California Bar Exam Point Scandal?
Some Southern Cali exam takers may have the earthquake to thank for passing.
California bar results are now available for viewing by the general public. As we noted when the private results first went up Friday, the California bar passage rate was 61.7%. Our thoughts:
The NY passage rate was 74.7%. So either the California bar is harder or New Yorkers are smarter.
In fact, the California State Bar notes that the pass rate is "the highest it has been since the July 1997 administration of the examination." The pass rate in California is usually [PDF] in the 40s and 50s. So were California lawyer wannabes smarter this year?
Perhaps. Or maybe the earthquake that struck on day one of the exam was a godsend instead of a disaster. According to the California State Bar, extra points were doled out to certain test centers. See the matrix and more wild speculation, after the jump.
In its press release accompanying the July exam results, the California State Bar acknowledges the earthquake's impact on exam-takers:
During the morning session of the first day of the July 2008 administration of the California Bar Examination, an earthquake struck the Southern California area. There was approximately 15-20 minutes time left in the session. Timing at the test centers continued as scheduled, although the examinees at one test center were given an additional 5 minutes to complete the session.
We know some of you were already upset by the idea of those extra five minutes. But what about the idea of extra points being given out?
Shouldn't you just get normal points for being able to "man up" during an earthquake, staying focused on your exam despite the rumbling and resisting the urge to dive under your desk?
Immediately following conclusion of the examination, the Committee asked its psychometric consultants to investigate whether the earthquake may have had an impact on examinee scores. The Committee's consultants found that the earthquake appeared to have impacted some of the nine Southern California test centers differently.
Based on the calculations and recommendations of its experts, the Committee decided to adjust the scores of some examinees, by test center, with additional points as a function of how much, if any, the test center where they were taking the examination was impacted.
No extra point love for the northern California exam takers, who did not feel the quake. Their results were assessed independently of the nine southern California test centers who did feel it. According to the state bar experts, "the degree of shaking (and staff and candidate reactions to it) varied across the affected sites." The experts crafted a fairly complicated matrix [PDF] to figure out which scores should be padded. According to the psychometric experts:
[S]ome candidates at one center ducked under their desks and some acoustic tiles fell off the ceiling. At another site nearby, the candidates continued to work normally until time was called. Thus, the overall effect of the quake on candidate scores on Essay questions 1 through 3 could vary across test centers as a function of what the candidates at those centers experienced and the actions they took in response to the earthquake.
After determining that the sites where the quake was allegedly felt most strongly had lower exam scores, the experts gave out extra points according to regression models:
One exam taker is nonplussed:
I still don't know how I got 3 points added to my score for 30 seconds of alarming but harmless shaking at the SD laptop site, when the Century Plaza Hotel site that ACTUALLY HAD PIECES OF A GLASS CHANDELIER FALLING (edit: so I have heard) didn't get any adjustment because their scores were higher than expected.Also, I guess there were 2 rooms at the Ontario site or something? and one got 1 point added and the other got 3 points? Even though they were at the same location? I guess maybe the one that got 1 point was probably the room where they gave test takers an extra 15 minutes, because I think not everyone at Ontario got the extra 15. To be fair, the Ontario site was the closest to where the quake hit.
I see some lawsuits in the offing from those at Century Plaza in West LA that were distracted by the quake and only failed by a few points.
What do people think? Fair? Not fair? Is litigation in the works? Maybe your esquired friends who took it at the San Diego Concourse can help you draft those legal documents.
ADJUSTING FOR THE IMPACT OF THE JULY 2008 EARTHQUAKE ON CALIFORNIA BAR EXAMINATION SCORES (PDF) [California State Bar]
GENERAL BAR EXAMINATION PASS RATE SUMMARY (PDF) [California State Bar]
Earlier: Parting Thoughts And West Coast Hippie Bar Results
Bar Exam Open Thread: So How Was Day One? (Earthquakes aside.)
(67) 
FIRSTYFIRSTYFIRSTYFIRSTYFIRSTYFIRSTYFIRSTY
first?
Ha! Suck it 2!
-1
FOURTH!
I often score higher for making people shake.
Maybe Stanford' s "Dean" Kathleen Sullivan--when she *finally* passed the Cal. Bar--was another beneficiary of these "extra points" that the Calif. examiners evidently dole out.
