They were ready but still managed to be equivocal in their recommendation. I think the previous posts that looked at this as a cynical ploy to say "we looked at it and decided not to" to tamp down criticism were accurate.justanotheruser wrote:Really surprised given that the State Bar was ready to lower the scoremcmand wrote:Disappointing that the Court couldn't be a leader on this.
2017 July California Bar Forum
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are sharing sensitive information about bar exam prep. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned."
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are sharing sensitive information about bar exam prep. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned."
-
- Posts: 722
- Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2014 12:45 pm
Re: 2017 July California Bar
Last edited by mcmand on Fri Jan 26, 2018 4:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- esq
- Posts: 591
- Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 9:59 pm
Re: 2017 July California Bar
I feel bad that I was part of that cynical group to be honest. Sorry all. Especially since, as some other posters pointed out, this outcome makes no logical sense.mcmand wrote:They were ready but still managed to be equivocal in their recommendation. I think the previous posts that looked at this as a cynical ploy to say "we looked at it and decided not to" to tamp down criticism were accurate.justanotheruser wrote:Really surprised given that the State Bar was ready to lower the scoremcmand wrote:Disappointing that the Court couldn't be a leader on this.
After the CA S.Ct. made such a spectacle of the whole cut-score situation by initially stepping in and bitch-slapping the CA Bar across the face, they should have taken some sort of action against the 1440 cut. It honestly makes the court look a little inept in my view.
-
- Posts: 286
- Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 3:32 pm
Re: 2017 July California Bar
Sorry, but I didn't expect they would lower it. So, with that news, I'm not sure whether I will start studying again now or wait. I'm inclined to wait. I'm tired of studying for the CBX. I think I'll take the next few months and work, save some money, and get some perspective before I try again.
-
- Posts: 480
- Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 8:05 pm
Re: 2017 July California Bar
I don't know if it matters to all of you waiting on scores, but this really changes nothing. Likely, the swing would have been incremental and in any event my opinion has always been don't worry about what is not in your control.Alt123 wrote:Court declines to lower the score for the time being.
https://newsroom.courts.ca.gov/news/sup ... a-bar-exam
ANXIETY AT MAX
Failing sucks, and perhaps some of you would have passed with a slightly lower cut score. But, there are plenty of people on this board, myself included, who failed and have gone on to pass and have started their career in law. Pass or fail, all is not lost. Good luck next month everyone.
-
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Mon May 16, 2016 2:11 pm
Re: 2017 July California Bar
The Court expressed concerns about the cut score due to letter from the deans of CA law schools. I think most jdxs don't regularly review their cut score, and CA was no different. It's not a stretch of imagination for the Court to be shocked that the cut score hasn't seemed to have been reviewed once since it was set several decades ago (apparently because no one thought it was a problem until recently, according to the letter the Court just published).esq wrote:I feel bad that I was part of that cynical group to be honest. Sorry all. Especially since, as some other posters pointed out, this outcome makes no logical sense.mcmand wrote:They were ready but still managed to be equivocal in their recommendation. I think the previous posts that looked at this as a cynical ploy to say "we looked at it and decided not to" to tamp down criticism were accurate.justanotheruser wrote:Really surprised given that the State Bar was ready to lower the scoremcmand wrote:Disappointing that the Court couldn't be a leader on this.
After the CA S.Ct. made such a spectacle of the whole cut-score situation by initially stepping in and bitch-slapping the CA Bar across the face, they should have taken some sort of action against the 1440 cut. It honestly makes the court look a little inept in my view.
That said, the letter explained why it chose not to change the score:
If nothing else derived, the Court noted the mixed opinions about the one (apparently divisive) study conducted at the direction of the Court to evince the necessity of change as being unpersuasive. Additionally, the Court noted, among other things, that there are other variables that complicate the question of an accurate cut score.S.Ct of CA wrote:Because the pass score has remained constant for three decades as overall bar exam pass rates have fluctuated, the court directed the State Bar to conduct a thorough and expedited study of the exam that would include, among other things, a meaningful analysis to determine whether protection of potential clients and the public is served by maintaining 1440 as the pass score.
...
On September 13, the court received the State Bar’s “Final Report on the 2017 California Bar Exam Standard Setting Study.” ... Opinions of the study were mixed: two independent psychometricians identified flaws in the study but ultimately found its process and conclusions sound, while a number of legal educators and others concluded the flaws of the study were so significant as to render it unreliable.
...
Based on that review and balancing all considerations, the court is not persuaded that the relevant information and data developed at this time weigh in favor of departing from the longstanding pass score of 1440.
