seriously cal-bar F-U shortening the exam to two days

[Citylaw]

http://calbarjournal.com/August2015/TopHeadlines/TH5.aspx

Cal-Bar is shortening the exam from three days to two. Maybe they will hand out participation ribbons next.

If I could pass a 3 day exam plenty of people can. I don't think the bar exam needs to be easier there are plenty of jokers out there capable of passing a three day exam. What will this bring on.

Probably just more pissed that I had to take a 3 day exam and others will not.

[loki13]

Here are my thoughts on this-

1. I took a three day bar, so everyone else should have to as well. (This is the "five miles both way, up hill, in the snow" argument.)

2. I like the prestige. Don't step on my prestige. (Having passed the bar in multiple jurisdictions, I still reference my CalBar, because, dude, three days. CalBar.)

3. Barrier to entry!

4. To the extent that California allows more alternative ways to enter the profession (which is true, although neither here nor there), it makes sense that they would have a difficult bar.

All that said, CityLaw, at least we both know that we can now hold our three day bars over all new Cal attorneys in perpetuity. "Oh. So you just had to pass the two day bar? How special for you."

[Groundhog]

I definitely hold my Cal bar 3-day preftige over other attorneys licensed elsewhere on a daily basis.

[Citylaw]

I read the article so 5 five essays and one ninety minute Practical exam and that is the same difficultly? False it is not.

The practical portion is what messes most people up and there is one less and it is half the size. This is bogus and I will tell kids I walk uphill both ways in the terrible L.A Winters forty years from now when Donald Trump is Dictator of the U.S. and the exam consists of the following multiple choice question

What is an element of negligence?

A. Duty
B. This is not the answer
C. This is not the answer
D. If you select A you will pass.

[🍟💵🌲🍥]

Seriously? MOST states are two day exams.
STFU.

This scream of boomer. "I did it.........and it was HARDER when I did it (even if it was actually super easier) SO PUNISH THOSE THAT COME AFTER ME!!!!!!!!"

[Citylaw]

Yea that is basically exactly the case.

It was b.s. that is was three days and other states weren't. However, I had to do it. I get to female dog and moan about it that is my right. However, it will be two days and for those that enrolled in law school in 2014 they got a sweet bonus.

A piece of me wonders if Chemerinsky's prior attack on the bar is related to this sudden change. He has to keep his job at Irvine and boost his BarBri stats the man has to eat. If he was at all involved good for him for wielding that much power.

Maybe one day Chemy will get on male private part Cheney's level of being able to shoot someone in the face and have the person apologize for letting their face get in the way of the bullet.  That is Chuck Norris sh*t.

[Groundhog]

This scream of boomer. "I did it.........and it was HARDER when I did it (even if it was actually super easier) SO PUNISH THOSE THAT COME AFTER ME!!!!!!!!"

I'm 29. If I and everyone before me did it, they can too. I agree with citylaw: I've earned the right to female dog. That's less expense and time stuck in a hotel.

The problem is also that CA allows almost anyone with a pulse to take the bar.

And citylaw, I wouldn't worry about Chemerinsky. He did fine at my school and writing books long before he went down to Irvine.

[🍟💵🌲🍥]

This scream of boomer. "I did it.........and it was HARDER when I did it (even if it was actually super easier) SO PUNISH THOSE THAT COME AFTER ME!!!!!!!!"

I'm 29. If I and everyone before me did it, they can too. I agree with citylaw: I've earned the right to female dog. That's less expense and time stuck in a hotel.

The problem is also that CA allows almost anyone with a pulse to take the bar.

And citylaw, I wouldn't worry about Chemerinsky. He did fine at my school and writing books long before he went down to Irvine.

Being 29 doesn't change that it still sounds like a boomer rant. Don't be a boomer. Apparently one can convert.
Don't do it bro.

[Maintain FL 350]

Holy cow, I come back from vacation and get greeted by THIS!

Like just about everyone here, I'll admit that I'm flat out jealous. Anyone who spent three days of feverish, stressful writing in some stupid convention center is bound to be jealous. It sucks.

But putting our jealousy aside for a moment, what is the actual substantive difference?

We're talking about the loss of one essay, and way less time spent on PTs (1.5 hrs vs 6 hrs). As far as I know, grading and the percentages required to pass will remain the same.

I'm against the loss of even one essay. They test substantive knowledge of the law, issue spotting, and the ability to form a cogent argument.

The PTs, on the other hand, are pretty much a waste of time in my opinion. It's just complicated busy work. Someone who has never attended law school but is reasonably smart could probably pass the PTs. Most of my law school classmates considered the PTs a gift, and figured they would help make up for the more difficult essays and MBE. I think most of us probably spent way less time preparing for the PTs than the essays.

The main issue here is simply TIME. Is it a better test because it's longer than others? If it was three full days of substantive legal testing, then I'd say yes. But when six hours are devoted to PTs I think you can trim that back and still have a good bar exam.

[loki13]

"But putting our jealousy aside for a moment, what is the actual substantive difference?"

First, never discount jealousy.

Second, the loss of an essay is important.

Third, I think the PTs are kind of awesome. Having taken more than one Bar, I appreciated the PTs. I understand that others mileage may vary, but broken down, it allows for three separate tests-
- A general, multi-guess test of idealized legal knowledge that doesn't really exist anywhere.
- A specific essay exam that tests application of learned knowledge to specific jurisdiction rules.
- The PTs, which test a person's learned ability and innate ability to apply new rules to new facts.

You say the PTs are useless- I say the PTs measure the one thing lawyers do the most often.

Now, maybe I'm wrong (it does happen). But I liked them- I guess we'll find out when we start examining the scores of those, um, 2 day attorneys.