Thursday, October 27, 2016
Sleep Well: On October 24, 2016, Kathryn Rubino posted an ATL entry labeled “ABA Finally Adopts Tougher Bar Passage Standards For Accreditation – Well, Almost.” Check out this opening:
“We’ve documented in these pages the continued abysmal bar passage rates around the country. And, after being threatened with having its accreditation powers stripped by the Department of Education, the American Bar Association has taken action, by tightening up the bar passage requirements for accredited schools.
On Friday, the ABA’s Council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar passed the tightened standard, but the change hasn’t officially happened yet. The ABA’s House of Delegates must approve the measure, and the earliest time they can do that is in February at the midyear meeting. The earliest the rule change can go into effect is for the 2017 grads who sit for the July bar exam.
The new standard, if adopted, is designed to close loopholes and mandates a 75 percent bar passage rate two years after graduation, whereas the current rule mandates that passage rate over five years. As Law.com reports:
The new rule isn’t a dramatic change, but supporters say it closes several loopholes in the existing standard and makes it more straightforward. It mandates that at least 75 percent of a law school’s alumni pass the bar within two years of graduation—rather than the current five-year period. It also eliminates a provision allowing schools to meet the standard if its first-time bar pass rate is within 15 percent of the statewide average, and a provision enabling law schools to meet the standard based on data from only 70 percent of graduates.
That first-time provision makes little sense for states with just one or two law schools, and allows low-performing schools to meet the standard by dragging down the statewide average with high failure rates, critics said.
But despite the rhetoric about new standard, there may be a loophole to even this tighter rule that law schools are teeing up. As Rick Bales, former Dean of Ohio Northern Law School, notes:
Arizona Summit (formerly Phoenix Law School), the same school that paid its low-GPA graduates not to take the bar exam yet still had an overall July 2016 pass rate of 19.7%, has created a new requirement that each student with a GPA below 3.33 must pass the school’s mock bar exam as a prerequisite to graduating. Theoretically, Arizona Summit could set the mock-bar pass rate at 10%, meaning that only the top-10% would qualify to sit for a bar exam. That would virtually guarantee technical compliance with the ABA’s 75% rule. Meanwhile, 90% of the school’s students would have paid $136,062 in tuition (plus expenses, lost opportunity costs, etc.) for a degree that does not qualify them to sit for any bar.
So, unless a school is completely sure you’re going to pass the exam, they are able to stop students from taking the bar exam (by preventing them from graduating), thereby circumventing the actual point of the rule.” [Emphasis mine]
The swine will take advantage of any possible loopholes. For $ome rea$on, these academic swindlers don’t have the balls to make a living on such technicalities in the private legal practice. Then again, they would be required to work more than 4-6 hours per week, and they would need to produce something of actual value. Plus, they wouldn’t be able to employ the idiotic SocraTTTic MeTTThod on judges, opposing counsel, or senior partners.
Other Coverage: On October 21, 2016, the ABA Journal published a story from Stephanie Francis Ward, under the headline “Legal-ed council approves proposed standard for bar passage rates amid diversity concerns.” Read the following excerpt:
“A proposal to tighten bar passage rate standards for ABA-approved law schools was passed Friday by the council of the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar.
Under the proposal for Standard 316, 75 percent of the graduates must pass a bar exam within a two-year period. The proposal is expected to go the ABA House of Delegates in February 2017. Most council members voted in favor of the proposal; an exact vote count was not available at press time.
With the current standard, there are various ways a law school can be in compliance. One is that that at least 75 percent of graduates from the five most recent calendar years have passed a bar exam, or there’s a 75 percent pass rate for at least three of those five years. Also, a school can be in compliance if just 70 percent of its graduates pass the bar at a rate within 15 percentage points of the average first-time bar pass rate for ABA-approved law school graduates in the same jurisdiction for three out the five most recently completed calendar years.
No accredited law school has been out of compliance with the current “ultimate bar passage standard,” Barry Currier, the ABA’s managing director of accreditation and legal education, told the council.
At an August hearing about the proposal, various groups, including the National Black Law Students Association and a group of law school deans from institutions associated with historically black colleges and universities, expressed concern with how the proposed change could decrease diversity in the profession.” [Emphasis mine]
Of course, you can always count on a few dolts to add in the fear mongering/argument of decreasing diversity in this gutter “profession.” Then again, do you see these gerbils pointing at Biglaw’s paucity of minority partners?!
