Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: yldstrk

“having taken and passed, I can only say that it is a horrible experience and that a lot of people quit after the 1st try. I personally believe that if Murkowski took it that many times until she passed, it is a plus and a false criticism. Most lawyers would probably not be opposed to me speaking for them and venturing to say they would agree.”

First, congratulations on passing. The exam varies from state and state and pass/fail rates vary also. When I took it (and passed), it was a three-day ordeal. The first day was pure multiple choice questions and was standard throughout the nation. The second and third days involved essay questions analyzing hypothetical situations and this is where each state exam varies. If memory serves, if you passed the multiple-choice questions but failed in the essay questions, you could retake the exam only for the essay questions.

Do I give a pass for four fails before the fifth success? No. One failure is understandable. Some idiots think they can goof off the couple of months between graduation from law school and the exam and skate by on their recollection of classes. It is stupid but not really an indication of competence. If they fail, they sign up for the intensive bar review course which specifically prepares you for the exam.

Failing a second time may or may not be a signal of competence. Only the multiple-choice questions really test “book learning”. The essay questions test whether you are competent to understand and logically analyze how the law applies to real world situations. Sometimes you can just flub up and totally whiff on the real issues involved by analyzing what is really a side issue instead of the main one the examiners are judging. Then, too, like competitors in the Olympics, a bad cold or some other upset can obscure your competence.

But failing four times isn’t a sign of persistence so much as a sign you really don’t have the aptitude for legal analysis and you either got serious and developed it before the fifth time, or you lucked out on questions and a sympathetic exam grader. (BTW, if memory serves, JFK Jr took only three times to pass the New York Bar.)


30 posted on 10/02/2010 3:44:48 AM PDT by caseinpoint (Don't get thickly involved in thin things.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]


To: caseinpoint

I believe Hillary & Michelle also flunked the bar the first time.


31 posted on 10/02/2010 3:52:05 AM PDT by anniegetyourgun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies ]

To: caseinpoint
"But failing four times isn’t a sign of persistence so much as a sign you really don’t have the aptitude for legal analysis"

Exactly.

39 posted on 10/02/2010 5:09:40 AM PDT by StAnDeliver (/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies ]

To: caseinpoint
Concur with your analysis. I took the VA bar and passed the first time. What was interesting was that we were told that the essay portion was written so you could argue either side of the issue, so "picking a side;" did not determine success or failure. How you analyzed the issues got you the score. While I cannot prove that was correct, I can say that I compared my answers with a friend who took the same exam and our answers were almost completely the opposite of each other. We both passed the bar. Oh yes, the failure rate for that particular test was around 25%.
49 posted on 10/02/2010 6:17:39 AM PDT by fini
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies ]

To: caseinpoint; yldstrk
She's young enough to have taken the bar after the "Multi-State" (standardized nationwide multiple choice questions) portion of the exam was introduced. Don't know exactly when Alaska got on board, but GA was when I took it for the first (and only) time the spring semester of my 3L year.

What may have held her back is that the rest of the exam at that time was probably essays and those tend to be very focussed on local state law. So if she went to law school in Oregon but was trying to pass the Alaska bar, she was at something of a disadvantage.

But . . . FOUR times? That's not a problem with not knowing the law, unless she has a really bad memory. That's a problem with being unable to see the big picture, pick out themes for analysis, and lay it out coherently on paper for the examiners. Combination of reading for content, organization, analytical skill, and persuasive writing ability.

Those skills have more to do with native intelligence than law. You can hone them (I hope she had the sense to take a bar review course somewhere in that sequence) but not acquire them.

Having to take the bar 4 times tells me that she doesn't have the smarts or at best is marginal. That's heading into legendary territory, like some of the folks that hang around the State Law Library who have taken the bar for years (15, 20 times) and never pass . . . .

68 posted on 10/02/2010 8:51:40 AM PDT by AnAmericanMother (Ministrix of ye Chasse, TTGC Ladies' Auxiliary (recess appointment))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson