July 2014 Bar Exam results thread Forum

[alicrimson]

Got my WI results. Passed at 278, exactly the state average. 141 MBE. 137 Essays.

Couple of notes. Like others have said they are know longer reporting Raw MBE scores. This is simply speculation but its hard not to draw the conclusion that the scale was in the 15-20 point range and they'd like to avoid the scrutiny of a whole 10th of the MBE not counting. For those who aren't aware, 10 of the questions are experimental and don't count and form the minimum scale of 10 points on the test. To my knowledge any question where less than a certain percentage got it right (I think I remember hearing 20% somewhere), they basically count everyone as having gotten right, a scale bump.

To suggest that in addition to 10 experimentals that another 10 weren't properly designed such that most of the test taking population got them wrong has to be worrisome for the NCBE. It suggests, again speculation, that there is an overreaction to the efficacy of bar prep programs. My concern is the same as we are encountering with the SAT. In raising the difficulty to combat the efficacy of prep programs we are creating a two tiered system in which those who can afford prep pass and those who can't do not.

The real question is, is the bar making itself harder because it thinks it isn't testing what lawyers should know, or is it becoming harder because they think the pass rate is too high? The first point (and the test doesn't test what lawyers should now) is a defensible reason for making the test harder. The second is not. This is a certification test, a test of minimum competence, not an entrance exam. It is not the job of the BBE in each state to funnel how many lawyers there are, the market should do that.

Good info, and I agree with your opinions on raising the difficulty just to raise the difficulty.

On an unrelated note, how did you feel coming out of the exam and what kind of prep did you do? I know this information can't really help anyone at this point, but it might be nice for those who are still waiting to see what passing people felt/experienced.

[Saddle Up]

I heard this in school today. The national bar passage rate is way down (how far down is way down, do not know). Is there a way to verify this rumor? My understanding is that most of the states have not yet reported. I know GA will not be out for a while, my sis just started at a firm this week and this rumor will likely add to her anxiety.

[Georgia Avenue]

How would anyone know? ~45 states haven't even released their results yet. But if that rumor were true, either each state decided to score the essays a lot harder, or NCBE decided to just not scale the MBE this year. Remember that the MBE scale exists so that no one administration of the test is "harder" than another. The third option is that the 100,000 July 2014 examinees were just spectacularly bad at test-taking.

All seem unlikely. I predict after all is said and done there won't be much movement in passage rates beyond what you'd expect from normal year-to-year variance.

[glitter178]

I heard this in school today. The national bar passage rate is way down (how far down is way down, do not know). Is there a way to verify this rumor? My understanding is that most of the states have not yet reported. I know GA will not be out for a while, my sis just started at a firm this week and this rumor will likely add to her anxiety.

Doubt it. I'd think ATL would be all over that type of info

[krishna_das]

I heard this in school today. The national bar passage rate is way down (how far down is way down, do not know). Is there a way to verify this rumor? My understanding is that most of the states have not yet reported. I know GA will not be out for a while, my sis just started at a firm this week and this rumor will likely add to her anxiety.

That would be really difficult to verify at this point, but the Examsoft debacle may have had a negative effect on bar performance (MBE scores) this year.

[mmmnnn]

Just found out I passed. Based on the released list, it appears that roughly 70% to 75% of takers in my jurisdiction passed, which is consistent with prior years.

If my score sheet (which comes in a couple days) details MBE/scaling/etc. I'll let you guys know.

Also, thanks Themis!

[silky bruh]

Just found out I passed. Based on the released list, it appears that roughly 70% to 75% of takers in my jurisdiction passed, which is consistent with prior years.

If my score sheet (which comes in a couple days) details MBE/scaling/etc. I'll let you guys know.

Also, thanks Themis!

Congrats!!! On a Friday, too. Enjoy it.

[L.M1988]

Got my WI results. Passed at 278, exactly the state average. 141 MBE. 137 Essays.

Couple of notes. Like others have said they are know longer reporting Raw MBE scores. This is simply speculation but its hard not to draw the conclusion that the scale was in the 15-20 point range and they'd like to avoid the scrutiny of a whole 10th of the MBE not counting. For those who aren't aware, 10 of the questions are experimental and don't count and form the minimum scale of 10 points on the test. To my knowledge any question where less than a certain percentage got it right (I think I remember hearing 20% somewhere), they basically count everyone as having gotten right, a scale bump.