Conclusion: Keep in mind that this change has not been enacted yet. The ABA cockroaches may decide to scale it back, or to postpone a final vote in order to “study the issue further,” in February 2016. In the final analysis, you can bet your ass that the brunt of this will fall on TTT graduates. The law school pigs will continue to get fat off of federal taxpayers via student loans. Their pay is not tied to any performance results. I would also not be surprised if the ABA gives the commodes several years before compliance, as a way to ensure that the bottom-feeding schools get more time to turn things around, i.e. financially rape more students.
Posted by Nando at 6:35 AM
Saturday, October 22, 2016
Epic Failure: Arizona Summit Law School Posts First-Time Passage Rate of 24.6 Percent on July 2016 Arizona Bar Exam
Outlandish Results: On October 18, 2016, Staci Zaretsky posted an ATL entry that was labeled “Law School Posts Worst Bar Exam Passage Rates In Its Existence, Drags Down Entire State’s Passage Rates.” Enjoy this opening:
“This summer, we regaled our readers with the tale of one for-profit law school’s plan to keep its low-performing students from taking the bar exam — and then failing the bar exam — immediately following graduation. The law school now requires that all students with GPAs below a 3.33 take and pass a mock bar exam as a graduation requirement, knowing full well that such a requirement may preclude countless students from being able to graduate and further sully their otherwise abysmal bar exam passage rates.
Prior to implementing this plan, the law school allegedly offered graduates a four-month, intensive bar preparation program with a $5,000 stipend and called graduates the day before the exam and offering a $10,000 stipend for them to defer taking it. The institution in question is Arizona Summit Law School (formerly known as the Phoenix School of Law), and now that the results from the July 2016 administration of the Arizona bar are out, it’s time to see if anything this school has done to better prepare its graduates for the test has worked out. Thus far, nothing has helped Summit graduates:
[Chart showing a 28.4% overall bar passage rate on February 2016– along with a 38.1% success score for first-time takers – from the trash pit known as Arizona Summit Law Sewer]
As we noted previously, according to a press release from the Supreme Court of Arizona’s Committee on Examinations, the overall pass rate for the July 2016 exam was allegedly 53 percent. As it turns out, the overall pass rate was even worse than that — the true overall pass rate for the July 2016 exam was 52.9 percent. At the time, we wondered whether Arizona Summit had yet again derailed the results to allow for the state’s worst bar-passage rate in more than a decade. The school-by-school pass rates were released yesterday, and we can now confirm that this is indeed what happened.
Just how poorly did Arizona Summit Law graduates perform on the July 2016 exam?..
[Chart highlighting Arizona $ummiTTTT’s 24.6% first-time passage rate for July 2016]
This is Arizona Summit’s worst bar exam performance to date. This is atrocious. “It’s despicable that this school continues to admit students, many taking on $100,000+ in debt, knowing that their chances of ever practicing law are slim to none. I hope AZ Summit loses their accreditation after this,” said one Arizona attorney. Here are some thoughts from one of the school’s graduates as to who may really be to blame:
It’s not a Summit; it’s Death Valley. The time has come for Dean Mays to pursue other endeavors. Since Dean Mays came onboard in the fall of 2010, bar pass rates have gone from 82% for first time writers in February of 2011 to 24.6% for the same group in July of 2016. The game is over and the students and alumni are the ones that are losing.” [Emphasis mine]
Yes, it’s a big surprise that if you admit and enroll waterheads, then bar pass rates will end up in the toilet, right?!?! Of course, this for profit trash pit will continue to accept cretins – and take their student loan money.
