a male human wrote:This wouldn't be a problem if those assholes released results a bit earlier. I don't know of any other exams that take 4 months to release results.
Everything about the process is incredibly frustrating. It's completely out of touch with the economic reality facing today's law school graduates. I also don't see the need for the exam to begin with, if law school accreditation were well-regulated. Like, I thought really hard about it and I honestly don't know a single person from my graduating class who isn't competent to practice law.
Yeah this is a total can of worms but I can't help but comment to agree. Like, in Wisconsin where in-state law grads do not have to take a bar, are they shown to be less competent? I highly HIGHLY doubt it. The bar is a *hazing*, especially in California. The time to weed out truly unfit people for a profession is prior to them investing several hundred thousand dollars, non? But yeah I guess I already know why they don't do that!
And think about it- if people can pay thousands in tutors and then pass on their 20th try, what is this test really measuring? In my experience if you've graduated from a semi-decent law school you are equipped enough to start practicing, especially under supervision. The law tested on the CA bar isn't even real law, it's a hybrid beast of common law theories and outdated CA rules.
I don't know a whole lot about the AMA but as far as admissions standards I appreciate that they limit med schools admittees rather than lower the boom after they've already invested time and energy and then refuse them entry to the profession.
(My opinions on all of this will be so much more credible once I pass and it's not just sour grapes.