I personally think the third point regarding the extent of impact the 2-day change and equal weight to the MBE is critical. If the One-Timers calculator is to be believed, you can "auto-pass" with 50s in all essays and a 148/200 with a 1442 overall.The court also encourages the State Bar and all California law schools to work cooperatively together and with others in examining (1) whether student metrics, law school curricula and teaching techniques, and other factors might account for the recent decline in bar exam pass rates; (2) how such data might inform efforts to improve academic instruction for the benefit of law students preparing for licensure and practice; and (3) whether and to what extent changes implemented for the first time during administration of the July 2017 exam — that is, adoption of a two-day exam and equal weighting of the written and multiple choice portions of the exam — might bear on possible adjustment of the pass score.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- CAnow
- Posts: 56
- Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2017 11:13 am
Re: 2017 July California Bar
Raw 148/200 + 50s on all essays = 1442.cbx2016 wrote: If the One-Timers calculator is to be believed, you can "auto-pass" with 50s in all essays and a 148/200 with a 1442 overall.
Raw 138/200 + 55s on all essays = 1442.
Raw 128/200 + 60s on all essays = 1442.
Raw 118/200 + 65s on all essays = 1442.
Raw 108/200 + 70s on all essays = 1442.
- yeslekkkk
- Posts: 378
- Joined: Sat Nov 23, 2013 1:37 am
Re: 2017 July California Bar
Isn't the PT worth more than 100 points thought?CAnow wrote:Raw 148/200 + 50s on all essays = 1442.cbx2016 wrote: If the One-Timers calculator is to be believed, you can "auto-pass" with 50s in all essays and a 148/200 with a 1442 overall.
Raw 138/200 + 55s on all essays = 1442.
Raw 128/200 + 60s on all essays = 1442.
Raw 118/200 + 65s on all essays = 1442.
Raw 108/200 + 70s on all essays = 1442.
-
- Posts: 181
- Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2015 10:57 pm
Re: 2017 July California Bar
So, how much can we trust the calculator?CAnow wrote:Raw 148/200 + 50s on all essays = 1442.cbx2016 wrote: If the One-Timers calculator is to be believed, you can "auto-pass" with 50s in all essays and a 148/200 with a 1442 overall.
Raw 138/200 + 55s on all essays = 1442.
Raw 128/200 + 60s on all essays = 1442.
Raw 118/200 + 65s on all essays = 1442.
Raw 108/200 + 70s on all essays = 1442.
-
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2017 1:51 pm
Re: 2017 July California Bar
Seems like a good estimate. 148 raw will put you in 1600s for scaled MBE score. A 128 will most likely put you right around 1444CAnow wrote:Raw 148/200 + 50s on all essays = 1442.cbx2016 wrote: If the One-Timers calculator is to be believed, you can "auto-pass" with 50s in all essays and a 148/200 with a 1442 overall.
Raw 138/200 + 55s on all essays = 1442.
Raw 128/200 + 60s on all essays = 1442.
Raw 118/200 + 65s on all essays = 1442.
Raw 108/200 + 70s on all essays = 1442.
- a male human
- Posts: 2233
- Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:42 pm
Re: 2017 July California Bar
With a grain of salt.justanotheruser wrote:So, how much can we trust the calculator?CAnow wrote:Raw 148/200 + 50s on all essays = 1442.cbx2016 wrote: If the One-Timers calculator is to be believed, you can "auto-pass" with 50s in all essays and a 148/200 with a 1442 overall.
Raw 138/200 + 55s on all essays = 1442.
Raw 128/200 + 60s on all essays = 1442.
Raw 118/200 + 65s on all essays = 1442.
Raw 108/200 + 70s on all essays = 1442.
This is the first time CA has done the two-day format, so there is nothing to extrapolate the scaling formula with. Presumably, the calculator uses one or more previous scaling formulae to estimate your score, but I'm not sure to what extent the new format will change that.
-
- Posts: 712
- Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 5:41 pm
Re: 2017 July California Bar
148 is the raw score, the scaled probably is like 160.CAnow wrote:Raw 148/200 + 50s on all essays = 1442.cbx2016 wrote: If the One-Timers calculator is to be believed, you can "auto-pass" with 50s in all essays and a 148/200 with a 1442 overall.
Raw 138/200 + 55s on all essays = 1442.
Raw 128/200 + 60s on all essays = 1442.
Raw 118/200 + 65s on all essays = 1442.
Raw 108/200 + 70s on all essays = 1442.