Other Coverage: On October 19, 2016, solid JDU contributor “ichininosan” posted a thread that was entitled “Arizona Summit – First time bar pass rate below 25%.” Check out the following comments:
“ichininosan (Oct 19, 2016 - 9:16 am)
First time bar pass rates at this institution of higher "education":
Feb 2014: 54.5%
July 2014: 54.8%
Feb 2015: 52.6%
July 2015: 30.6%
Feb 2016: 38.1%
July 2016: 24.6%
triplesix (Oct 19, 2016 - 9:21 am)
Where is the ABA?
cocolawyer (Oct 19, 2016 - 12:58 pm)
That is what I was saying. Western was stripped for 45% first time bar passage rates. La Verne was stripped for 42% bar passage rates (side not both schools now have accreditation back...sadly). Yet a below 25% bar passage rate and no ABA action? Things have gone from bad to worse.” [Emphasis mine]
The American Bar Association cockroaches don’t give a damn about bar passage rates – or even enforcing their own paltry “standards.” This has always been a bifurcated “profession,” and these bitches and hags have been with the Biglaw and academic types since the beginning. By the way, even when the eunuchs have placed commodes such as La Verne or WhiTTTTier on probation, they have put that back on normal status shortly after the fact. After all, the organization looks out for the scammers and thieves.
Conclusion: The ABA has abdicated its responsibility to the “profession.” Then again, that is only if you believe that is their goal and charge. In the final analysis, the law school pigs are allowed to operate with near impunity, because of the lax “standards” of the racketeer influenced and corrupt organization known as the American Bar Association. Hell, the rodents may slap Arizona $ummiTTTT Law Sewer on the wrist at a later date, but such an action will be for public consumption only. They want to be seen as doing the right thing. In a just world, this school and dozens of others would be shuttered overnight – and the land turned over for petting zoos, homeless shelters, or even parking space.
Posted by Nando at 7:02 AM
Monday, October 17, 2016
Hello, Quaker State!: On October 12. 2016, Staci Zaretsky posted an ATL entry labeled “Pennsylvania Bar Exam Results Reveal Worst Passage Rates In More Than A Decade.” Enjoy this opening:
“As more and more results are announced, bar exam passage rates continue to falter across the country. As we mentioned previously, Pennsylvania released the results of the July 2016 administration of the state’s bar exam late last week, with an overall passage rate of 69.31 percent. This is down from July 2015’s overall passage rate (71.15 percent), and down from July 2014’s overall passage rate (75.52 percent). But it gets worse…
This is Pennsylvania’s lowest overall passage rate in the past five years (the overall passage rate in July 2011 was 79.81 percent); in fact, this is Pennsylvania’s lowest overall passage rate in more than a decade (the overall passage rate in July 2003, the earliest date for which statistics are publicly available online, was 71.58 percent). This is also Pennsylvania’s lowest first-time passage rate (75.35 percent) in more than a decade.
How did Pennsylvania-area law schools fare this time around? We’ll break this down by July 2016 overall passage rate and July 2016 first-time taker passage rate, then compare these percentages to years prior and provide some key takeaways.” [Emphasis mine]
The “profession” is GLUTTED throughout this entire damn country. The law school pigs have lowered their admi$$ion$ “standards” even further, in order to compensate for fewer applicants. And, to no one’s surprise, now those waterheads are failing the bar exam at a higher rate. That is something called logic.
Now, scroll down to this conclusion:
“Out of the ten Pennsylvania-area law schools listed here, four (Duquesne, Rutgers, Penn, and Widener – Commonwealth) saw their first-time passage rate increase year over year, and six (Drexel, Penn State, Temple, Pittsburgh, Villanova, and Widener – Delaware) saw their first-time passage rate decrease year over year.
Penn Law posted the highest first-time passage rate (and overall passage rate), with Duquesne Law coming in second place. In fact, Duquesne saw a 16.96 percentage point increase in its first-time passage rate year over year. Congratulations! But what happened at Widener – Delaware between this summer and last? The law school’s first-time passage rate dropped by 29.31 percentage points. That’s frightening.
When will bar exam results stop dropping precipitously? When law schools change their modi operandi, raise their admissions standards, and put their students first? We’ve said it numerous times before and we’ll say it again, because it still bears repeating: “Until law schools realize they’re doing a disservice to everyone — their students, their graduates, and their graduates’ future clients — things will only continue to get worse.” [Emphasis mine]
For $ome rea$on, the law school swine seem to believe that accepting and enrolling dumber students should not result in lower bar passage rates. Apparently, they want to take in morons without any consequences to their commode’s reputation. It hasn’t stopped the cockroaches from charging outrageous tuition rates either.
