July 2016 Texas Bar Exam Forum

[BigZuck]

Bvest (and any other grizzled bar vets)-

I'm not sure I have ever really understood scaling, I assume that whatever my MBE score is I'm going to get a bump of about 8-10 points give or take. Am I understanding the BLE website when it says that the MPT/P&E/TX Essays are all scaled too so I should get some sort of bump there as well? Meaning strong MBE score (like 160ish)+ok to subpar everything else should easily put one into AUTOPASS territory, yes?

(basically I'm just wondering if I should be shifting a little more focus to things like the MPT and P&E or keep grinding away at the MBE)

[BVest]

Ignoring for a moment equating (which seeks to adjust for difficulty from exam to exam) and the general downward trend in MBE scores, each section will have a raw score which is then converted to the MBE scale. Therefore each section's raw scores will be distributed along a scale where the mean is approximately 138 or 139 and the standard deviation is approximately 16.

Each different section has a different possible raw score, so how each is affected by the scale varies, but in any case it won't be linear (i.e. not as simple as "add 10").

MBE: 0-190 possible raw score (1 raw point per question, minus the 10 experimental questions)
Essays: 0-300 possible raw score (25 possible raw points per question)
P/E: 0-100 possible raw score (it's actually 5 possible raw points per question X 40 questions, but then they divide by 2 for no good reason)
MPT: 0-6 possible raw score (I shit you not; and as far as I can tell, it's in whole numbers only)

Here's how the other sections get scaled to the MBE scale:

Scaling involves assigning the highest total essay raw score the same value as the highest MBE scale score in Texas, the second highest total essay raw score the same value as the second highest MBE scale score, and so on until the lowest total essay raw score is the assigned the same value as the lowest MBE scale score. The converted scores are called essay “scale” scores. This same procedure is used to convert MPT and P&E raw scores to scale scores.

So, for essays, assuming an average score of about 170-180, scaling will take about 30-40 points off your raw score; P/E will add points; and MPT will add a shitload of points.

After that the math is not done yet. To get the final score (where passing is 675), they double the Essay and MBE and half the P/E and MPT scores. Such that a 145 MBE, 130 Essay, 120 MPT and 140 P/E would equal 290 + 260 + 60 + 70 = 680.


e: And in terms of what's autopass, if you pull a 165 MBE, you only need to get an average of 115 on the other three sections, which is somewhere in the lowest 10%, if not lowest 5%. 160 would require average of 118, which is still lowest 10%.

[BigZuck]

Thanks, that's really helpful. You should probably become a bar examiner when you grow up, I bet you know more about it then the actual examiners (although then you probably wouldn't be able to help out TLSers, so maybe don't do that)

Those AUTOPASS combos definitely put my mind at ease. I think I'll just keep grinding MBE, try and learn something about the subjects I didn't take in law school, and figure out the particulars on the P&E and call it good.

[AllDangle]

BVest, and others: Is there any pattern that helps make it more likely that either Trusts or Guardianship will be the topic this year?

[BVest]

BVest, and others: Is there any pattern that helps make it more likely that either Trusts or Guardianship will be the topic this year?

I know that the last four (in reverse order) were Trusts F16, Trusts J15, Guardianship F15, and Trusts J14. IIRC, we were told that they tend to alternate, so it looks like y'all are probably set up for Guardianship since they've done two Trust questions in a row, but no one really knows.

Looking a little farther back it looks like this:

Trusts F16
Trusts J15
Guardianship F15
Trusts J14
Trusts F14
Guardianship J13
Guardianship F13
Trusts J12
Guardianship F12
Trusts J11

So 6 Trusts and 4 Guardianships over the last 10 exams. Not much of a pattern to judge by.

[fly_lawy3r]

Time to put 75% of my eggs in the guardianship basket. (Knowing my luck, though, this will be the first time in 10 years the bar examiners test trusts 3 exams in a row.)

[BVest]

Time to put 75% of my eggs in the guardianship basket. (Knowing my luck, though, this will be the first time in 10 years the bar examiners test trusts 3 exams in a row.)

Five years. Ten exams. Looking a little further back, it appears that July 2011 was a third-in-a-row for Trusts.

[genxwindex]

I'm super behind. I haven't read anything or watched the lectures for Wills and Estates, Trusts, Guardianship, Corporations, Agency, Partnerships, Secured Transactions, and Commercial Paper.

Thoughts on just using the FROs (Themis' Final Review Outlines) for them at this point and foregoing the long outlines, lectures, and handouts? The Wills FRO is 25 pages to the handout's 30 pages fwiw. I'm hoping not too much is lost by using the FROs.

I'm hitting around 65% on MBE questions, did well on the graded MPT, and feel so-so on the P&E. But I'm panicking about the essays, for the above subjects and otherwise. I've only done a handful of practice essays (no more than one per subject). I told myself I would save that for July, but I kept over-emphasizing the MBE and now here I am. How true is the TLS saying that you can make up law and get at least some points?

[BVest]

I'm super behind. I haven't read anything or watched the lectures for Wills and Estates, Trusts, Guardianship, Corporations, Agency, Partnerships, Secured Transactions, and Commercial Paper.

Thoughts on just using the FROs (Themis' Final Review Outlines) for them at this point and foregoing the long outlines, lectures, and handouts? The Wills FRO is 25 pages to the handout's 30 pages fwiw. I'm hoping not too much is lost by using the FROs.

I'm hitting around 65% on MBE questions, did well on the graded MPT, and feel so-so on the P&E. But I'm panicking about the essays, for the above subjects and otherwise. I've only done a handful of practice essays (no more than one per subject). I told myself I would save that for July, but I kept over-emphasizing the MBE and now here I am. How true is the TLS saying that you can make up law and get at least some points?

IMO, even those FROs probably contain too much information that is rarely tested. At this state you should probably focus on the past essays to find what rules are repeatedly tested, then focus only on those sections of the FROs.

[NolanRyan]

Having a legit freak out today. Every essay I do I look at it and immediately have no frigging clue as to what the rule could be. Doesn't matter the subject.

Massive panic. I don't know what the hell "minimal competence" means bc that phrase is bullshit.

[0lol]

Minimal competence

Ucc9 governs secured transactions

That guy is creditor

That guy is debtor

That's a valid security interest in vcr

It attached cause xyz

It perfected when idk

Creditor number 7 has the superior claim cause they perfected first, or somthing

[jcsmith]

I keep wondering if focusing on one subject each day is sufficient. Like, for example, today I was focusing on Family Law, but then I keep freaking out thinking that I'm going to forget the MBE stuff. And then I think that I need to grasp the Crim Law and Evidence portion. My mind is just going crazy right now and I feel so scatterbrained. I've stopped doing the Barbri plans because I feel like they jump topics so much. I think to myself that I want to grasp this kind of law before jumping to another suddenly. Also, people have told me that they basically stopped doing Barbri like half-way through completion because their plan was too difficult to keep up with. I wonder if what I'm doing will be a hindrance.

[jcsmith]

Having a legit freak out today. Every essay I do I look at it and immediately have no frigging clue as to what the rule could be. Doesn't matter the subject.

Massive panic. I don't know what the hell "minimal competence" means bc that phrase is bullshit.

I think this is true-The barbri dude says it over and over: You look at the fact pattern and try to figure out why they are giving you those facts. Then you create a rule based off of those facts by using your common sense. He also says that if the rule has elements, they should give you each element in the fact pattern. And you just go through each one and make your own conclusion. That would be wayyyy over minimal competence I do believe. You are doing everything they want you to do in regards to stating a rule and applying that rule to the facts.

I do know that is physically impossible to know every single thing. The bar examiners know that too. I just make sure it's somewhat close to the model answer, then i try to replicate it without looking at it. That's what seems to be working for me. I don't want to be in the situation where I make up my own law, but i know it can be a back-up and I won't freak out come exam time.

