MBE - how'd you feel? Forum

[cdelgado]

For Barbri, I usually knew whether the answer was correct if I knew the answer. MBE, even if i thought i knew the answer I i didnt know if it was correct or not a lot of the time.

True. I definitely had quite a few where the answer in my head wasn't identical to any of the answer choices. I'd just go with the one that was closest. We'll find out at the end of October whether that was a good thing to do or a disastrous thing to do.

The good news is that we can miss a lot and still pass.

[nomolawskool2]

I used Themis and they spent the whole time reassuring us that the MBE tests blackletter, basic doctrine. Test day, I thought the questions more similar to that "gotcha" BS you get a few times in law school. I don't get how a "test of minimal competency" was harder to understand than that LSAT word game horse shit we did 4 years ago.

[juniormint33]

I used Themis and they spent the whole time reassuring us that the MBE tests blackletter, basic doctrine. Test day, I thought the questions more similar to that "gotcha" BS you get a few times in law school. I don't get how a "test of minimal competency" was harder to understand than that LSAT word game horse shit we did 4 years ago.

+1

[somuchbooty]

Yep, I told Themis their MBE questions were not very much like the actual MBE questions, and gave them a 3 out of 10 for that reason. That'll show them.

[waxecstatic]

I used Adaptibar and as some people may know, the Adaptibar civ pro questions were absurd, and would usually cite cases in their answer explanation, and would test a lot of technical crap. But on the MBE civ pro, most of those questions were NOT on jurisdiction, where you might think half the questions would be from. Second, hardly any questions on removal. They were all on Erie Doctrine, res judicata/collateral estoppel, and separating claims. It was rough.

[waxecstatic]

I just don't get it. How can someone take that many practice tests/questions and then not see more than 2-3 questions that look similar to PREVIOUS exam questions? Just doesn't make sense, and if they're going to alter the exam question style that much, they should at least make sure they aren't worded ambiguously.

I didn't take a prep course, but from what I've read, the prep questions are nothing like MBE questions. They have long fact patterns and test on the fringe issues in law. The MBE questions are written in such a way that you can clearly tell what the right answer should be, but the answer choices are so meticulously ambiguous, that you second guess yourself... A lot. Compared to the released MBE questions from NCBEX, I didn't think today's MBE was all that different. You either know the rule or not, if you kind of know it, you're fucked because the other three answer choices will look mighty attractive.

I couldn't agree more! And that can screw with your head for the rest of the exam.

[kyle010723]

I truly don't understand how some of you folks were brave enough to study for the Bar without taking a class on it. I would throw myself against a wall if I have to somehow teach myself crim pro/wills/trust/family law and etc.

[saffronleaf]

[waxecstatic]

oh dear god...lizard vaccinations....commandeering....nightmares no doubt tonight.

[Lacepiece23]

[waxecstatic]

[saffronleaf]

[odoylerulez]

[LAW813FL]

[hindijs1]

I used Adaptibar and as some people may know, the Adaptibar civ pro questions were absurd, and would usually cite cases in their answer explanation, and would test a lot of technical crap. But on the MBE civ pro, most of those questions were NOT on jurisdiction, where you might think half the questions would be from. Second, hardly any questions on removal. They were all on Erie Doctrine, res judicata/collateral estoppel, and separating claims. It was rough.

I think this is like the second time civ pro was tested. I can knock prep companies on alot of things, but we cant expect them to know what areas of civ pro will be zeroed in on at this point.

[hindijs1]

I truly don't understand how some of you folks were brave enough to study for the Bar without taking a class on it. I would throw myself against a wall if I have to somehow teach myself crim pro/wills/trust/family law and etc.

I agree. I took courses on every area of law tested on both MBE and state portion. On the other hand, as i'm sure you agree, bar testing on areas of law such as crim pro are very narrow for bar purposes.

[kyle010723]

I truly don't understand how some of you folks were brave enough to study for the Bar without taking a class on it. I would throw myself against a wall if I have to somehow teach myself crim pro/wills/trust/family law and etc.

I agree. I took courses on every area of law tested on both MBE and state portion. On the other hand, as i'm sure you agree, bar testing on areas of law such as crim pro are very narrow for bar purposes.

Let me rephrase that. I don't understand how people decided to take the bar without taking any Bar prep course. I did not take half of the testable subjects during law school.

[odoylerulez]

[waxecstatic]

[victortsoi]

[odoylerulez]

[konar]

[odoylerulez]

[musicfor18]

[odoylerulez]