Other Coverage: On October 10, 2016, the Legal Intelligencer featured a Lizzy McClellan piece that was entitled “Pa. Bar Passage Rate Drops to New Low.” Take a look at the following portion:
“The passage rates for first-time takers of the Pennsylvania bar exam reached a new low with results from the July test.
Just 75.4 percent of the 1,371 first-time applicants passed the July 2016 exam, which was administered July 26 and 27. That is the lowest passage rate for any July exam for which the state Board of Law Examiners has made data about bar exam passage available. The previous low was in July 2003, the earliest year for which data is available, when 77.8 percent of first-time test takers passed.
The total number of applicants also hit a new low for Pennsylvania's July bar exam. A total of 1,574 people took the exam in July, compared to 1,799 in July 2015. From 2003 to 2014, the average number of first-time applicants was 1,809, compared with 1,371 first-timers this July. The overall passage rate for July 2016 was 69.3 percent.
The bar exam passage rates have been on the decline nationally in recent years. The national average passage rate was 59 percent overall in 2015, and 70 percent among first-time applicants. In 2014, it was 64 percent and 74 percent, respectively, which also showed a decline from 2013 numbers.
But results from the Multistate Bar Examination created a glimmer of hope several weeks ago, when they showed a slight increase in the national mean score. According to a memo to law school deans from Erica Moeser, president of the National Conference of Bar Examiners, the mean MBE score for July 2016 was 140.3, up from 139.9.” [Emphasis mine]
How do you like those results, mindless lemming?!?! Still want to take the law school plunge, Dumbass? Now that the MBE results were slightly better, the law school pigs cannot bitch and whine that this portion is “too difficult for our stupid graduates.” Then again, the tramps excel at placing blame on someone or something else.
Conclusion: Avoid becoming another statistic. In the end, only YOU will be held accountable for failing to provide for your needs or those of your family. If you cannot land legal employment, or decent non-law positions, then you have pissed away three years of your life – and incurred an additional $130K+ in NON-DISCHARGEABLE debt – for no good reason. Only mental midgets will see that as “good learning experience.” Good luck trying to repay your student loans, as well as putting food in the fridge and a roof over your head, with a $35K a year job, Bitch.
Wednesday, October 12, 2016
The Swines’ True Colors Revealed: Actually, the only color these whores care about is green! Student loan money is their god. Anyway, on October 6, 2016, Kathryn Rubino posted an ATL entry labeled “Law Schools Agree: There Are Too Many Law Schools.” Take a look at this opening:
“Finally, we get a chance to look behind the curtain and find out what law schools really think. These seemingly inscrutable actors have tremendous pull on the overall direction of the legal profession, but, hidden behind a veil of bureaucracy and academia, observers are often left to reverse engineer their motivations and opinions. But no more, finally they speak.
Well, sort of. Kaplan Test Prep conducted a survey of law school admissions officers, and participation was high:
For the 2016 survey, 111 of the 205 American Bar Association-accredited law schools were polled by telephone between August and September 2016. Included among the 111 are 12 of the top 25 law schools, as ranked by U.S. News & World Report.
So, what exactly did they say? Here’s the big one: 65 percent of schools surveyed agree it “would be a good idea if at least a few law schools closed.” I suppose none of the schools that answered in the affirmative think their institution should be the one that is shuttered. At a time when law schools are said to be in the midst of a “a brain drain” with high quality potential applicants eschewing the law school life, this provides some valuable insight. It seems most schools recognize just because a student has the ability to take on educational loans for law school doesn’t mean they should be going to law school. Churning out graduates for the sake of the churn doesn’t benefit the profession.
Despite this welcomed bit of realism, another data point suggests that even though they recognize more law students for the sake of law students isn’t always a good thing, getting schools to do something about it is more challenging.
24 percent of law schools cut the number of seats for their 2016 class of first-year students, lower than the 35 percent who reported doing so for the 2015 class of 1Ls and and the 54 percent who did for the 2014 class.” [Emphasis mine]
Here is the key point: fully 65 percent of the 111 ABA-accredited commodes polled by Kaplan Test Prep agreed that it would be a good idea if at least a few law schools closed. Yet, the pigs keep approving more toilets, through the American Bar Association. And fewer toilets cut the number of first-year seats in 2016 than in 2015. Plus, the cockroaches could enforce their own standards, in order to place several trash pits on probation for pathetic bar passage rates – and perhaps eventually close some of these places down. Currently, no school is on probation.