To suggest that in addition to 10 experimentals that another 10 weren't properly designed such that most of the test taking population got them wrong has to be worrisome for the NCBE. It suggests, again speculation, that there is an overreaction to the efficacy of bar prep programs. My concern is the same as we are encountering with the SAT. In raising the difficulty to combat the efficacy of prep programs we are creating a two tiered system in which those who can afford prep pass and those who can't do not.

The real question is, is the bar making itself harder because it thinks it isn't testing what lawyers should know, or is it becoming harder because they think the pass rate is too high? The first point (and the test doesn't test what lawyers should now) is a defensible reason for making the test harder. The second is not. This is a certification test, a test of minimum competence, not an entrance exam. It is not the job of the BBE in each state to funnel how many lawyers there are, the market should do that.

Good info, and I agree with your opinions on raising the difficulty just to raise the difficulty.

On an unrelated note, how did you feel coming out of the exam and what kind of prep did you do? I know this information can't really help anyone at this point, but it might be nice for those who are still waiting to see what passing people felt/experienced.

Sure. For starters I took the test straight out of law school. I was a Texas law school student (SMU) taking the WI bar.

For those of you who don't know WI is fairly standard. Tues. essays, usually six 45 minute subject essays (Prof. Resp. is always one, though not officially, because WI does not require the MPRE) and an MPT. Wed. is the MBE.

For prep I did Barbri. Themis does not offer a course in WI. I did not go to a class, all online. I watched all the lectures and reviewed the lecture notes. I did not rely heavily upon either the Conviser mini review or the large outline, instead choosing to focus on aiming for a 7/10 on each essay by getting all major points. I also, for this reason, did not study distinctions rigorously. I outlined the barbri essays, probably 3 per subject, and read through all of them (skimmed is more like) to get an idea of how they test issues and what to look for in identifying areas of law.

For the MBE I did the Barbri Simulated Test, the diagnostic 100 question test, and probably 400 other practice questions, maybe 750 total. I thought Barbri AMP was of middling value. It helped with some things, with others it was just an exercise in "remember what the answer looks like." I just tried to get through them.

Essays I felt good about. I scored lower on the MPT than I did with Barbri practice, had been scoring 18-20, got a 15 and I thought I had nailed the MPT. Scored an average of 8 on my essays which was higher than I thought I would.

MBE I felt about the same as I did in practice. Some I knew, some I felt I had a good guess, some I just stabbed at. I thought property was harder but I thought Torts was easier. Experimentals were super easy to spot as they had a bunch of Civ Pro on mine at least. Just took a stab and moved on.

I scored higher than my practice scores on the MBE by about 15 points. Was averaging raw 110-125. Scored 141 on the MBE. probably a combination of the scale (barbri does not scale) and getting a few more questions right.

Hope this helps.

[OhScalia]

Got my WI results. Passed at 278, exactly the state average. 141 MBE. 137 Essays.

Couple of notes. Like others have said they are know longer reporting Raw MBE scores. This is simply speculation but its hard not to draw the conclusion that the scale was in the 15-20 point range and they'd like to avoid the scrutiny of a whole 10th of the MBE not counting. For those who aren't aware, 10 of the questions are experimental and don't count and form the minimum scale of 10 points on the test. To my knowledge any question where less than a certain percentage got it right (I think I remember hearing 20% somewhere), they basically count everyone as having gotten right, a scale bump.

To suggest that in addition to 10 experimentals that another 10 weren't properly designed such that most of the test taking population got them wrong has to be worrisome for the NCBE. It suggests, again speculation, that there is an overreaction to the efficacy of bar prep programs. My concern is the same as we are encountering with the SAT. In raising the difficulty to combat the efficacy of prep programs we are creating a two tiered system in which those who can afford prep pass and those who can't do not.