-
- Posts: 25
- Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2013 1:41 am
Re: 2017 July California Bar
maxmartin wrote:148 is the raw score, the scaled probably is like 160.CAnow wrote:Raw 148/200 + 50s on all essays = 1442.cbx2016 wrote: If the One-Timers calculator is to be believed, you can "auto-pass" with 50s in all essays and a 148/200 with a 1442 overall.
Raw 138/200 + 55s on all essays = 1442.
Raw 128/200 + 60s on all essays = 1442.
Raw 118/200 + 65s on all essays = 1442.
Raw 108/200 + 70s on all essays = 1442.
According to the calculator, a 148 raw score is 180 scaled...
-
- Posts: 439
- Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 5:33 pm
Re: 2017 July California Bar
Sad. Pretty disappointed but whatever.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 439
- Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 5:33 pm
Re: 2017 July California Bar
Isn't the exam out of 175 anyways? How are they getting a score out of 200?maxmartin wrote:148 is the raw score, the scaled probably is like 160.CAnow wrote:Raw 148/200 + 50s on all essays = 1442.cbx2016 wrote: If the One-Timers calculator is to be believed, you can "auto-pass" with 50s in all essays and a 148/200 with a 1442 overall.
Raw 138/200 + 55s on all essays = 1442.
Raw 128/200 + 60s on all essays = 1442.
Raw 118/200 + 65s on all essays = 1442.
Raw 108/200 + 70s on all essays = 1442.
-
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Mon May 16, 2016 2:11 pm
Re: 2017 July California Bar
This is partially my original point. There are a lot of moving parts right now besides the cut score.a male human wrote:With a grain of salt.justanotheruser wrote:So, how much can we trust the calculator?CAnow wrote:Raw 148/200 + 50s on all essays = 1442.cbx2016 wrote: If the One-Timers calculator is to be believed, you can "auto-pass" with 50s in all essays and a 148/200 with a 1442 overall.
Raw 138/200 + 55s on all essays = 1442.
Raw 128/200 + 60s on all essays = 1442.
Raw 118/200 + 65s on all essays = 1442.
Raw 108/200 + 70s on all essays = 1442.
This is the first time CA has done the two-day format, so there is nothing to extrapolate the scaling formula with. Presumably, the calculator uses one or more previous scaling formulae to estimate your score, but I'm not sure to what extent the new format will change that.
Someone noted that a 148/200 (which I am assuming is meant to read 148/175) would convert, according to the site, to a 904 CBX final weight, i.e. 1800 CBX scaled / 180 on the MBE scale, which is way out of line with even the most gracious "eyeball scaling" of the last decade of adjusting raw upward 12-21 points, and that was on a 190-question scale. I have no idea what would look reasonable for an eyeball raw-to-scaled adjustment for a 175-question scale because it's so new. The calculator seems to think that a reasonable eyeball conversion amounts to 32 points, and I have no basis to argue that it's wrong other than it doesn't line up with 190-question scale expectations. The calculator's essay side though seems reasonably straightforward (350 raw written of 700 points, or 1000 on a 2000 point scale; 50 percent weight to final score).
All these hypothetical numbers aside, there is no uncertainty that the (comparably) less-arbitrary portion of the bar exam being presently worth 50 percent, up from 35 percent, makes a "148/200" worth more now than it did before. That will be, in itself, a distinctive shift re the cut score difficulty today vs the cut score difficulty of exams past. Whether that amounts to a 180 scaled...
- catechumen
- Posts: 50
- Joined: Wed May 21, 2014 11:20 pm
Re: 2017 July California Bar
I lost any respect I had for the CA Supreme Court. At the end of the day they are only looking out for the interest of their fellow lawyers. They basically told the law school deans we don't care if CA is much harder than the rest of the country. If you want a higher pass rate admit better test takers, and keep out non-traditional law students.
Ironically, this is a slap in the face to minority students because they are the ones most affected by this failure to lower the passing score. About the only thing we can do is call our elected officials to fix this directly. We will not get any help from the Bar or the courts. Governor Brown failed the Bar once, in fact he just signed a bill stripping the Bar of a lot of its power, so the issue is fresh in his mind. Lets lobby them to fix this test!
"The court also encourages the State Bar and all California law schools to work cooperatively together and with others in examining (1) whether student metrics, law school curricula and teaching techniques, and other factors might account for the recent decline in bar exam pass rates; (2) how such data might inform efforts to improve academic instruction for the benefit of law students preparing for licensure and practice;"
Ironically, this is a slap in the face to minority students because they are the ones most affected by this failure to lower the passing score. About the only thing we can do is call our elected officials to fix this directly. We will not get any help from the Bar or the courts. Governor Brown failed the Bar once, in fact he just signed a bill stripping the Bar of a lot of its power, so the issue is fresh in his mind. Lets lobby them to fix this test!