[genxwindex]

I'm super behind. I haven't read anything or watched the lectures for Wills and Estates, Trusts, Guardianship, Corporations, Agency, Partnerships, Secured Transactions, and Commercial Paper.

Thoughts on just using the FROs (Themis' Final Review Outlines) for them at this point and foregoing the long outlines, lectures, and handouts? The Wills FRO is 25 pages to the handout's 30 pages fwiw. I'm hoping not too much is lost by using the FROs.

I'm hitting around 65% on MBE questions, did well on the graded MPT, and feel so-so on the P&E. But I'm panicking about the essays, for the above subjects and otherwise. I've only done a handful of practice essays (no more than one per subject). I told myself I would save that for July, but I kept over-emphasizing the MBE and now here I am. How true is the TLS saying that you can make up law and get at least some points?

IMO, even those FROs probably contain too much information that is rarely tested. At this state you should probably focus on the past essays to find what rules are repeatedly tested, then focus only on those sections of the FROs.

That sounds like a plan. Thanks BVest.

Maybe I have half of a chance after all

[BVest]

Having a legit freak out today. Every essay I do I look at it and immediately have no frigging clue as to what the rule could be. Doesn't matter the subject.

Massive panic. I don't know what the hell "minimal competence" means bc that phrase is bullshit.

Have the freak out now, but learn from it. Figure out what works for you when you are in that situation, because odds are good it will happen with at least one question on the exam. The important thing is to know your strategy for dealing with such questions, because freaking out in the exam means wasting too much time on a question where you're clearly getting little marginal return. I have a friend who failed the bar because she freaked out on a question like that, spent too long trying to figure it out, and ended up only having about 10 minutes for question 11 and never got to question 12. She got a 667. Clearly if she'd simply written something and moved on, she could have picked up enough points to pass from questions 11 and 12. (She passed the second time with no problem.)

I'm a big believer in having routines to cut down on the number of things you have to think about in a day. With that in mind, here's my post from another thread about how to (a) organize essays uniformly so that you don't have to put much thought into organization and (b) avoid the freakout on questions you don't have a clue about. Adapt the strategies as works best for you:

Essay Structure

I saved my essays for late in the game. Writing the essays is a "skill" I suppose. It's really more of a formula that's pretty easy to learn.

1) Follow CIRAC (Where "C" is not merely the conclusion, but the very short answer to the call of the question -- e.g. Call of Q on part (a) of an essay is = "What type of business is Global Hot Dogs? Explain fully." C = "Global Hot Dogs is a [General Partnership/Limited Partnership/Limited Liability Company].").

2) Address only the issue(s) relevant to the specific call of the question. This isn't a racehorse law school exam. You don't get points for discussing the finer points of irrelevant issues.

3) Keep your sentences short. It makes it easier for the examiners to see that you included what you needed to.

4) Stick to a few opening words for sentences that you use to answer many questions. It doesn't matter if each of your answers looks the same or isn't timeless prose. e.g.:

Global Hot Dogs is a General Partnership. The issue is whether the founders took the steps necessary to form a Limited Liability Partnership as their agreement states they have formed. To form a LLP, persons forming a business for profit must

• . Except, a business formed for profit between two or more people that does not take those steps or form another entity such as a corporation is a general partnership. Here [analyze facts in 2-3 sentences; e.g. "the founders took all the steps to form the LLP except one. They [steps they did take]. But they failed to register with the Secretary of State, a required element of forming an LLP"]. Thus the founders have failed to form an LLP as they intended, but they did form a business together for the purpose of making a profit. Therefore they have formed a General Partnership.
  
  The above is:
  [Conclusion/Answer]. The issue is whether [issue]. To [rule]. Except [rule exception]. Here [analysis]. Thus [conclusion].
  
  It literally is that easy.
  
  
  
  Not Freaking Out
  
  I also had a process for when I read the question and had no idea what the law was:
  
  1) Decide what is the most equitable outcome. That's your Conclusion/Answer.
  
  2) Make up a rule that makes sense -- it doesn't matter if it matches your outcome.
  