I got 4 extra points and I didn't even take the CA bar exam. I am going to apply my points to my Xbox 360 account.
Suck it, Texas.
Cholent -- mmmmmmmmm
CA = TTT
YES YES, BUT DID HENRY PLAY AT THE TIN ROOF THIS WEEKEND?
5 = FAIL.
LOL at having psychometric consultants on retainer.
5=Tulane grad.
3 = Fail (ed the CA BAR).
This won't impact more than a few dozen people. Having a few points added doesn't matter. You either pass out right or you don't. Certain people who are in a small range below the minimum passing score get sent to a secondary look of their exam and they are re-graded but even then the few points won't end up making a difference for more than 4 or 5 people total.
i hate lawyers.
-a lawyer.
You needed at least a 1440 to pass. It is highly doubtful that someone would have been at 1435 and then pass. If you were within 5 points of passing, you would have gone to a second read and surely would have failed.
California allows unaccredited law schools. Their students drag down the pass rate (sorry, but they do). Comparing New York's and California's pass rates is apples to oranges. Nuff said.
You needed at least a 1440 to pass. It is highly doubtful that someone would have been at 1435 and then pass. If you were within 5 points of passing, you would have gone to a second read and surely would have failed.
someone should sue!
repeat after me: sue! sue! sue! sue! sue! sue! sue!
I was in the Ontario 1 point room. We did not get "15 extra minutes" we got about 5 and that was because when 1700+ people all duck under tables it can take a few moments before a return to normalcy. Things did fall in Ontario and struck the person in front of me. Really large lights swayed and we were mere miles from the epicenter of the quake. It made perfect sense to allow a few moments to account for everyone's lost composure. That being said those extra minutes should have been the ONLY thing granted to those test takers. I passed but I'm pissed that my passage is sullied by this idea that some how a single point added to Essay 3 got me there. We had 6 essays, 2 performance tests and the MBE, do you really think the passage rate was so high because of points added to a single essay? Please.
Kash saying "man up" -- that is worth 5 points in my book.
As a Northern California test-taker, I am seriously considering using the lack of an earthquake as my excuse for failing.
Why am I not surprised that the land of Gavin and Prop 8 engages in more subjective discrimination? Only in blue states. Watch out, 2012 is 4 years away, donkeys.
Why am I not surprised that the land of Gavin and Prop 8 engages in more subjective discrimination? Only in blue states. Watch out, 2012 is 4 years away, donkeys.
Why am I not surprised that the land of Gavin and Prop 8 engages in more subjective discrimination? Only in blue states. Watch out, 2012 is 4 years away, donkeys.
Pretty fair--if a center is disproportionately low, and there was a quake, give 'em a few points. NBD.
I was given points for the earthquake as well as for being really black.
sexual chocolate
^ Elie's back!
i was at the century plaza. a little piece of a chandelier fell off of the ceiling, and one girl from michigan lost her mind for a minute. other than that, we had a "get back to work" mentality.
If you are still writing -- as opposed to just editing, twiddling your thumbs or leaving the room if they let you -- with 15-20 minutes left in the session, you deserve to fail.
And if it was an MBE session, then you should have been done for half an hour when the quake hit.
Anyone with an IQ higher than room temperature knows why the CA pass rate is historically so low. That said, failing can happen to anyone, even someone as smart as Kathleen.
As a Nor Cal test taker I just have to say that it's not the bar, the earthquake or extra points' fault that San Diego just tested dumb this year. At least they wont have to suffer the results of their stupidity until their first solo case...
Actually though, I haven't really thought about it. I passed, 9 of 10 of my friends passed and that's enough happiness and joy for me to not care who else did/did not pass! :-)
i was at the century plaza. a little piece of a chandelier fell off of the ceiling, and one girl from michigan lost her mind for a minute. other than that, we had a "get back to work" mentality.
Guys at my high school used to get extra points on tests during earthquakes blah blah blah etc. etc.
Do I get extra points for dating a CWT NY 05 associate with nice legs and small but firm tits?
CA bar is way more difficult than NY bar. CA lawyers are way smarter than NY lawyers. That's why we live in CA.
a pass is a pass is a pass, biatches.
CA bar is way more easy than NY bar. CA lawyers are way less smarter than NY lawyers. That's why we live in CA.
When it comes to the bar exam, Pass = Fail. This is applicable to all states.