ABA Approved Law Schools Since 2005: Now, we will look at the list “ABA-Approved Law Schools by Year” provided by the Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar. Here are the cesspools approved since 2005:
Atlanta’s John Marshall Law School, Western State College of Law at Argosy University, Charleston School of Law, Faulker University Thomas Goode Jones SOL, Liberty University, Arizona Summit, Charlotte School of Law, Drexel University, Elon University, UC Irvine, University of La Verne College of Law, University of Massachusetts SOL-Dartmouth, Belmont University COL, Lincoln Memorial University Duncan School of Law, Concordia University, Indiana Tech. The pigs approved the reconstituted/merged toilet Mitchell | Hamline in 2015, however since this is actually one fewer garbage heap, it should not be considered an additional school.
That is a total of 16 new trash pits, since 2005! Hell, this organization already had law schools such as Cooley, TJ$L, Pace, and New York Law Sewer in place. Apparently, the swine felt – for $ome rea$on – that 189 or 190 ABA law schools was not enough back then, based on demand for “legal education.” The bastards certainly did not take need for new attorneys into account. After all, that is the students’ problem, right?!?!
Other Coverage: On October 7, 2016, the ABA Journal published a piece, from reporter Debra Cassens Weiss, which was entitled “Law school admissions officers are optimistic about legal ed, but would like to see some closures.” Here is the full text of that article below:
“Law school admissions officers are expressing more optimism, according to a survey of 111 law schools by Kaplan Test Prep.
Ninety-two percent of those responding to the survey said they are feeling more optimistic about the state of education than they did a year ago, according to a press release. And 78 percent expected an increase in applications for the 2016-17 applications cycle.
Only 24 percent of the schools had reduced the size of their 2016 class of first-year students, compared to 35 percent last year and 54 percent in 2014.
Despite their optimism, 65 percent agreed it would be a good idea if at least a few law schools closed.” [Emphasis mine]
The pigs are merely hopeful that more cretins, convicts, and mental midgets will apply to ABA-accredited toilets. After all, the bitches and hags on admi$$ion$ committee$ keep approving a higher percentage of dumbasses each year. CLEARLY, they do not give one damn about those students’ job outcomes or ability to pass a bar exam. How honorable, huh?!?!
Conclusion: Lemming, if the ABA diploma mills – including 12 of the top 25 schools – agreed that there are too many law schools, then YOU should pay close attention. Of course, you may be lured into a toilet with a scholarship, i.e. tuition reduction, offer. Perhaps, it is your “dream” to be a lawyer – even if you have never worked in a law firm in any capacity, and have no idea what the job entails. Do not consider attending any law school outside the top 5-10. If you cannot get into such an institution, then that is a clue to you that you do not have the talent to get into Biglaw – which is your best hope of paying off your student loans without enduring financial hell.
Friday, October 7, 2016
Power Flush: On October 1, 2016, the Argus Leader published a Jonathan Ellis piece that was entitled “Growing number of law school grads unable to pass bar exam.” Look at this beautiful opening:
“In the summer of 2014, officials at the University of South Dakota School of Law got startling news: One in four of the school’s most recent graduates who had taken the state bar exam failed to pass.
Just a year earlier, more than 90 percent in the previous class had passed the bar, which determines whether a law school grad can practice law in the state. Passage rates with percentages in the 90s and 80s were the norm.
But that was before 2014. Last summer the passage rate sunk to 63 percent. And this year, for first-time test takers who took the bar in July, the unofficial passage rate is closer to 50 percent.
The sudden collapse in graduates who can pass the bar exam is prompting fears that a shortage of lawyers in rural South Dakota could get worse. Although graduates from other states do end up practicing law in South Dakota, the vast majority of lawyers hail from the University of South Dakota, home to the state’s lone law school. USD is what’s known as an “infrastructure law school,” which provides a homegrown supply of lawyers needed for the state’s law firms, businesses and governments.
The decline in bar passage rates isn’t unique to South Dakota. Nationally, pass rates had been falling for several years. But the rapid decline in South Dakota has prompted officials to take action at USD in order to reverse the trend.