"The court also encourages the State Bar and all California law schools to work cooperatively together and with others in examining (1) whether student metrics, law school curricula and teaching techniques, and other factors might account for the recent decline in bar exam pass rates; (2) how such data might inform efforts to improve academic instruction for the benefit of law students preparing for licensure and practice;"
-
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2017 10:50 pm
Re: 2017 July California Bar
So obviously a bit confused and understanding that this by no means is 100% accurate, but for the sake of my nerves, what would a roughly 1370 scaled mbe translate to according to one-timers calculator? I am a repeater and my scaled mbe’s have been 1379, 1411, and 1433. Of which I’ve never understood where I stood as far as raw score goes. If anyone can shed some light I’d rather assume low on my raw score to see where I would roughly need my essays to be.Jay.T17 wrote:Seems like a good estimate. 148 raw will put you in 1600s for scaled MBE score. A 128 will most likely put you right around 1444CAnow wrote:Raw 148/200 + 50s on all essays = 1442.cbx2016 wrote: If the One-Timers calculator is to be believed, you can "auto-pass" with 50s in all essays and a 148/200 with a 1442 overall.
Raw 138/200 + 55s on all essays = 1442.
Raw 128/200 + 60s on all essays = 1442.
Raw 118/200 + 65s on all essays = 1442.
Raw 108/200 + 70s on all essays = 1442.
I hate this.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2017 1:51 pm
Re: 2017 July California Bar
My statement about a 148 putting you in the 1600s is wrong according to Onetimers. Apparently, a raw 148/200 will put you at a 1808 scaled.Pbjd21 wrote:So obviously a bit confused and understanding that this by no means is 100% accurate, but for the sake of my nerves, what would a roughly 1370 scaled mbe translate to according to one-timers calculator? I am a repeater and my scaled mbe’s have been 1379, 1411, and 1433. Of which I’ve never understood where I stood as far as raw score goes. If anyone can shed some light I’d rather assume low on my raw score to see where I would roughly need my essays to be.Jay.T17 wrote:Seems like a good estimate. 148 raw will put you in 1600s for scaled MBE score. A 128 will most likely put you right around 1444CAnow wrote:Raw 148/200 + 50s on all essays = 1442.cbx2016 wrote: If the One-Timers calculator is to be believed, you can "auto-pass" with 50s in all essays and a 148/200 with a 1442 overall.
Raw 138/200 + 55s on all essays = 1442.
Raw 128/200 + 60s on all essays = 1442.
Raw 118/200 + 65s on all essays = 1442.
Raw 108/200 + 70s on all essays = 1442.
I hate this.
Onetimers states that a raw 124/200 = 1442 scaled MBE, and a raw 119/200 = 1366 scaled MBE.
I think Barbri said a 1440 ranged between 62% and 68% depending on the scale for the particular year. So Onetimers may be using a generous formula. I just don't see how getting 74% on the MBE will place you in the 1800s.
-
- Posts: 485
- Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2015 5:27 am
Re: 2017 July California Bar
If I don't pass this time I am going to write to Gov Brown and beg him to do something...I dunno what exactly. but still...
-
- Posts: 480
- Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 8:05 pm
Re: 2017 July California Bar
This shows exactly why the conversation here, to some degree, is futile re: lower the cut score. You have to attack your weakness, which if I recall were your essay scores (since you crushed the MBE). Hopefully, the 50% emphasis on the MBE this time will be what you need to get over the hurdle. Good luck!6TimeFailure wrote:If I don't pass this time I am going to write to Gov Brown and beg him to do something...I dunno what exactly. but still...
-
- Posts: 722
- Joined: Thu Jun 05, 2014 12:45 pm
Re: 2017 July California Bar
Not sure what's wrong or futile about discussing better ways to evaluate attorney competence. We all know our own circumstances and the reality we are facing with the test as it is and the slow nature of any change in this profession. We're not idiots.LockBox wrote:This shows exactly why the conversation here, to some degree, is futile re: lower the cut score. You have to attack your weakness, which if I recall were your essay scores (since you crushed the MBE). Hopefully, the 50% emphasis on the MBE this time will be what you need to get over the hurdle. Good luck!6TimeFailure wrote:If I don't pass this time I am going to write to Gov Brown and beg him to do something...I dunno what exactly. but still...
