What did everyone think of the MBE?

[jacy85]

Can anyone explain to me how the exam is "scaled." I'm a bit confused. First, people keep saying "all you need is a 120." A 120 assuming what score on the essay/MPT? Also, how does the scaled score help one pass if the passing score is based on the raw score.

I have no idea how its scaled, I only know what Bar/Bri told us about what the scale usually is (i.e. how many points are added).

As for what you need, that varies vastly by state.  I've heard some people say their state has no minimum. In GA, we have to have a minimum of 115 scaled in order for the state bar examiners to even grade our essays.  So your state may require 120, but I can't imagine they'd look at RAW score and not scaled.  I didn't think they even released raw scores.

[unlvcrjchick]

I looked at my BarBri materials re: withdrawal, and nowhere did it say that neutralizing assistance means to take back provided equipment.  All it said was that you have to do more than just announce your withdrawal.  As for calling the police, again the book said nothing about that being a requisite to withdrawal - it said simply something like "one may ALSO contact the authorities." Thus, the way I interpreted the question, since he did more than just announce his withdrawal (he tried to talk them out of it, too), I thought that was enough for withdrawal from the crime that was eventually committed.  Unfortunately, the materials don't seem to provide the answer to that question, and I also think that no amount of studying could have prepared me for the first half of the MBE (the 2nd half I found to be much easier and I walked out of the exam room 30 minutes early).

Regarding the conspiracy withdrawal question, according to my supplement, one does have to attempt to "neutralize assistance." It says

***WITHDRAWAL

To withdraw, a conspirator must perform an affirmative act that
notifies all members of the conspiracy of her withdrawal. Notice
must be given in time for the members to abandon their plans. If she
has also provided assistance as an accomplice, she must try to
neutralize the assistance.

Regarding the PMSI question, I know that a PMSI seller trumps a PMSI lender, but I don't think the seller in the question was a secured party. I only recall the seller getting a note, not taking a security interest in the house. So the question is whether a seller with a promissory note wins over a lender with a security interest.

I did very well on the practice Barbri MBE, and very well on all of the question sets. I thought the MBE was hard, especially the first half. The second half was quite a bit easier but still harder than I'd expected.

Can anyone explain to me how the exam is "scaled." I'm a bit confused. First, people keep saying "all you need is a 120." A 120 assuming what score on the essay/MPT? Also, how does the scaled score help one pass if the passing score is based on the raw score.

I know it says to neutralize assistance: I'm not debating that.  My question is, in what form does the neutralization take? Do you have to take away the equipment, or merely try to talk them out of using the equipment in addition to telling them that you no longer want to be involved?  The materials do not say, and that was my point.  Thank goodness I need to get no minimum score in Nevada on the MBE (MBE is worth only 1/3 and the essays/MPT are worth 2/3, and you need a total overall score of only a 75).

[jondub]

Only the bar examining committee can answer this one. But the degree of neutralization is a tricky one. All it says in the barbri materials is that withdrawal, notice of such, and neutralization is necessary if liability went beyond mere encouragement which it most certainly did under these circumstances.

The way I looked at it is this, but for the guy supplying the equipment, the crime would have either never been committed or the criminals would have had considerable difficulty in carrying out the crime. In other words, its like I lend you my gun. Then I change my mind, voice this to you, and try to dissuade you. Then you go and use my gun to kill or attempt to kill someone. I really don't think even just talking them out of it is enough. Neutralize in that situation to me would have to be telling the store about it, the police, or getting your equipment back.

It is only one question so I dont really care, but Id like to know how people answered that one on that particular element. 

[jacy85]

Only the bar examining committee can answer this one. But the degree of neutralization is a tricky one. All it says in the barbri materials is that withdrawal, notice of such, and neutralization is necessary if liability went beyond mere encouragement which it most certainly did under these circumstances.