“Frankly, USD has been a bit behind in that, in part, up until 2014, we had no problem with the bar exam,” said Thomas Geu, dean of the law school. “When you’re hitting in the high 80s or 90s, you don’t worry about much.” [Emphasis mine]
You also don’t worry about whether your students and graduates can land decent employment – legal or non-law – upon earning their TTT law degree, greedy pig. Of course, that makes you no different from any other “legal educator” in the country. I guess those who fail the bar exam can now land one of those coveted “JD Advantage” jobs, i.e. positions that they could have earned without a goddamn JD. For $ome rea$on, these rodents conveniently forget to mention this fact when proclaiming the falsehood that “One can anything with a law degree!”
Other Coverage: On October 4, 2016, Diverse Issues in Higher Education featured an Associated Press article labeled “Growing Number of South Dakota [L]aw Graduates Fail Bar Exam.” Read the following portion:
“The percentage of University of South Dakota School of Law graduates who fail to pass the state bar exam has increased from about 10 percent in 2013 to about 50 percent this year.
The trend is prompting fears that a shortage of lawyers in rural South Dakota could get worse. Most lawyers in the South Dakota hail from the university, which is the state’s only law school.
The Argus Leader reported the South Dakota Board of Bar Examiners’ decision to increase the minimum core needed in order to pass the bar contributed to the failure rate. South Dakota’s minimum score is equal to or greater than the score required by 30 other states.
According to Law School Transparency, the demand for law schools declined nationally during the Great Recession. In order to keep the schools running, administrators began accepting “higher risk students,” students with lower grade point averages or LSAT scores.
The group published a report last year that stated 30 law schools in 2010 admitted classes with at least 25 percent “higher risk” and by 2014 the number rose to 74 law schools and 37 law schools had admitted at least 50 percent of classes with students considered high risk.
“I think law schools need to take a look at their decisions to take these risks and ask why they’re doing it,” said Kyle McEntee, the executive director of Law School Transparency.” [Emphasis mine]
There is no shortage of lawyers in South Dakota or any other state, including Alaska, Maine, Alabama, New Hampshire, Wyoming, Missouri, etc. In those counties and rural areas that have few attorneys, there is a good reason for that, moron. Those locales are sparsely populated, and often filled with broke-ass yokels who don’t have two dimes to rub together. Good luck trying to support yourself with that clientele, genius.
Entering Class Info: Head to the LST profile for the Univer$iTTTy of $ouTTTh Dakota Sewer of Law. On the right hand side of this page, you will see the Entering Class Admissions Data Chart. Here are the rancid figures for the cretins who started in Fall 2013, which is the cohort that took the July 2016 for the first time:
25th percentile LSAT: 144
50th percentile LSAT: 147
75th percentile LSAT: 150
25th percentile UGPA: 2.93
50th percentile UGPA: 3.15
75th percentile UGPA: 3.56 [Emphasis mine]
Conclusion: Avoid this steaming waste pile at all costs. As you can see, the commode admits applicants with pathetic numbers. Then again, what the hell do you expect from the 143rd “best” law school in the country?!?! In an age of grade inflation, this ABA-accredited toilet admitted waterheads who graduated from college with a 2.93 undergraduate GPAs – and that was good enough for the the 25th percentile of their class! Remember, MOST law students majored in garbage such as Philosophy, History, and Political “Science.” It seems that the bar exam has become sufficiently difficult so that such dunces cannot become licensed to practice law. Have fun managing a small motel, with your TTT law degree.
Posted by Nando at 5:12 AM
Monday, October 3, 2016
The News: On September 29, 2016, Staci Zaretsky posted an ATL entry labeled “Bar Exam Passage Rates Plummet After Adoption of Uniform Bar Exam.” Check out this opening:
“Citing the need for keeping costs down in light of law school graduates’ heavy debt burdens and the need for the portability of law licenses considering the state of the still recovering job market, many jurisdictions adopted the Uniform Bar Exam (UBE) in the past few years. The thought was that with a national exam, a passing score would make it easier for graduates to find work and practice law in other states without having to pay exorbitant testing fees. Going a step further, with state bar exam passage rates plummeting across the nation, the hope was that perhaps a national exam would enable a greater number of law school graduates to actually pass the test and put their law degrees to use.
