14, 2012, 02:25:26 PM »
I passed the October test and studying 8 hours a day was not an option. I work full time, plus I had to study my 2L classes at the same time. I had Constitutional Law, Civil Procedure, Criminal Procedure and Real Property this year on top of studying Contracts, Criminal Law and Torts. BUT it is recommended, those that have more on their plate actually do better. Initially, I didn't start studying for the June FYLSE until the 2nd week in May and stopped all 2L study at that time but I was about 4 weeks ahead so I felt comfortable doing that. When I got the fail letter in August, I hit the books again and kept on top of everything. October's test was harder by far than the June test so passing surprised me.
Anyways, typing out the rule statements was a great way to practice and I thoroughly knew them, can recite them in my head, when I'm falling asleep. We had Professor Dodge helping us prepare at Concord. He helped me address what we call is our KNOWN Unknowns, that program is the only reason I passed. I would have passed the first one if I would have started studying for it at least two months earlier. Smarter students that started as late as I did passed the June test, but I'm just a little dense and think I'm just as smart sometimes;) I figure I'll have to study at least 6 months in advance of the bar exam to pass on my first try - which is my intention and I signed up for BarPassers, their essay lectures are great!
« on: December 14, 2012, 02:15:09 PM »
So as a follow-up, I needed to fail the first time. I PASSED the october FYLSE - don't know the score yet, snail mail;)
« on: December 14, 2012, 02:04:56 PM »
"I'm at Concord right now as a 1L. I'm taking the FYLSE in June 13'. So far everything has been great. You have to be very disciplined in order to make a school like Concord work. That means setting aside 3 hours or so per day everyday to study. I was accepted in several ABA accredited schools, and still chose to attend Concord."
KUDOS to you - memorize those rule statements at least by January, then do as many MPC questions and practice essays before JUNE - you will pass the test on your first try and Concord (if they still offer it - concord challenge) pays for your 3L books!
I passed it on my second try, Oct '12. 3L starts in a few weeks.
Best regards to you at Concord, make sure you join the SBA, they send you a daily question to help you study for the FYLSE;)
« on: December 14, 2012, 01:24:13 PM »
"holds a J.D. degree, not based on study by correspondence, from an unapproved law school that is accredited in the jurisdiction where it exists"
I wonder if the quote above can be challenged constitutionally under the commerce clause?
I have an attorney friend who will basically told me she would like to challenge the Oregon state bar after I pass the California state bar exam, so I may sit immediately for the Oregon test in order to become an Oregon lawyer too, then we will go to Hawaii and challenge their "club rules." The above quote was posted earlier and is from Texas statute, but the restriction maybe can be challenged. Abraham Lincoln studied by correspondence.
« on: December 14, 2012, 01:15:58 PM »
I really love your observation even if it is inaccurate:
"For you to score in the 60's on the essay portion means that you were objectively bad at understanding how to apply the law to a set of facts."
It was not "bad at understanding" it was not hitting all the issues, but my skill set improved, I just passed the FYLSE in October. Have no idea on my score since snail mail hasn't arrived here in Oregon.
An attorney at work made the same quick judgement about my June test, he said, "I must not have enough substantive knowledge." That was clearly an opinion that kicked my butt, because it just wasn't true.
As for the cat negligence question on the Tort question in October, I pretty much flew threw that explanation this time: RACE HORSE STYLE. I originally put how the day care operater should kill the cat, (that's what I would have done) but after I wrote that, I quickly deleted it and stated her options were clear, call the local animal shelter and have them trap the cats and keep the children indoors so no child would be harmed. The day careoperator was negligent in her actions when she knew the danger existed outside and her duty of care for those children as invitees - DofC of reasonable care to known dangers: those wild fury cats which can be pretty vicious and Oh MY Goodness: poop in the sand box, what state was she in, she would have been a trained operator in CA and would have known to pour Ammonia - a caustic hazardous substance in a sand box is a NO NO? Her license should be revoked. I had fun, but I was so drained after that test, the last 8 MPC's had to answer in the last 5 minutes so the last 3 were guesses. We then HAD to drive 11 hours home to Portland so I could be at work the next day!
At least we went to the Oakland Raider game the Sunday before;) That was my day of rest prior to the test.
My advice again, KNOW your RULE statements, speed writing or typing is the only way to score passing scores on the essays, missing one issue will be a BIG deduction, the lawyers who grade the essay give no mercy. We are all at mercy - even some students from brick and mortar schools suffer the consequence of taking this test, but at a 20% pass rate it isn't that anyone is a moron or that some people don't get the issues quickly or missed the issues, some under pressure have a hard time.
My test in June, we had a question that was a criminal law question and some answered it as a tort - Doc sent an emergency room patient home without seeing him because the nurse diagnosed the guy with indegestion when he had chest pains. On his way home, he suffered a heart attack while driving and crashed into a truck. He died. The call of the question was WHAT CRIMES could be found against the Doctor? LOL most who read that question thought TORT! One simple word and they got credit for their answer but most were 35 and 45 for missing the call of the question. I answered it correctly, my mistake was my opening statement or I would have passed that one. My conclusion, fry the doc (LOL not really) I put it could be negligent homicide due to his inaction but had to go through the entire MURDER fact pattern to conclude NH or No Crime if the court viewed it was reasonable for him to rely on the nurse's indegestion conclusion. I also put that if the state does find him guilty of negligence homicide, the state medical board might also consider the crime some sort of violation to his license and he might loose his license - but that shouldn't have been even put in the discussion.
« on: October 29, 2012, 03:34:48 PM »
Your website does not have any student reviews? I read an article lately that said there are a lot of people out there that tutor but if they don't have stats on their student pass rates, be very careful. I am thinking about contacting the former examintion director for the CA State Bar. He charges as much as 3G's I think for one on one tutoring.
If you are really GREAT, I would be interested in contacting past students that have passed the Ca Bar.
« on: September 10, 2012, 01:00:50 PM »
I failed my first try, 2nd try is in October. It is hard but I failed 537 - one multiple choice question for the 2nd evaluation - which might have passed me, received 60 - 60 - 60 and 65 on my essays = 77% on the multiple choice - but the degree of difficulty killed me my 308 was lowered to 289, waiting for my essays to see what issues I missed and a professor at the school will evaluate what I need to do. I'm a Concord student - we have a program called Second Time Sucess - it is helping me prepare for the test. Concord First I started in middle of May - could kick myself for not starting earlier, so I could pass on the first try. Did about 1600 multiple choice, about 50 essays, 10 were graded by a professor at the law school. First right out your rule statements, memorize them, sing them, go over them in your head in the shower, in bed. Take small breaks, if you work like I do, live, eat and breath - Criminal Law, Torts and Contracts. If you are not in a review course - sign up for one right now. If you have six weeks to prepare and haven't started, working full time - you might pass on your first try. I'm lucky, I have my crim law down, now I'm hitting torts. I've heard people like Gould - google it with FYLSE. AND GOOD LUCK