You passed? Great. Now you get to be a lawyer. Being a lawyer is awful. Truly awful. I couldn't think of a worse way to spend the last year of my life. Every second has been hell. I wish I would have failed. Honestly.
And, yes, I'm looking for a non lawfirm job right now. Problem is, the market's "unfavorable" right now.
Welcome to the profession.
-CA Bar Passer, 07'
Preach 21! What about the 200 multiple choice questions or the 5 other essays (including that evil con. law one). I was at the Ontario Test Center as well (rm 1) and we definitely DID NOT receive 15 minutes. We lost above 15 minutes due to the quake and only received 5 after we were seated. This whole point thing is such a token move by the state bar because 3 "raw" points does not make a difference for anyone's score nor does it compensate for any time lost. Besides, you can technically fail an entire essay and still pass.
Preach 21! What about the 200 multiple choice questions or the 5 other essays (including that evil con. law one). I was at the Ontario Test Center as well (rm 1) and we definitely DID NOT receive 15 minutes. We lost above 15 minutes due to the quake and only received 5 after we were seated. This whole point thing is such a token move by the state bar because 3 "raw" points does not make a difference for anyone's score nor does it compensate for any time lost. Besides, you can technically fail an entire essay and still pass.
New York: 49 degrees today.
Los Angeles: 67 degrees today.
there's at least 18 reasons we are smarter than you = )
39: You are correct. I keep hoping it gets better, but as stated on one of these interminable posts about other states' exams, passing the bar is about the worst "be careful what you wish for" gift of all time.
fail 'em all.
there are jobs for them anyhow.
21 is right. We only got 5 minutes in that room, not 15. Please. It happened about 5-10 minutes before the end of the essay, and 90%+ of people ducked under their desks. It felt like a plane crashing outside the building, and the lights and ceiling fans were swaying strongly. I could give too much of a shit about all the points stuff, and don't feel like my passage was sullied. I am a little shocked though that people in San Diego, vastly farther from the earthquake, and who didn't feel it nearly as much from what I've been told by friends there, got MORE points, just because they're scores were lower. Because of the distribution of the best law schools in CA, it is arguably predictable that the best scores are going to come from LA/Ontario and San Fransisco. So that's odd. If they did not, the "experts" should have looked at a historical comparison of SD vs. LA/SF, and I hope they did.
NY v. CA: will people stop making this idiotic bar passage comparison please? CA allows you to take the exam an unlimited number of times, CA allows students from unacredited law schools to take the bar. Focusing on this number, Mystal, is like focusing on RBIs rather than OBP in baseball. It makes you look like you know what you're talking about, but tells you less than a real number would tell you.
That said, my wife has passed both, and she says CA is a little harder, only because it's three days versus two, and some people don't quite have the stamina for the third day and they poop and/or freak out.
"their," not "they're"
At least CA is better than Texas, the ass cravath of the gulf.
First!!!!
42 - If each degree counts as one reason to you, you must be pretty stupid.
It's rather different to say that nicer weather and bigger traffic jams are good reasons to prefer LA over NY.
49:
CA is a state (a lot like NY). LA; however, is a city inside of CA (think Brooklyn). Just helping out.
49, LA does not have worse traffic jams, speaking as someone who grew up in NYC and who has now lived here four years. The only people who think LA has worse traffic jams are whiny former New Yorkers who never owned a car (and probably never had a driver's license) before moving to LA, and the people who know little more but who believe them. Anyone who has ever tried to go up Ave of the Americas in the morning, or who has been stuck on the BQE at midnight, or has tried to cross just about any Manhattan-linked bridge in at rush hour in the morning or out in the evening knows what a total crock this is. It would be more accurate to say that at least in NY some people can avoid the traffic by using public transportation -- mostly those rich enough to live in lower Manhattan, or in Park Slope, or maybe Hoboken, and those willing to commute for 1 1/2 hours on Metro North. Dumbshit.