New Mexico is one of the states that recently adopted the UBE, starting with the February 2016 exam. On that administration of the exam, the passage rate fell to 69 percent, an 11 percent decline from February 2015, when the passage rate was 80 percent. This summer, the results were even worse, with the overall passage rate falling to 64 percent, an 8 percent decline from July 2015, when the New Mexico bar exam was last administered and the passage rate was 72 percent.
New Mexico’s only law school, the New Mexico University School of Law, was hit particularly hard by the state’s adoption of the UBE. In February 2016, the school’s passage rate for first-time takers was 71 percent (down from 88 percent in February 2015 when the New Mexico bar exam was administered). In July 2016, the school’s passage rate for first-time takers was 68 percent (down from 81 percent in July 2015 when the New Mexico bar exam was administered). This is the worst UNM Law graduates have performed on the bar exam since July 2008, across 16 other administrations of the test.
According to the Albuquerque Journal, graduates of the school who failed the exam were “disproportionately minorities and women,” and although 14 Native American UNM Law graduates took the July 2016 exam, none of them passed.” [Emphasis mine]
It would be interesting to see the LSAT scores and undergraduate GPAs of the students who failed the New Mexico state bar exam. There may be a correlation between those numbers. Then again, the real figures of concern to the ABA-accredited stench pit are the total asses in seats – along with the amount of federal student loan money pouring into the school’s coffers.
Other Coverage: On September 28, 2016, the Albuquerque Journal featured an editorial board piece that was entitled “Uniform bar exam is not the problem, is law school?” Take a look at the following portion:
“The law school’s two deans – another arrangement rather unique to New Mexico – said, in a letter to alumni and other people associated with the school, that some other states that adopted the test also saw pass rates drop as well. But Arizona, which adopted the test in 2012, was not one of them. And Colorado’s pass rate dropped slightly from 2012 to 2015.
In their letter, co-deans Sergio Pareja and Alfred Mathewson said the new exam will be studied to see what changes the school needs to make to boost the first-time pass rate to 80 percent by 2018. They also set a goal of having 85 percent of students pass within 18 months.
In the previous test, half of the essay questions were about New Mexico law. They are not in the new test, and subjects like Indian law and administrative law are not included in the test. There already are cries to abandon the uniform exam. That would be the wrong thing to do and an admission that we just can’t compete.
The question is not whether the test is too hard, but whether the law school needs to adapt to prepare its students with the uniform exam in mind.
It’s a competitive world, and passing a uniform bar exam better positions UNM law students as they enter the practice of law. The deans are right to take this approach, and the suggestion by Regents president Rob Doughty, also a UNM law grad, that the school should refocus its efforts on fundamentals is a good one.
Figure out what’s missing and fill in the holes.
That also means paying special attention to minority students and working with the legal community to prepare them.” [Emphasis mine]
Don’t be surprised if this toilet includes more bar prep courses in its TT curriculum. Expect the pigs to lobby for inclusion of Indian Law in the next test. You can also count on this dung heap to keep admitting dumber applicants.
The Commode’s Ranking: As you can see, the Univer$iTTy of New Mexico Sewer of Law is rated as the 60th greatest, most amazing, and marvelous law school in the entire damn country. In fact, it only shares this distinct honor with the following four cesspits: Cincinnati, Kentucky, Miami, and Oklahoma.
Conclusion: Avoid this pile of trash UNLESS all of the following factors apply: (a) you are a New Mexico resident; (b) you truly wish to practice law in the State of New Mexico; (c) you can live at home for the full three years; and (d) you don’t mind that your best outcome will be as a prosecutor, in state government, or as a small law practitioner. Otherwise, you are making a terrible financial decision. If your “dream” is to be a lawyer, then I suggest you grow up – and quit relying on unrealistic attorney portrays in movies, TV, and books. You cannot represent broke-ass losers and deadbeats, and still drive a new Jaguar or Porsche. Hell, you will be lucky to eat halfway decent or to afford rent, with that garbage clientele. This is especially the case if you incur an additional $120K+ in NON-DISCHARGEABLE debt.