The way I looked at it is this, but for the guy supplying the equipment, the crime would have either never been committed or the criminals would have had considerable difficulty in carrying out the crime. In other words, its like I lend you my gun. Then I change my mind, voice this to you, and try to dissuade you. Then you go and use my gun to kill or attempt to kill someone. I really don't think even just talking them out of it is enough. Neutralize in that situation to me would have to be telling the store about it, the police, or getting your equipment back.

It is only one question so I dont really care, but Id like to know how people answered that one on that particular element. 

This was my understanding of the concept of "neutralization."  I remembered part of this from crim law from 1L, and drew the same conclusion from Bar/Bri's materials. If you're giving equipment, the only real way to neutralize your assistance is *get the equipment back* or alert the police or something similar.  Giving someone burglar's tools, and then saying, "you shouldn't break into tha thouse, it's wrong, etc." is not going to cut it when they still have your tools that make the job MUCH easier than it would be otherwise.  They're more likely to get into the house quietly rather than having to break the door or smash a window, so your assistance has not been neutralized.  I think calling the police would also work.

[txlawstu]

Everyone I have talked to has said the MBE was ridiculous and likely our downfall if we fail.  I did see a lot of PMBR type questions, but I also saw a lot of questions unlike anything I've seen before.  I went into autopilot for awhile there.  Partially because a stupid siren went off outside for a long time distracting us.  I don't know if it was harder than normal, but it was ridiculous for sure.

[unlvcrjchick]

Everyone I have talked to has said the MBE was ridiculous and likely our downfall if we fail.  I did see a lot of PMBR type questions, but I also saw a lot of questions unlike anything I've seen before.  I went into autopilot for awhile there.  Partially because a stupid siren went off outside for a long time distracting us.  I don't know if it was harder than normal, but it was ridiculous for sure.

I think it will only be one's downfall if there is a set minimum score in that person's state.  I am so grateful that Nevada has no such requirement - overall score is what counts.  Thank goodness for small favors...

[txlawstu]

Everyone I have talked to has said the MBE was ridiculous and likely our downfall if we fail.  I did see a lot of PMBR type questions, but I also saw a lot of questions unlike anything I've seen before.  I went into autopilot for awhile there.  Partially because a stupid siren went off outside for a long time distracting us.  I don't know if it was harder than normal, but it was ridiculous for sure.

I think it will only be one's downfall if there is a set minimum score in that person's state.  I am so grateful that Nevada has no such requirement - overall score is what counts.  Thank goodness for small favors...

Well, in TX it's a combination score but it has a percentage for each day.  So, although you can use points from other days, 40% of the points come from the MBE.  So, if you do really bad on the MBE, you better do exceptional on other parts to make up the points.  The MBE has been known to be the downfall of examinees here.

[philibusters]

I don't know for sure, but I was under the impression that the MBE was scaled so it didn't really matter how hard to questions were.  For example even if you only got 60% right, if the average test taker got 59% right you would be assured of a passing score.  Likewise if you got 75% right and the average testtaker got 90% right you might be in trouble.  Thus I am not understanding why everybody is freaking out over the MBE.

[xferlawstudent]

That's rights.  Just like in law school, it doesn't really matter how hard or how easy the test is because all that matters is that you did better relative to others.

If the MBE was truly harder this year (I agree it was pretty hard) then the scaled score will be adjusted to reflect that.  IF the raw scores are low, they will add many more points to it to obtain a scaled score similar to last years. 

[unlvcrjchick]

I don't know for sure, but I was under the impression that the MBE was scaled so it didn't really matter how hard to questions were.  For example even if you only got 60% right, if the average test taker got 59% right you would be assured of a passing score.  Likewise if you got 75% right and the average testtaker got 90% right you might be in trouble.  Thus I am not understanding why everybody is freaking out over the MBE.

That's just the thing:  I'm "freaking out" because I think that I got less than 60% correct, despite my doing very well on the simulated exam and practice questions.  I'll be lucky if I got 50-55% correct, and since I'm sure most people probably did better than this, well, you can understand why I'm a tad worried.