Got deleted before: LA does not have worse traffic than NY, this is a crock; and anyone who says it has never been on Avenue of the Americas in the morning, or stuck on the BQE at midnight, or stuck on any and every bridge going into NYC in the morning, or out in the evening. The only people who think LA has worse traffic than NY are whiney NYers (and the ignoramuses who listen to them) who never owned a car while they were there (and many of whom probably had no driver's license) and who move to LA and are shocked, shocked! that sometimes traffic gets pretty dicey on the 405 and the 10. Please. It is accurate to say that in NY it is possible for many people to avoid traffic by taking the subway (because let's face it, whiney over-educated NYers would NEVER take the bus). In LA you can only take a bus, and since whiney over-educated NYers would still NEVER take the BUS (or get off a freeway and drive up Pico or 6th or Fig) they sit in freeway traffic and...well....whine.
51/52
While I admire your delighful narrative of your traffic hurdles, I'd suggest a more credible source:
http://www.forbes.com/2006/02/06/worst-traffic-nightmares-cx_rm_0207traffic.html
DB
- 49
Comparing NYC to LA is pretty stupid. It' s like comparing apples to oranges. I swear lawyers are so fucking dumb sometimes. Get a clue. The only real similarity is that both cities are in the USA.
49/53, sorry pal, I just fundamentally don't buy it, even if Forbes.com posts a single study with no explanation about what went into it. If such a thing is enough to convince you, I hope you don't work for my firm my friend. I have spent my entire adult life in either NYC or LA, and a good chunk of my childhood in NYC. And I love NYC. I still have a job and work to do, so I can't look into this more deeply, but I will promise you that the Texas study takes into account NYC's public transportation, and its ridership as a percentage of NYC's population, and that NYC gets a better rating for that reason and that reason alone. But I believe under further inspection my point would hold, and that for those actually sitting in cars in NYC -- which is my point -- it is worse. If you don't believe me and you're in NYC, get in a cab tonight and try to go across midtown at 7:30pm, which you can't do by subway. Or do any of the things listed above.
Someone look at the Bar passage rate in CA and NY among ABA accredited school grads. I bet the numbers are not that different. Enough with this NY bar passage rate is 74% because the exam is too hard crap. ABA accredited pass rate about 90%, even higher than MD
Californian lawyers are dumber then East Coast attorneys, also less well mannered!
Editors, please post an entry regarding recommendations for repeaters. I know of several top students from Boalt, UCLA, and Harvard who did not pass in CA and they are going through hell at their firms.
58, ditto. Please editors!!!
The bar passage rate in California is so low because half of the law schools in the state are unaccredited fifth-tier toilets.
18 nailed it. It's amazing how a blog that's supposed to specialize in this type of information seems to miss half the picture on a pretty regular basis.
Editors, listen to 58!
If you are from Cali you are a loser hippie. NY to 190. Cali to surf boards and idiots.
First, they didn't just add points to equalize the scores, as some are suggesting. They performed a fairly complex analysis that project scores on the affected essays based on the test center's scores on the others. It's not just that certain test centers had smarter takers, unless they are only smarter in earthquake situations.
That said, I was in SD Concourse and felt nothing, so I think there's some kind of statistical anomaly going on here. As someone else pointed out, 5 points are extremely unlikely to matter anyway.
Oh, and Kash: "nonplussed" does not, despite the appearance, mean "unconcerned;" it means "confused" or "bewildered." This is a common mistake, so you're forgiven.
I was among the "1708 chumps in a different room at the Ontario Convention Center" who "got just 1 point." We were the ones who got 5 more minutes. All I can think of for why we deserve any points at all is that it was extremely noisy with 1600+ chairs squeaking as people got in and under their tables, and the high ceiling made any moving lights seem extremely scary. But 5 minutes was more than the time we lost (which I think was maybe around 2-3 minutes?).
All those people who posted here that 1-2 points will not make a difference in passing/failing are ALL WRONG. I am about to hire an attorney to sue the Bar, because I failed the exam by mere 2 points.
I was in the Ontario Conv.Center, in the room with 1700 people, and received only 1 point, whereas the other room in the same convention center received 3 points. I added two more points to my current score to see if I would pass -- result is YES! So, beware before you reach to faulty conclusions and assume that there is not a person in that room harmed by all this. I will do everything at my disposal to seek justice, as the bar's "expert" report is full of s***. Either no test center should have gotten any points, or ALL test centers that felt the earthquake should have gotten same points. The way in which these so-called experts reached their conclusion must be challenged before a district court.
The reason NY is more difficult to pass is that the exam graders are mostly Jewish and gay, and everyone knows what difficult bitches they can be. They knocked me down on points just because I spelled perpetuities wrong!