Posted by Nando at 3:38 AM
Thursday, September 29, 2016
Faculty Lounge Law School Pigs Squeal That the Bar Exam is Getting Too Difficult for Their Dumbass Graduates
Pathetic Antics: On September 28, 2016, Univer$iTTTTTy of Ma$$achu$eTTTTT$ Sewer of Law “professor” Ralph D. Clifford bitched about declining bar passage rates, in a Faculty Lounge entry labeled “Wait a Minute! Let's Think About the Mathematics of Bar Passage.” Take a look at this drivel:
“Florida had a 68.2% success rate on the bar last July. See Florida Results. (The success rate for practitioners is just slightly better at 68.9%). All of the non-practitioners—and probably most of the practitioners, too—are graduates from ABA schools.
It is not possible for all ABA schools to achieve an 85% (or even 75%) pass rate in Florida. Despite what is said on A Prairie Home Companion, all of our children cannot be above average. The reality is that if one ABA school gets a passage rate that is above the state average, another one will be below it.
Further, the passage rate trend on the Florida bar raises an important question. As the table and chart of July pass rates below indicates, the pass rate on the Florida bar has been declining fairly dramatically over the last eight years:
Year Overall Practitioners
2009 80.0 —
2010 79.2 —
2011 80.1 —
2012 80.2 —
2013 77.2 —
2014 71.8 —
2015 68.9 69.6
2016 68.2 68.9” [Emphasis mine]
Cockroach Ralph Clifford has eight years of significantly declining bar passage rates, for the State of Florida, but only two years of data on practitioners taking the exam. Great comparison, jackass. The $elf-$erving bastard then reaches the following conclusion:
“This declining passage rate can have two sources. One contributing factor, as much of the discussion about bar passage rates have assumed to be the sole factor, is that the quality of the people taking the bar exam has declined. The other possible factor that the discussion has ignored is that the bar exam itself has become more difficult.
There is some support for this second factor being important in the percentage of practitioners who pass. There is not a significant difference between that rate and the overall rate. All of the practitioners presumably graduated from law school at least a decade ago and before the current shrinkage of the law student applicant pool occurred. If the current admission practices of law schools is causing the bar passage decline, how do we explain that practitioners are doing no better?” [Emphasis mine]
Ralph, when you have a moment, can you pull your head out of your ass? Perhaps, many of the practitioners taking the Florida bar exam were initially licensed decades ago, and have forgotten a fair amount of the material on the test, genius. Furthermore, that sample size may be pretty damn small, in contrast to the first time takers. Did that ever cross your academic thief mind?
Other Coverage: On September 28, 2016 at 4:21 pm, solid JDU contributor “ichininosan” started a thread that was entitled “Blaming the Bar Exam for Low Pass Rates.” Check out the following exchange:
“flharfh (Sep 28, 2016 - 7:12 pm)
So the law professor's argument is essentially "minority students tend to be too stupid to pass the bar exam. We need more minority lawyers because diversity, therefore bar exam standards should be lowered." Do I have it right?
adamb (Sep 28, 2016 - 8:39 pm)
Yes - that is the logic, which is not even sound for an lsat logical reasoning statement.”
Of course, the law school pigs want state bar examiners to make the test easier so that more of their foolish graduates can pass – regardless of color or race. For $ome rea$on, the “legal scholars” at the Faculty Lounge “forgot” to mention that MBE scores improved slightly in 2016. According to Derek Muller at Excess of Democracy:
“My initial theory--unsupported by any evidence!--would be that the best students were sufficiently worried about the bar exam and studied more than ever. That would mean that the scores of people already inclined to pass the bar exam improved--and that wouldn't have any impact on the pass rates. It would shift up the mean score of the MBE without affecting the overall pass rates. And, if the quality of students law schools have been graduating has continued to decline, then we might expect to see overall pass rates decline.” [Emphasis mine]
Conclusion: If large portions of graduating classes cannot pass the bar – even though you swine are admitting and enrolling more waterheads – then what are you doing with these students for three years?!?! Then again, you are not miracle workers. You are simply proving true the adage: Garbage in, garbage out. Expect to see more ABA-accredited trash pits offer extensive test preparation, including entire courses devoted to reviewing the latest state bar exam. After all, who wouldn’t want to spend $135K in NON-DISCHARGEABLE debt, for a three year review of bar materials?!?!
Posted by Nando at 4:48 AM