The real question is, is the bar making itself harder because it thinks it isn't testing what lawyers should know, or is it becoming harder because they think the pass rate is too high? The first point (and the test doesn't test what lawyers should now) is a defensible reason for making the test harder. The second is not. This is a certification test, a test of minimum competence, not an entrance exam. It is not the job of the BBE in each state to funnel how many lawyers there are, the market should do that.

Good info, and I agree with your opinions on raising the difficulty just to raise the difficulty.

On an unrelated note, how did you feel coming out of the exam and what kind of prep did you do? I know this information can't really help anyone at this point, but it might be nice for those who are still waiting to see what passing people felt/experienced.

Sure. For starters I took the test straight out of law school. I was a Texas law school student (SMU) taking the WI bar.

For those of you who don't know WI is fairly standard. Tues. essays, usually six 45 minute subject essays (Prof. Resp. is always one, though not officially, because WI does not require the MPRE) and an MPT. Wed. is the MBE.

For prep I did Barbri. Themis does not offer a course in WI. I did not go to a class, all online. I watched all the lectures and reviewed the lecture notes. I did not rely heavily upon either the Conviser mini review or the large outline, instead choosing to focus on aiming for a 7/10 on each essay by getting all major points. I also, for this reason, did not study distinctions rigorously. I outlined the barbri essays, probably 3 per subject, and read through all of them (skimmed is more like) to get an idea of how they test issues and what to look for in identifying areas of law.

For the MBE I did the Barbri Simulated Test, the diagnostic 100 question test, and probably 400 other practice questions, maybe 750 total. I thought Barbri AMP was of middling value. It helped with some things, with others it was just an exercise in "remember what the answer looks like." I just tried to get through them.

Essays I felt good about. I scored lower on the MPT than I did with Barbri practice, had been scoring 18-20, got a 15 and I thought I had nailed the MPT. Scored an average of 8 on my essays which was higher than I thought I would.

MBE I felt about the same as I did in practice. Some I knew, some I felt I had a good guess, some I just stabbed at. I thought property was harder but I thought Torts was easier. Experimentals were super easy to spot as they had a bunch of Civ Pro on mine at least. Just took a stab and moved on.

I scored higher than my practice scores on the MBE by about 15 points. Was averaging raw 110-125. Scored 141 on the MBE. probably a combination of the scale (barbri does not scale) and getting a few more questions right.

Hope this helps.

This supports the idea that the MBE was not harder than normal. Definitely not harder than the Barbri simulated MBE.

[jarofsoup]

Got my WI results. Passed at 278, exactly the state average. 141 MBE. 137 Essays.

Couple of notes. Like others have said they are know longer reporting Raw MBE scores. This is simply speculation but its hard not to draw the conclusion that the scale was in the 15-20 point range and they'd like to avoid the scrutiny of a whole 10th of the MBE not counting. For those who aren't aware, 10 of the questions are experimental and don't count and form the minimum scale of 10 points on the test. To my knowledge any question where less than a certain percentage got it right (I think I remember hearing 20% somewhere), they basically count everyone as having gotten right, a scale bump.

To suggest that in addition to 10 experimentals that another 10 weren't properly designed such that most of the test taking population got them wrong has to be worrisome for the NCBE. It suggests, again speculation, that there is an overreaction to the efficacy of bar prep programs. My concern is the same as we are encountering with the SAT. In raising the difficulty to combat the efficacy of prep programs we are creating a two tiered system in which those who can afford prep pass and those who can't do not.

The real question is, is the bar making itself harder because it thinks it isn't testing what lawyers should know, or is it becoming harder because they think the pass rate is too high? The first point (and the test doesn't test what lawyers should now) is a defensible reason for making the test harder. The second is not. This is a certification test, a test of minimum competence, not an entrance exam. It is not the job of the BBE in each state to funnel how many lawyers there are, the market should do that.

Good info, and I agree with your opinions on raising the difficulty just to raise the difficulty.

On an unrelated note, how did you feel coming out of the exam and what kind of prep did you do? I know this information can't really help anyone at this point, but it might be nice for those who are still waiting to see what passing people felt/experienced.

Sure. For starters I took the test straight out of law school. I was a Texas law school student (SMU) taking the WI bar.

For those of you who don't know WI is fairly standard. Tues. essays, usually six 45 minute subject essays (Prof. Resp. is always one, though not officially, because WI does not require the MPRE) and an MPT. Wed. is the MBE.

