39 percent pass February bar exam

The Committee of Bar Examiners announced last month that 39 percent of the would-be attorneys who took the February 2006 bar exam passed. That rate is down a percentage point from last February but up from the February exams of 2001-04. If the 1,872 successful test-takers satisfy other requirements for admission, they will become members of the State Bar, bringing the total membership to more than 207,000.

Of the 4,798 applicants, 1,361 (28.4 percent) took the test for the first time. Of those, 53.5 percent passed. Of the 3,437 applicants repeating the exam, 33.3 percent passed.

The committee also announced that 211 (52.4 percent) of the 403 lawyers who took the attorneys' exam also passed. The exam is open to lawyers who have been admitted to the active practice of law in good standing for at least four years in another U.S. jurisdiction.

First-timers who attended ABA-approved law schools registered a pass rate of 60 percent. Those who attended California-accredited schools had a 29 percent pass rate. First-timers from correspondence schools had a 36 percent pass rate, and graduates of unaccredited schools had a 6 percent pass rate.

The success rates for repeat applicants from those law schools were lower.

The bar exam is given twice annually, in July and February.

Reprinted with permission from the California Bar Journal

An analysis of low pass rates and other related ramblings
By Steve Liosi, Esq.

California Bar Exam's Pass Rate Hits Five-Year High
The overall pass rate on the most recent California bar exam was 39%. The worst, by far, of any jurisdiction in the county, yet, the pass rate brought the following headline in another publication: California Bar Exam's Pass Rate Hits Five-Year High. I guess that's a better headline than California's Pass Rate Still Sucks. Jerome Braun, the State Bar's director of Admissions, was quoted as saying, "We're very happy that the pass rate went up. Whether this is trend or not, I do not know."

Who is Mr. Braun kidding? California's pass rate will never rival the high rates of other states, which typically range from the upper 60s to the upper 90s. Conclusion: there is no upward trend on the horizon.

Why, an outside observer or even an unenlightened candidate might ask, is this so? Why do so many people, attorneys included, fail the dreaded California bar exam?

There are numerous theories
Some theorize that the California Committee of Bar Examiners know what the pass rate will be before the exam in question is administered. To me, this does not sound far-fetched at all. With over 200,000 California attorneys, who needs any more? And, interestingly, the pass rates, good or bad, coincide with the number of attorneys practicing in a given state. The pass rates in some lowly-populated states, with corresponding poor climates, are in the high 90s.

Others theorize that California simply has too many schools with low admission standards (i.e., students with horrendously law LSAT scores). Some of these schools are known as the "checkbook" schools, as in, "If you have a checkbook, you'll get admitted." Sadly, this, sometimes, seems true. There are some schools (see accompanying illustration - from the Cal Bar Journal) that have few, if any, graduates pass the bar exam; in fact, the Valedictorians of some of these law schools, never pass. While this theory sounds plausible, of the 4,798 candidates sitting for the bar exam, only 1,092 graduated from non-ABA schools. This pool of candidates, though, certainly doesn't help California's overall pass rate.

California is a different bar exam
Others theorize that California simply has higher standards, and I am in agreement. Professor Jeff Cancilla, an attorney mentor in charge of product development for Barperfect.com, and someone who has passed six bar exams on his first attempt, including California's, says, "California is a different bar exam. Take New York, for example. New York's bar exam is far easier than California's exam for one main reason: in California, a candidate is given an hour to respond to an essay, and in New York a candidate is given closer to 30 minutes, which, implies that the written portion of New York's exam is centered on issue-spotting with no time to expand your analysis. On the other hand, California's essays are centered on issue-spotting and analysis. Since you're being given an additional 30 minutes, you'd better flesh out your analysis. Candidates need to realize that California is, first and foremost, a writing bar exam. A high MBE score, in reality, doesn't help that much in California."

Are Candidates Themselves To Blame?
Others theorize that law school graduates do not understand the skill level required to pass the California bar exam, and, again, I am in agreement. And I speak from firsthand knowledge. Too often, I have heard the following refrains: "When I was in law school, I worked 50 hours a week, had a wife and two kids, and I just found myself cramming all of the time." Or: "I crammed in undergrad, so I crammed in law school. I was an A student in undergrad." Or: "I really thought all I had to do was take [the mass-produced courses], but, boy, was I wrong." Or: "My LSAT score is in the high 140s." Or: "I was academically dismissed from two different law schools, but being an attorney is my dream, so I finished up at a correspondence school." Or: "I thought the bar exam was a standardized test just like any other standardized test. I passed my real estate exam on the first try."

