The FYLSE is an unfair exam because you are given 12 months to internalize concepts that really take more than a year to remember. And, just because other people come up with a year of study, then exam system, that doesn't mean it's perfect and that there is something wrong with the 80% that fail it.
I'm not saying they can't revise it, they should every few years(just as they do to the GED,LSAT,Multistate bar exam,etc) but it needs to be there. If you don't filter your water, it stops being safe to drink.
Quote from: lawyerintraining on August 24, 2011, 02:07:44 PMI'm not saying they can't revise it, they should every few years(just as they do to the GED,LSAT,Multistate bar exam,etc) but it needs to be there. If you don't filter your water, it stops being safe to drink.I think it's not so much to prevent unsound lawyers, but to prevent people who shouldn't even be in law school from wasting 2 more years of their lives.
Perhaps a baby bar should be an ABA requirement - you get 1, maybe 2 bites at the apple then you are done. That would get rid of some of the diploma mills out there screwing students for $100K who have very little realistic prospect of passing the bar or securing gainful employment in the law. And I am not being a snob - I went to one of those mills.
Quote from: Hamilton on August 25, 2011, 11:25:04 AMPerhaps a baby bar should be an ABA requirement - you get 1, maybe 2 bites at the apple then you are done. That would get rid of some of the diploma mills out there screwing students for $100K who have very little realistic prospect of passing the bar or securing gainful employment in the law. And I am not being a snob - I went to one of those mills.Not a crazy idea. Given that most 1L studies are pretty much all the same subjects, this shouldn't be that hard to do.My understanding, though, is that Law Schools are quite the revenue mill for their universities, though. I doubt they'd appreciate the idea of losing a big chunk of tuition money.