For prep I did Barbri. Themis does not offer a course in WI. I did not go to a class, all online. I watched all the lectures and reviewed the lecture notes. I did not rely heavily upon either the Conviser mini review or the large outline, instead choosing to focus on aiming for a 7/10 on each essay by getting all major points. I also, for this reason, did not study distinctions rigorously. I outlined the barbri essays, probably 3 per subject, and read through all of them (skimmed is more like) to get an idea of how they test issues and what to look for in identifying areas of law.

For the MBE I did the Barbri Simulated Test, the diagnostic 100 question test, and probably 400 other practice questions, maybe 750 total. I thought Barbri AMP was of middling value. It helped with some things, with others it was just an exercise in "remember what the answer looks like." I just tried to get through them.

Essays I felt good about. I scored lower on the MPT than I did with Barbri practice, had been scoring 18-20, got a 15 and I thought I had nailed the MPT. Scored an average of 8 on my essays which was higher than I thought I would.

MBE I felt about the same as I did in practice. Some I knew, some I felt I had a good guess, some I just stabbed at. I thought property was harder but I thought Torts was easier. Experimentals were super easy to spot as they had a bunch of Civ Pro on mine at least. Just took a stab and moved on.

I scored higher than my practice scores on the MBE by about 15 points. Was averaging raw 110-125. Scored 141 on the MBE. probably a combination of the scale (barbri does not scale) and getting a few more questions right.

Hope this helps.

This supports the idea that the MBE was not harder than normal. Definitely not harder than the Barbri simulated MBE.

Barbri SMBE and FMBE are designed to be much harder. But I dont know. I took OPE 4 and got a 72/100 on it which I hope was representative of how I did on game day.

[NonTradHealthLaw]

After having a few weeks to digest and ruminate I feel confident that the hard questions were harder than expected but the other 80-85% were ranging from easy to tricky. I like those odds. Oct 24 may come tomorrow and end this self- immolation charade. Time to go all in again.

[homestyle28]

The third option is that the 100,000 July 2014 examinees were just spectacularly bad at test-taking.

*cough*

[dallaseagle]

Got my WI results. Passed at 278, exactly the state average. 141 MBE. 137 Essays.

Couple of notes. Like others have said they are know longer reporting Raw MBE scores. This is simply speculation but its hard not to draw the conclusion that the scale was in the 15-20 point range and they'd like to avoid the scrutiny of a whole 10th of the MBE not counting. For those who aren't aware, 10 of the questions are experimental and don't count and form the minimum scale of 10 points on the test. To my knowledge any question where less than a certain percentage got it right (I think I remember hearing 20% somewhere), they basically count everyone as having gotten right, a scale bump.

To suggest that in addition to 10 experimentals that another 10 weren't properly designed such that most of the test taking population got them wrong has to be worrisome for the NCBE. It suggests, again speculation, that there is an overreaction to the efficacy of bar prep programs. My concern is the same as we are encountering with the SAT. In raising the difficulty to combat the efficacy of prep programs we are creating a two tiered system in which those who can afford prep pass and those who can't do not.

The real question is, is the bar making itself harder because it thinks it isn't testing what lawyers should know, or is it becoming harder because they think the pass rate is too high? The first point (and the test doesn't test what lawyers should now) is a defensible reason for making the test harder. The second is not. This is a certification test, a test of minimum competence, not an entrance exam. It is not the job of the BBE in each state to funnel how many lawyers there are, the market should do that.

cosigned

[OklahomasOK]

FWIW, OK bar passage rate was noticeably lower than previous years. Down 7% from a year ago.

I knew a few pretty bright people who failed the OK bar.

[krishna_das]

FWIW, OK bar passage rate was noticeably lower than previous years. Down 7% from a year ago.

I knew a few pretty bright people who failed the OK bar.

The Oklahoma pass rate for July 2014 is 79%. Down from 82% for July 2013--a 3% difference.

[OklahomasOK]

FWIW, OK bar passage rate was noticeably lower than previous years. Down 7% from a year ago.

I knew a few pretty bright people who failed the OK bar.