Perhaps There Is Just Too Much Misinformation Out There
[Mass-produced course] tells their students, "The bar exam is a test of 'minimum competence'." The other [mass-produced course] tells their students, "All you need are the right head notes. Your essays aren't even read. In fact, we know of someone who passed the bar exam, and all she did was copy the cases from her performance exam into her blue book." If a candidate heeds this kind of advice, they will certainly immerse themselves into the process without the proper sense of urgency and without realizing that California's standards are high. Very high. (Think Kathleen Sullivan, Stanford's former law school dean who failed the July 2005 California bar exam.)

Among the Misinformation: Bar-Exam Writing Templates
Unfortunately, there are products and courses out there that profess a candidate can pass the essay portion of the California bar exam as long they are armed with Exam Writing Templates. "All you have to do," said the owner of a small writing course, "is fill in the blanks with your analysis. A monkey can do it." I simply shook my head when hearing this story. Sadly, in California, the bar review tutorial industry is filled with used-car salesmen types, intent on preying on vulnerable repeat candidates who are looking for a magic bullet.

There Is No Magic Bullet
To suggest that all a candidate need do is "fill in the banks with their analysis" is preposterous, fraudulent and possibly criminal. A bar-exam writing template is simply a collection of rule statements presented in an approach format. Since lengthy rule statements are not the key to passing the essay portion of the California bar exam, such a product is nothing but a waste of money. True analytical writing does not require separate statements of law. With true analytical writing, a candidate's legal knowledge is set forth within their analysis . . . just like attorneys argue. (Gee, what a concept.)

Have you ever been present at a trial? Attorneys do not spit out their rule statements before providing the judge with pertinent analysis. Instead, an attorney's legal knowledge is apparent within his analysis: "Your honor, Defendant should be found liable for battery because he intentionally hit Plaintiff from behind. Moreover, the touching if not harmful was at least offensive in that Plaintiff was likely frightened and/or startled since she did not see Defendant coming. Further, the touching was without consent because Plaintiff likely did not consent to being surprised and/or hit from behind. Additionally, since Defendant approached Plaintiff from behind, it can reasonably be inferred Defendant did not have Plaintiff's consent. Lastly, there are no facts indicating that Defendant's striking of Plaintiff was privileged." There isn't a template in the world that could have helped you craft such a response. (Naturally, when crafting a response for an essay answer, "your honor" should be deleted, but the rest can remain. Notice, no rule statements - but whoever wrote the response certainly knows the law, don't they?)

What Exactly is the Bar Testing?
This statement will shock most of you. The California bar exam is not testing your legal knowledge. I repeat: the California bar exam is not testing your legal knowledge. Rather, the California bar exam is testing your thought process. It is a thought-process test. Can you, to use the cliché, "think like a lawyer" under the stress of the test?
.
If you want to pass the California bar exam, you need to make these realizations: I am being tested on my ability to think. And a bar-exam writing template cannot teach me how to think. All a bar-exam writing template can do is teach me how to fill up my blue books with legal statements that earn no points. (This is something else I know from firsthand experience. I passed the California bar exam on my first attempt without any rule statements. I didn't need them . . . because I wrote the like the above example.)

Moral of the Article
Realize that the California bar exam is not a test of 'minimum competence' - the skill level required to pass is high. Realize that doing 100 MBEs a day does not guarantee a pass. Realize that your thought process is being tested and that, ultimately, superior analytical writing is what passes the California bar exam.

In addition to publishing this journal, Steve Liosi is the Program Director of BarPerfect (www.barperfect.com). Mr. Liosi can be reached by calling (562) 536-9476 or e-mailing steve@clsj1994.com.

JDblogger Is Coming!

In mid August, the Law Student Journal will be unveiling JDblogger, which will afford students and bar candidates the opportunity to communicate with each other via blogs and other postings, allowing for interactive discussions about law school and the bar exam. Everyone is welcome to post comments and pose questions. Advertisers and course providers are encouraged to join in - we have no problem with you using JDblogger to promote your products and/or services.

The stated purpose of JDblogger is not to become a complaint center - meaning, we do not care how much you hate/dislike your law school, your bar review course or your tutor.

We look forward to your participation.