KAPLAN BAR REVIEW hangout Forum

[Pokemon]

I like how Fromm made a big deal for the zone of danger stuff in strict liability due to inherently dangerous activity... yet the zone of danger concept is nowhere in the outline.

[Mr. Pink]

Does anyone else feel like the qbank questions they're getting have changed? At around 1200 done, I felt like my questions started getting a lot shorter.

I was thinking this last night as I did a set of 50.... most were pretty short and sweet.

[JenDarby]

Fromm hosted these live lectures regarding the simulated final at Fordham.

Apparently the NY average was 115 and the Fordham average was 118.

Fromm said you add +15 for standard scale and +10 for Level 1s (no clue what this means unless it means hard questions). This made the scaled average at Fordham 143 (even though he added 25 to 118 and got 142).

[Pokemon]

Do you mean the final MBE?

Also, a little strange that apparently we should add 15 points to final MBE, but 25 to the additional MBE.

[silky bruh]

Do you mean the final MBE?

Also, a little strange that apparently we should add 15 points to final MBE, but 25 to the additional MBE.

If the additional MBE is more difficult than the final I don't think I'm going to do it. Need some positive reinforcement at this point.

[JenDarby]

Yea it was a simulated final MBE. Fordham paid Kaplan for all students to have access to the qbank and this 3 day simulated final MBE and live lectures by Fromm,

[LeDique]

Do you mean the final MBE?

Also, a little strange that apparently we should add 15 points to final MBE, but 25 to the additional MBE.

I thought this was bizarre too, and I think it's a remnant of the old "30 points to the final" doctrine. Which is confusing to me because it sure seems to me like it should be +30 on the final still as it needs to both be adjusted for difficult and scaling. The idea that the final is equivalently difficult to the real MBE is something I'm not buying. Though I guess you get an extra 10 questions that count…

[bdubs]

Yea it was a simulated final MBE. Fordham paid Kaplan for all students to have access to the qbank and this 3 day simulated final MBE and live lectures by Fromm,

That is really nice. My school is super cheap and would probably never do anything like that. They provide basically zero bar support because they just expect that 90%+ will pass. Doesn't matter that we paid insanely high tuition to the school or anything. I guess we have a greater diversity of jurisdictions, but at least some MBE support would be nice.

[Pokemon]

Do you mean the final MBE?

Also, a little strange that apparently we should add 15 points to final MBE, but 25 to the additional MBE.

I thought this was bizarre too, and I think it's a remnant of the old "30 points to the final" doctrine. Which is confusing to me because it sure seems to me like it should be +30 on the final still as it needs to both be adjusted for difficult and scaling. The idea that the final is equivalently difficult to the real MBE is something I'm not buying. Though I guess you get an extra 10 questions that count…

I agree. But apparently, the additional MBE is supposed to be +25 cause this was confirmed by e-mail from a TLS poster. So either they have made the final really easy, which makes no sense as you say, or they are trying to keep people from ignoring MBE if they think they did well.

[JenDarby]

Fromm said to add 25 to the final as well - that along with the low averages was the point of my post lol. I mean maybe it's incorrect, but we were just told this today.

[shock259]

WHY ALL THESE MIND GAMES KAPLAN?!

[objctnyrhnr]

so I am not gonna talk up fordham or anything, but I think it's pretty accepted that fordham is a considerably above average school with a considerably average bar passage rate.

if fordham's avg on the final was 118, are we really going to buy that the average of EVERY KAPLAN TAKER'S FINAL SCORE was literally 7 points higher? guys, i think kaplan has been lying to us the whole time...about a lot of things.

did i read those posts above correctly?

[Pokemon]

You are really focusing your energy on the wrong thing.

[lisjjen]

WHY ALL THESE MIND GAMES KAPLAN?!

This. This has been driving me crazy.

[Mr. Pink]

Do you mean the final MBE?

Also, a little strange that apparently we should add 15 points to final MBE, but 25 to the additional MBE.

I thought this was bizarre too, and I think it's a remnant of the old "30 points to the final" doctrine. Which is confusing to me because it sure seems to me like it should be +30 on the final still as it needs to both be adjusted for difficult and scaling. The idea that the final is equivalently difficult to the real MBE is something I'm not buying. Though I guess you get an extra 10 questions that count…

I agree. But apparently, the additional MBE is supposed to be +25 cause this was confirmed by e-mail from a TLS poster. So either they have made the final really easy, which makes no sense as you say, or they are trying to keep people from ignoring MBE if they think they did well.