The Oklahoma pass rate for July 2014 is 79%. Down from 82% for July 2013--a 3% difference.

Shit, you're right. My mistake. Could have sworn it was 75%.

[silky bruh]

FWIW, OK bar passage rate was noticeably lower than previous years. Down 7% from a year ago.

I knew a few pretty bright people who failed the OK bar.

The Oklahoma pass rate for July 2014 is 79%. Down from 82% for July 2013--a 3% difference.

Shit, you're right. My mistake. Could have sworn it was 75%.

TOO EARLY ON A SUNDAY FOR THIS SHIT

[krishna_das]

FWIW, OK bar passage rate was noticeably lower than previous years. Down 7% from a year ago.

I knew a few pretty bright people who failed the OK bar.

The Oklahoma pass rate for July 2014 is 79%. Down from 82% for July 2013--a 3% difference.

Shit, you're right. My mistake. Could have sworn it was 75%.

It's cool. You're right that it is a noticeably lower passage rate than in previous years. I'm just hoping pass rates aren't down across the country.

[beachbum]

I knew I should have stayed away from this thread.

[vandalvideo]

FWIW, OK bar passage rate was noticeably lower than previous years. Down 7% from a year ago.

I knew a few pretty bright people who failed the OK bar.

The Oklahoma pass rate for July 2014 is 79%. Down from 82% for July 2013--a 3% difference.

Ten year low for the win! Although its not too much lower than 2012 or 2009.

[AJS30]

FWIW, OK bar passage rate was noticeably lower than previous years. Down 7% from a year ago.

I knew a few pretty bright people who failed the OK bar.

The Oklahoma pass rate for July 2014 is 79%. Down from 82% for July 2013--a 3% difference.

Ten year low for the win! Although its not too much lower than 2012 or 2009.

I believe there were less people taking the exam this time around, if that counts for anything.

[Georgia Avenue]

FWIW, OK bar passage rate was noticeably lower than previous years. Down 7% from a year ago.

I knew a few pretty bright people who failed the OK bar.

The Oklahoma pass rate for July 2014 is 79%. Down from 82% for July 2013--a 3% difference.

Ten year low for the win! Although its not too much lower than 2012 or 2009.

I believe there were less people taking the exam this time around, if that counts for anything.

It always does. Bars with a low amount of takers are always more susceptible to swings. NCBE says the pass rate for July 2012 was 81% for 399 examinees, so I'd hesitate to read too much into the pass rate being 79%.

Let's wait and see what happens in the big states before jumping to any conclusions. If Florida is down 5-6%, then that might mean something.

[SEngland]

Got that PASS.

yeeeezzzzzzzzuuuuurrrrr

[Neidermeyer]

Got that PASS.

yeeeezzzzzzzzuuuuurrrrr

Congrats! What jurisdiction?

[mmmnnn]

Just found out I passed. Based on the released list, it appears that roughly 70% to 75% of takers in my jurisdiction passed, which is consistent with prior years.

If my score sheet (which comes in a couple days) details MBE/scaling/etc. I'll let you guys know.

Also, thanks Themis!

Got my score sheet yesterday.

First, no update on passage rate. That's released separately for some reason.

Like everyone else said, there's no raw MBE score. My scaled score was shockingly high (172). Leaving the exam, I felt like I nailed the morning session, but I felt like the afternoon session was a horror show. Before the bar, I was averaging around 70-75% on Themis's mixed question sets and practice tests.

My essay (MEE) and MPT scores were all average/above average, which was totally consistent with my Themis feedback. I got the median score on the essay where I made up rules (Civ Pro) and got above average on another where I was somewhat lost (Corporations). My best essay score (perfect score) was family law, which is bizarre because I didn't feel all that great about my answer. I suppose a lot of people screwed it up. Heard some talk about mixing civ pro or conflicts, which I did not do at all--I stuck to family law only.

And my MPT scores, although good, weren't as high as I expected. My MEE scores were better, which is the opposite of how I felt during the exam. I'm guessing that many people did very well on the MPTs, which were relatively straightforward compared to some examples I encountered studying.

All in all, I passed with a lot of room to spare. More than I ever expected.

So don't fret. It'll probably be good news.