To the extent we talk about changing the exam or its score to make ourselves feel better, that's our prerogative.
Last edited by mcmand on Fri Jan 26, 2018 4:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 480
- Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 8:05 pm
Re: 2017 July California Bar
Understood, just as it is my prerogative to claim that, until you've passed, the discussion is futile...actually, not worthwhile would be a better characterization.mcmand wrote:Not sure what's wrong or futile about discussing better ways to evaluate attorney competence. We all know our own circumstances and the reality we are facing with the test as it is and the slow nature of any change in this profession. We're not idiots.LockBox wrote:This shows exactly why the conversation here, to some degree, is futile re: lower the cut score. You have to attack your weakness, which if I recall were your essay scores (since you crushed the MBE). Hopefully, the 50% emphasis on the MBE this time will be what you need to get over the hurdle. Good luck!6TimeFailure wrote:If I don't pass this time I am going to write to Gov Brown and beg him to do something...I dunno what exactly. but still...
To the extent we talk about changing the exam or its score to make ourselves feel better, that's our prerogative.
Again, not to dissuade conversation here but my advice would be not to worry about any of this until the bar is behind any of you. I had many people, during my retake process, telling me how unfair it is, biased etc. It was all noise. I told them to go away (nicely). Not that I disagreed, but my focus was on passing and to the extent that this conversation didn't help me, I sidestepped it. If it helps y'all, have it.
My hope is that people visiting this board are trying to pass and doing whatever is in their capability to reach that goal.
- catechumen
- Posts: 50
- Joined: Wed May 21, 2014 11:20 pm
Re: 2017 July California Bar
Why not do both? Writing to the governor should at most take you 10-15 mins. Hardly a massive wasteful or futile effort either. We have popular opinion on our side too. We have both the Left and the Right who think this test is unfair. The Right because it's protectionist, and the Left because it disproportionately effects minority groups. Fixing this should be a political slam dunk. We just need to make our voices heard.
I mean you acknowledge that the test is unfair, yet say we should be ok with the status quo? Imagine if those required to take polling tests in order to vote in the segregationist America had such attitudes? You can study and work for change at the same time. No one is talking about abandoning studying altogether so we can camp out in front of the capital. This is not Occupy the Bar. LOL
As for everyone else. If we want change we need to get organized. Anyone up for joining something like a Facebook group to do so?
I mean you acknowledge that the test is unfair, yet say we should be ok with the status quo? Imagine if those required to take polling tests in order to vote in the segregationist America had such attitudes? You can study and work for change at the same time. No one is talking about abandoning studying altogether so we can camp out in front of the capital. This is not Occupy the Bar. LOL
As for everyone else. If we want change we need to get organized. Anyone up for joining something like a Facebook group to do so?
LockBox wrote:Understood, just as it is my prerogative to claim that, until you've passed, the discussion is futile...actually, not worthwhile would be a better characterization.mcmand wrote:Not sure what's wrong or futile about discussing better ways to evaluate attorney competence. We all know our own circumstances and the reality we are facing with the test as it is and the slow nature of any change in this profession. We're not idiots.LockBox wrote:This shows exactly why the conversation here, to some degree, is futile re: lower the cut score. You have to attack your weakness, which if I recall were your essay scores (since you crushed the MBE). Hopefully, the 50% emphasis on the MBE this time will be what you need to get over the hurdle. Good luck!6TimeFailure wrote:If I don't pass this time I am going to write to Gov Brown and beg him to do something...I dunno what exactly. but still...
To the extent we talk about changing the exam or its score to make ourselves feel better, that's our prerogative.
Again, not to dissuade conversation here but my advice would be not to worry about any of this until the bar is behind any of you. I had many people, during my retake process, telling me how unfair it is, biased etc. It was all noise. I told them to go away (nicely). Not that I disagreed, but my focus was on passing and to the extent that this conversation didn't help me, I sidestepped it. If it helps y'all, have it.
My hope is that people visiting this board are trying to pass and doing whatever is in their capability to reach that goal.
- yeslekkkk
- Posts: 378
- Joined: Sat Nov 23, 2013 1:37 am
Re: 2017 July California Bar
22 days friends.
-
- Posts: 712
- Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 5:41 pm
Re: 2017 July California Bar
Graders might tighten the grades in anticipation of the lower passing score. Now the passing score is upheld, let's see if we are fu..ed. It is so unfair to see the first time NY pass rate is around 86% for ABA schools. LOL
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login