My understanding from the kaplan reps is that the Final MBE is more reflective of an actual MBE- mixed easy questions and hard questions... and that the real MBE adds 10-20 points, so add 15 as an average.

The additional MBE on the other hand has more difficult questions because at this point, there is no need to waste time with the easier questions. They want you to do the tougher ones down the stretch, hence adding 25 to get a more realistic score.

[LeDique]

My understanding from the kaplan reps is that the Final MBE is more reflective of an actual MBE- mixed easy questions and hard questions... and that the real MBE adds 10-20 points, so add 15 as an average.

The additional MBE on the other hand has more difficult questions because at this point, there is no need to waste time with the easier questions. They want you to do the tougher ones down the stretch, hence adding 25 to get a more realistic score.

Yeah, but I'm not buying the premise that "the Final MBE is more reflective of an actual MBE." If it is, then Kaplan has been wasting my time with easier questions this whole time. They also used the "no need to waste time with easier questions" line about the final MBE anyway, so Kaplan is really just all over the map here.

[northwood]

My understanding from the kaplan reps is that the Final MBE is more reflective of an actual MBE- mixed easy questions and hard questions... and that the real MBE adds 10-20 points, so add 15 as an average.

The additional MBE on the other hand has more difficult questions because at this point, there is no need to waste time with the easier questions. They want you to do the tougher ones down the stretch, hence adding 25 to get a more realistic score.

Yeah, but I'm not buying the premise that "the Final MBE is more reflective of an actual MBE." If it is, then Kaplan has been wasting my time with easier questions this whole time. They also used the "no need to waste time with easier questions" line about the final MBE anyway, so Kaplan is really just all over the map here.

ITS THE UNNECESSARY SCARE THE SHIT OUT OF YOU TO STUDY STUDY STUDY STUDY TIME...... ( why that was all in caps is beyond me but maybe to make the effect of being stressed out??)

[bazinga!]

guys. UCC 9/3. I'm so screwed.

Ok, back to the outline...gahhhhhh!

[andythefir]

I had a mini-freakout today when I came across a list of about 15 practice Qs from the NCBE and only got 5-6 right. I bought one of their 100 Q practice tests ($50!) they say is compiled from real former bars. Good news: I passed, so Kaplan's method does work.

Bad news: some of the law clashes with what Kaplan has said. Specifically, on the final review Fromm said that a search of a car incident to arrest does not include the wingspan of the driver for a warrant or other arrest that does not give probable cause to believe that there is evidence in the car (booze for a DUI, drugs for possession etc.). The NCBE had a very similar question and said the opposite was true: when arresting, even for a warrant, a search incident to arrest includes the back seat of the car.

I'm hesitant to start second guessing Kaplan when I'm this close, but it also seems strange to second guess the NCBE.

[Pokemon]

guys. UCC 9/3. I'm so screwed.

Ok, back to the outline...gahhhhhh!

I have not yet seen that lecture. I figured at this point, I might as well do it on weekend so I remember it better.

[Pokemon]

I had a mini-freakout today when I came across a list of about 15 practice Qs from the NCBE and only got 5-6 right. I bought one of their 100 Q practice tests ($50!) they say is compiled from real former bars. Good news: I passed, so Kaplan's method does work.

Bad news: some of the law clashes with what Kaplan has said. Specifically, on the final review Fromm said that a search of a car incident to arrest does not include the wingspan of the driver for a warrant or other arrest that does not give probable cause to believe that there is evidence in the car (booze for a DUI, drugs for possession etc.). The NCBE had a very similar question and said the opposite was true: when arresting, even for a warrant, a search incident to arrest includes the back seat of the car.

I'm hesitant to start second guessing Kaplan when I'm this close, but it also seems strange to second guess the NCBE.

Were the questions, harder or easier than Kaplan? Different in any way?

Ps; for the wingspan thing, didn't Fromm say that was like a new rule?

[JenDarby]

guys. UCC 9/3. I'm so screwed.

Ok, back to the outline...gahhhhhh!

