udonisandtrinity wrote:go back to your "math" argument and look at the numbers.
You have a group of twenty or more exam takers who score 140-160 on their MBEs. They all pass. Then you have one person who scores a 128 and still manages to pass. Are you saying that this one person has better writing skills than the thousands of failures who also got a 128 or HIGHER? if he or she just that AMAZING when it comes to writing? if the written was graded fairly and actually given equal grading weight, you would see thousands of more passing scores with shitty MBE scores.
Yes, I am saying that this person has better writing skills than the other people who got a 128 and failed. They probably also knew the law better for the essay topics that got picked that year than the other 128/fail-ers did. No idea why you think that's impossible or how you know how many other people who failed got a 128 when you're extrapolating from a sample of 20 people. Also, chances are good that a higher MBE score correlates with a higher essay score and a lower MBE score correlates with a lower essay score (if you miss a lot of MBE questions that's a lot of areas of law you'll miss on the essays too). You're assuming that a shitty MBE score doesn't suggest anything about the essay score. I'm saying that *can* be the case (people can be better at writing than grokking multiple-choice), but often someone who does poorly on the one is going to do poorly on the other, probably because both scores reflect that they just don't know the law very well the way the exam wants to test it.
We've had this argument already and I'm not going to pursue it further but I really don't think your argument makes sense.