I wanted to write a quick summary when I got back from Baltimore on Thursday evening. But, by that point, the bar exam was the last thing I really wanted to think about.
Foremost, thanks to everyone who put up with my crap for the past few months.
In summary, I didn't think the exam was that bad. Given the circumstances and all. I mean, in retrospect, I'm really not sure what the point of the exam is since it sure as hell does not measure your knowledge or ability to apply the law. Unfortunately, as the statistics go, 1 out of every 3 law school graduates does not pass the bar. Will I be among them? Who knows. Since the Bar doesn't actually tell you how they grade your answers, I have more faith in the output of a random number generator.
The exam was broken down into two parts: 11 essays (400 pts), and 200 multiple choice (200 points). You need 405 points to pass. I was worried about the essays the most because they're weighted more and could cover a few topics I never had classes in (family law, ick). I thought the MC would be the easier part--since I've done well-over 2,000 of these problems. When it came down to it, my expectations were completely reversed.
I thought the essays were very easy. Not what I expected at all. The 11th essay question, the MPT, and carries the twice the weight of a normal essay question. I don't like MPTs (mostly because they're time-consuming), but I thought the question was a breeze. It was essentially commenting on how an exculpatory agreement should be redrafted. Probably 50% of my law classes involved drafting and writing legal documents. Cakewalk.
HOWEVER, the Bar grades essays "holistically" on a scale of 1 to 6. "Holistically" in this case--from what I hear--means "depending on the mood the attorney--who is probably behind schedule on real work as it is--happens to be in while grading your exam." Awesome, eh?
I thought the multiple choice would be easy. After all, I've done a ton of them both in law school and during bar prep. It was completely not what I expected. At all. The fact patterns were very long and convoluted. I've whined before about the exam writers writing without specificity--but the morning session was crazy. During the break for lunch, I think the general consensus was that the questions seemed more difficult than normal. I blame it on poor exam writing. Once I could figure out what the heck the question was even TRYING to ask, the correct answer choice was easier to find. But again, the fact patterns were very long and contained a LOT of unnecessary information. The questions in the afternoon session weren't as bad, but there were still a few off-the-wall questions. Seems to be what people are reporting all around the internet. So let's hope the curve is nice.
They say the bar exam is a test of minimal competency. If you know the material, you should be able to pass easily. I guess then, I hope that I adequately demonstrated that I'm as minimally competent as possible.
Foremost, thanks to everyone who put up with my crap for the past few months.
In summary, I didn't think the exam was that bad. Given the circumstances and all. I mean, in retrospect, I'm really not sure what the point of the exam is since it sure as hell does not measure your knowledge or ability to apply the law. Unfortunately, as the statistics go, 1 out of every 3 law school graduates does not pass the bar. Will I be among them? Who knows. Since the Bar doesn't actually tell you how they grade your answers, I have more faith in the output of a random number generator.
The exam was broken down into two parts: 11 essays (400 pts), and 200 multiple choice (200 points). You need 405 points to pass. I was worried about the essays the most because they're weighted more and could cover a few topics I never had classes in (family law, ick). I thought the MC would be the easier part--since I've done well-over 2,000 of these problems. When it came down to it, my expectations were completely reversed.
I thought the essays were very easy. Not what I expected at all. The 11th essay question, the MPT, and carries the twice the weight of a normal essay question. I don't like MPTs (mostly because they're time-consuming), but I thought the question was a breeze. It was essentially commenting on how an exculpatory agreement should be redrafted. Probably 50% of my law classes involved drafting and writing legal documents. Cakewalk.
HOWEVER, the Bar grades essays "holistically" on a scale of 1 to 6. "Holistically" in this case--from what I hear--means "depending on the mood the attorney--who is probably behind schedule on real work as it is--happens to be in while grading your exam." Awesome, eh?
I thought the multiple choice would be easy. After all, I've done a ton of them both in law school and during bar prep. It was completely not what I expected. At all. The fact patterns were very long and convoluted. I've whined before about the exam writers writing without specificity--but the morning session was crazy. During the break for lunch, I think the general consensus was that the questions seemed more difficult than normal. I blame it on poor exam writing. Once I could figure out what the heck the question was even TRYING to ask, the correct answer choice was easier to find. But again, the fact patterns were very long and contained a LOT of unnecessary information. The questions in the afternoon session weren't as bad, but there were still a few off-the-wall questions. Seems to be what people are reporting all around the internet. So let's hope the curve is nice.
They say the bar exam is a test of minimal competency. If you know the material, you should be able to pass easily. I guess then, I hope that I adequately demonstrated that I'm as minimally competent as possible.
Leave a comment