I have not yet seen that lecture. I figured at this point, I might as well do it on weekend so I remember it better.

I just had to double check there is no Article 3 commercial paper on NY. A tiny relief I suppose.

[andythefir]

I had a mini-freakout today when I came across a list of about 15 practice Qs from the NCBE and only got 5-6 right. I bought one of their 100 Q practice tests ($50!) they say is compiled from real former bars. Good news: I passed, so Kaplan's method does work.

Bad news: some of the law clashes with what Kaplan has said. Specifically, on the final review Fromm said that a search of a car incident to arrest does not include the wingspan of the driver for a warrant or other arrest that does not give probable cause to believe that there is evidence in the car (booze for a DUI, drugs for possession etc.). The NCBE had a very similar question and said the opposite was true: when arresting, even for a warrant, a search incident to arrest includes the back seat of the car.

I'm hesitant to start second guessing Kaplan when I'm this close, but it also seems strange to second guess the NCBE.

Were the questions, harder or easier than Kaplan? Different in any way?

Ps; for the wingspan thing, didn't Fromm say that was like a new rule?

Kaplan said they gave a disproportionate number of 8-10 difficulty, which is true, but I found a few of the questions on the practice test to be melt-your-face hard (although this might be because I still suck at mortgages, and there were some super tricky mortgage questions). If Kaplan's difficulty goes 8, 8, 10, 8, 9, 7 these questions were more 5, 8, 7, 8, 2, 5, 15.

[sidhesadie]

I had a mini-freakout today when I came across a list of about 15 practice Qs from the NCBE and only got 5-6 right. I bought one of their 100 Q practice tests ($50!) they say is compiled from real former bars. Good news: I passed, so Kaplan's method does work.

Bad news: some of the law clashes with what Kaplan has said. Specifically, on the final review Fromm said that a search of a car incident to arrest does not include the wingspan of the driver for a warrant or other arrest that does not give probable cause to believe that there is evidence in the car (booze for a DUI, drugs for possession etc.). The NCBE had a very similar question and said the opposite was true: when arresting, even for a warrant, a search incident to arrest includes the back seat of the car.

I'm hesitant to start second guessing Kaplan when I'm this close, but it also seems strange to second guess the NCBE.

Were the questions, harder or easier than Kaplan? Different in any way?

Ps; for the wingspan thing, didn't Fromm say that was like a new rule?

The NCBE questions are mostly fairly old , many of them from the 90's. Crim pro and Con law have had changes.

You can't search the car incident to arrest anymore unless there's probable cause to believe evidence *of crime of arrest* is in it, or if you're going to cite and release the driver back to the car (then it's officer safety). But if you've got them in the patrol car, you can't search the passenger compartment, even wingspan, unless the evidence of crime of arrest exception applies. Arizona v. Gant, y'all. 2009. It's not that new, but the NCBE q probably predated it.

[bazinga!]

I had a mini-freakout today when I came across a list of about 15 practice Qs from the NCBE and only got 5-6 right. I bought one of their 100 Q practice tests ($50!) they say is compiled from real former bars. Good news: I passed, so Kaplan's method does work.

Bad news: some of the law clashes with what Kaplan has said. Specifically, on the final review Fromm said that a search of a car incident to arrest does not include the wingspan of the driver for a warrant or other arrest that does not give probable cause to believe that there is evidence in the car (booze for a DUI, drugs for possession etc.). The NCBE had a very similar question and said the opposite was true: when arresting, even for a warrant, a search incident to arrest includes the back seat of the car.

I'm hesitant to start second guessing Kaplan when I'm this close, but it also seems strange to second guess the NCBE.

Were the questions, harder or easier than Kaplan? Different in any way?

Ps; for the wingspan thing, didn't Fromm say that was like a new rule?

Yeah, I think he said use to be that SITLA meant you could check whatever, wherever including in the car. But now the officer has to be in some sort of reasonable fear, meaning like the defendant could get back in the car and grab a gun. But that that would never happen bc a cop would handcuff the defendant and put him in the back of the car first in the interest of safety, so it negates the need for searching the car. I think I remember from the lectures that if there's a passenger and both are out of the car, the cop can do a sweep of the interior before he lets the passenger get back in the car if he has reason to believe there might be something dangerous or mayyybe (not sure) evidence that could be tossed.