  3) Make up an exception to your rule that makes sense -- here outcome does matter. If the rule you made up would result in the opposite outcome than your conclusion, then make up an exception so that the rule does not apply here. If the rule would result in your outcome, make up an exception that either does not apply or that reinforces your outcome.
  
  4) Write your answer as if your rule and exception are exactly what you learned from bar prep.
  
  5) Move along because you're not going to get a ton of marginal points on this question. Use your time on other questions.

[0lol]

good stuff

[longhornlaw]

Having a legit freak out today. Every essay I do I look at it and immediately have no frigging clue as to what the rule could be. Doesn't matter the subject.

Massive panic. I don't know what the hell "minimal competence" means bc that phrase is bullshit.

Have the freak out now, but learn from it. Figure out what works for you when you are in that situation, because odds are good it will happen with at least one question on the exam. The important thing is to know your strategy for dealing with such questions, because freaking out in the exam means wasting too much time on a question where you're clearly getting little marginal return. I have a friend who failed the bar because she freaked out on a question like that, spent too long trying to figure it out, and ended up only having about 10 minutes for question 11 and never got to question 12. She got a 667. Clearly if she'd simply written something and moved on, she could have picked up enough points to pass from questions 11 and 12. (She passed the second time with no problem.)

I'm a big believer in having routines to cut down on the number of things you have to think about in a day. With that in mind, here's my post from another thread about how to (a) organize essays uniformly so that you don't have to put much thought into organization and (b) avoid the freakout on questions you don't have a clue about. Adapt the strategies as works best for you:

Essay Structure

I saved my essays for late in the game. Writing the essays is a "skill" I suppose. It's really more of a formula that's pretty easy to learn.

1) Follow CIRAC (Where "C" is not merely the conclusion, but the very short answer to the call of the question -- e.g. Call of Q on part (a) of an essay is = "What type of business is Global Hot Dogs? Explain fully." C = "Global Hot Dogs is a [General Partnership/Limited Partnership/Limited Liability Company].").

2) Address only the issue(s) relevant to the specific call of the question. This isn't a racehorse law school exam. You don't get points for discussing the finer points of irrelevant issues.

3) Keep your sentences short. It makes it easier for the examiners to see that you included what you needed to.

4) Stick to a few opening words for sentences that you use to answer many questions. It doesn't matter if each of your answers looks the same or isn't timeless prose. e.g.:

Global Hot Dogs is a General Partnership. The issue is whether the founders took the steps necessary to form a Limited Liability Partnership as their agreement states they have formed. To form a LLP, persons forming a business for profit must

• . Except, a business formed for profit between two or more people that does not take those steps or form another entity such as a corporation is a general partnership. Here [analyze facts in 2-3 sentences; e.g. "the founders took all the steps to form the LLP except one. They [steps they did take]. But they failed to register with the Secretary of State, a required element of forming an LLP"]. Thus the founders have failed to form an LLP as they intended, but they did form a business together for the purpose of making a profit. Therefore they have formed a General Partnership.
  
  The above is:
  [Conclusion/Answer]. The issue is whether [issue]. To [rule]. Except [rule exception]. Here [analysis]. Thus [conclusion].
  
  It literally is that easy.
  
  
  
  Not Freaking Out
  
  I also had a process for when I read the question and had no idea what the law was:
  
  1) Decide what is the most equitable outcome. That's your Conclusion/Answer.
  
  2) Make up a rule that makes sense -- it doesn't matter if it matches your outcome.
  
  3) Make up an exception to your rule that makes sense -- here outcome does matter. If the rule you made up would result in the opposite outcome than your conclusion, then make up an exception so that the rule does not apply here. If the rule would result in your outcome, make up an exception that either does not apply or that reinforces your outcome.
  
  4) Write your answer as if your rule and exception are exactly what you learned from bar prep.
  
  5) Move along because you're not going to get a ton of marginal points on this question. Use your time on other questions.

If I can add something as well - don't worry about getting the right conclusion. I switched my conclusion while writing an essay because the analysis came up with the exact opposite of what I initially concluded the answer was. So dont be afraid to dive in to the essay and write.

Also, if you've looked at the sample answers from past exams, it's clear that you can get an above average answer and have an incorrect rule statement, barely write anything, or conclude entirely differently than the person next to you. Learn the material, but also remember that if you only recall 5 of the 7 elements of a rule, you'll be ok as long as your analysis is strong.

[BVest]

If I can add something as well - don't worry about getting the right conclusion. I switched my conclusion while writing an essay because the analysis came up with the exact opposite of what I initially concluded the answer was. So dont be afraid to dive in to the essay and write.

Also, if you've looked at the sample answers from past exams, it's clear that you can get an above average answer and have an incorrect rule statement, barely write anything, or conclude entirely differently than the person next to you. Learn the material, but also remember that if you only recall 5 of the 7 elements of a rule, you'll be ok as long as your analysis is strong.

Likewise, if you can only remember one element because it's the one that's obviously missing (like my example above of failing to file with Secretary of State), then focus on that one. You can even make it the issue. E.g., "The issue is whether they properly filed with the Secretary of State when seeking to form an LLP." "To form an LLP, among the other elements, which are not at issue here, . . . ."

Another intro term to throw in (I concede this might count as erudition, but it gives the reader the impression you know your shit or at least would know where to look if this were real life and you could look up the rule): "Under the ____, " as in "Under the Texas Business Organizations Code, to form an LLP . . . ." This works for all essay topics (most of which you could guess the name of even if you don't know it):

Corporations/Partnership -- Texas Business Organizations Code
UCC -- Texas Business & Commerce Code or simply Texas UCC
Wills & Estates; Guardianship -- Texas Estates Code
Family Law -- Texas Family Code
Consumer Law -- Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act; Texas Insurance Code
Real Property; Trusts -- Texas Property Code; Texas Trust Code (Texas Trust Code is a title within the Texas Property Code)

[NolanRyan]

I have yet to get to 50% correct on any barbri MBE assignment (including todays 100). Much less reach the goal score. What the hell am I supposed to do...

[0lol]

went thru 5.5 yrs of civ P&E

1.5 years of crim P&E

conclusion:

civ P&E is way easier and everything is repeated over and over

crim P&E blows and can cover a million things

[JS281]

went thru 5.5 yrs of civ P&E

1.5 years of crim P&E

conclusion:

civ P&E is way easier and everything is repeated over and over

crim P&E blows and can cover a million things

I haven't really gone over this part of the exam yet. I am holding off for a few more days. Care to make my life easier by listing the repeated topics?

[umstah]

went thru 5.5 yrs of civ P&E

1.5 years of crim P&E

conclusion:

civ P&E is way easier and everything is repeated over and over

crim P&E blows and can cover a million things

I haven't really gone over this part of the exam yet. I am holding off for a few more days. Care to make my life easier by listing the repeated topics?

ditto. or if anyone has a set of flashcards/outlien for the top questioned topics for both crimpro/civ pro, that would be amazing. imagine ill be using that heavily right before the exam.

[0lol]

pm me ur email and ill send u the question/answer bank for civ pro once i polish it up

tldr tho:

VENUE
M4SJ/M4DV/JNOV
disco scope
particular deadlines

[0lol]

LIMINE

[JS281]

went thru 5.5 yrs of civ P&E

1.5 years of crim P&E

conclusion:

civ P&E is way easier and everything is repeated over and over

crim P&E blows and can cover a million things

I haven't really gone over this part of the exam yet. I am holding off for a few more days. Care to make my life easier by listing the repeated topics?

ditto. or if anyone has a set of flashcards/outlien for the top questioned topics for both crimpro/civ pro, that would be amazing. imagine ill be using that heavily right before the exam.

pm me ur email and ill send u the question/answer bank for civ pro once i polish it up

tldr tho:

VENUE
M4SJ/M4DV/JNOV
disco scope
particular deadlines

I found this yesterday https://quizlet.com/class/1450852/

There are P&E flashcards, but I haven't gone through them to determine if it's helpful.