caliguy93 wrote:For the people against lowering the cut score..and to people who have already passed the bar and are practicing attorneys...
Can you please tell me one instance in the actual practice of law where you will be or have been cold called on any one of every legal subject without any help from other staff, online research, or notes?
Pleaae tell me a real life scenario where you will be dropped off for 2 or even 3 days with nothing but a ziplock bag filled with pens, pencils, highlighters, and ear plugs and expected to recite random and surprising areas of law you may never practice without any help or notes at all, all while knowing your future is at stake if you don't do it well enough.
Never, this exam is a hazing and nothing more. Anyone willing to endure it successfully will become an attorney, anyone who quits after a few attempts will never become an attorney. The exam has absolutely no bearing on how good of an attorney one will become.
There are some serious scholars out there who pass the bar on their first attempt yet have trouble getting clients because they have no business sense.
I personally know, one of my best friends actually, who is dumber than me, yet they eventually passed. And personally know, my roommate, who is much much smarter than me who has failed and just took her second attempt this last July.
We all know someone dumber that ha passed and know people who are smarter that have failed.
In the end, it doesn't even matter.. just like your grades in law school. No one cares once you get out, just like no one will care once your a lawyer.
I agree with this, sort of. The test is what the test is, a bag of pens and your knowledge. While you may never encounter a real life situation like it, the concepts that they test, "thinking like a lawyer" is something I use every single day. Like I have said above, the test is passable, but it takes a specific way of studying and writing to pass it.
As for the score, I think that CA having one of the higher cut scores, I think Delaware has the highest, is par for the course as far as population and schools. I look at some other states where only 200 people are taking the bar, should that matter, I don't know. All I know is that the test is what the test is, a test designed to test the minimum competency. When I failed the first time I knew walking out that I had missed a lot of things, the second time, having studied the correct way, I went in feeling that whatever they threw at me I would be able to write on because I knew that I was expected to write as a lawyer, I knew it didn't matter if I knew everything, I had to fake my way through it, make up rules, do the analysis, and hit that minimum threshold. And I think that's really what they want to see, the ability of the test taker to push through it. I too know dumb people that have passed, I include myself in that, and smart people who have failed. And what that has shown me is it's about how you carry yourself through the test. Dr. Sacassuo said that the test was 50% what you wrote, 50% they way you wrote it and I really agree with that. It's about swagger.
So to address your actual question, I might always be able to look things up, but there are times when I am in court, and I do criminal law, that I do need to think on my feet, analogize the cases being thrown at me, turn the argument, and work for my client, that's the same skill set I used on the bar.
But other than that I agree, it's a shitty test that no one cares about after you pass it, just like your grades in law school.
I think once you pass the test, and remember how you felt walking out of that test, you'll see that the cut score, whatever it is, was appropriate. I wish everyone success and really believe passing is possible. You just have to find what works for you and hit your groove.