THEMIS JULY 2018 - DISCUSSION

Discussions related to the bar exam are found in this forum
Ohnt

New
Posts: 78
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2018 1:48 am

Re: THEMIS JULY 2018 - DISCUSSION

Postby Ohnt » Thu Jun 21, 2018 1:30 pm

Ohnt wrote:
Ohnt wrote:
1Abimrdjur3 wrote:
Allux wrote:
sproutz wrote:
Lawworld19 wrote:How well are you all doing on MBE practice questions and essays so far??


62% overall MBE after 808 questions. Subjects are varying pretty wildly from 70% in Crim Law to 52% in Civ Pro though.

Essays I'm really nervous about though. I keep getting high marks for organization, but low marks for analysis, averaging out to barely passing, or just under.


I’m curious, where do you guys find those stats?? I didn’t see anything that would trace our performance on PQs.


"Course Progress" to "MBE PQs"




Thanks!!! Didn’t know this! Foreign educated- was making tons of mistakes when I started.

User avatar
BlueLaw11

Bronze
Posts: 137
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 4:14 am

Re: THEMIS JULY 2018 - DISCUSSION

Postby BlueLaw11 » Thu Jun 21, 2018 1:35 pm

Starting to be convinced Pam Karlan has been involved involved in every Crim Pro case that has gone before SCOTUS...

Agreed with what was said a few pages back though, she is fantastic

playwright

New
Posts: 24
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2014 12:34 pm

Re: THEMIS JULY 2018 - DISCUSSION

Postby playwright » Thu Jun 21, 2018 3:06 pm

For the MPT, how does note-taking/outlining work during the real exam?
When I'm taking a practice MPT I have two word docs open and type notes on one and type the answer in the other.
For the real thing, we would only have one screen to work with. Any tips on organizing/outlining?

rastajacob

New
Posts: 23
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2018 12:17 pm

Re: THEMIS JULY 2018 - DISCUSSION

Postby rastajacob » Thu Jun 21, 2018 4:02 pm

Ugh, Evidence MBE PQ's are destroying me...Sorry, just wanted to vent...!

User avatar
midtrains

New
Posts: 18
Joined: Thu Feb 27, 2014 8:25 pm

Re: THEMIS JULY 2018 - DISCUSSION

Postby midtrains » Thu Jun 21, 2018 4:33 pm

Take a shot every time Kramer points out that he's drinking water

Calcrastinator

New
Posts: 10
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2018 11:39 pm

Re: THEMIS JULY 2018 - DISCUSSION

Postby Calcrastinator » Thu Jun 21, 2018 7:32 pm

lawbug123 wrote:
Tala29 wrote:I have the same issue, the more I move on the more I forgot about other subjects and it's really hard. I am at 60% done because I actually have barely reviewed (other than doing MBE and PQ sets and getting down why I got the question wrong/right). I have, so far, never really sat down and tried to actively memorize or reviewed notes. Honestly, I kind of just wanted to get all lectures out of the way first and then use the last 2-3 weeks to do that.

Was that a bad call? I suddenly scored really low on the last sets of MBE questions for the specific subjects (never scored so low this far in the program), bit maybe it is because they are really nuanced towards the end (that's what someone told me at least).


I'm doing the EXACT same thing as you. Minus the fact that I'm at 25% so really you should be partying right now...comparatively speaking, of course.


I am thinking about giving up on this test. I am around the same percentage. I can't figure out how everyone is getting so far ahead. I mean are you literally rewriting outlines and watching all the videos? I don't see how just taking MBEs and essays are going to magically help me remember when I can't even visualize how to structure answers for essays or learn the law in an organized manner. I honestly want to give up for this summer.

CiFULA

New
Posts: 32
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 9:15 am

Re: THEMIS JULY 2018 - DISCUSSION

Postby CiFULA » Thu Jun 21, 2018 7:38 pm

checking in. +1 to pam karlan being awesome and the evidence guy not so much. somehow im missing the blanks for just his lectures. doesn't help that his boston (?) accent makes it hard to catch certain words. he pronounces his o's as a's and trails off in the latter half of the word sometimes. kampeden = competent etc. he needs to enunciate better or something..

rastajacob

New
Posts: 23
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2018 12:17 pm

Re: THEMIS JULY 2018 - DISCUSSION

Postby rastajacob » Thu Jun 21, 2018 8:28 pm

The Paper Chase is on Cable TV right now and it is giving me inspiration, LOL...

User avatar
RobertGolddust

Bronze
Posts: 379
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 9:09 pm

Re: THEMIS JULY 2018 - DISCUSSION

Postby RobertGolddust » Thu Jun 21, 2018 9:06 pm

Scored a 90% on torts today. Generally scored 50-70% in property or contract question. Crazy how much easier one section is then the other.

User avatar
White Dwarf

Bronze
Posts: 348
Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2015 7:54 pm

Re: THEMIS JULY 2018 - DISCUSSION

Postby White Dwarf » Thu Jun 21, 2018 10:02 pm

Some of these Con Law questions are so poorly written. The explanations make logical jumps that are not justified by the fact pattern. It's never clear whether you are only dealing with the exact situation in the facts, or if you should be making obvious inferences.

They're also super inconsistent about when answers are over-broad. I got a question wrong where the right answer was "Judges are never subject to liability." For the specific situation presented in the question, it was true. But, it's not true generally that judges are never subject to liability.

There's another I got wrong because the explanation said the Senate can't create jurisdiction for federal courts. Ok, but the Senate has to approve treaties before federal courts have jurisdiction over cases arising under that treaty, so is it really correct to say Senate approval of a treaty doesn't "create" jurisdiction? It's such an obnoxious distinction for the question-writer to make.

/rant

I'm going to bed.

lawbug123

New
Posts: 47
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 1:03 pm

Re: THEMIS JULY 2018 - DISCUSSION

Postby lawbug123 » Thu Jun 21, 2018 11:01 pm

White Dwarf wrote:Some of these Con Law questions are so poorly written. The explanations make logical jumps that are not justified by the fact pattern. It's never clear whether you are only dealing with the exact situation in the facts, or if you should be making obvious inferences.

They're also super inconsistent about when answers are over-broad. I got a question wrong where the right answer was "Judges are never subject to liability." For the specific situation presented in the question, it was true. But, it's not true generally that judges are never subject to liability.

There's another I got wrong because the explanation said the Senate can't create jurisdiction for federal courts. Ok, but the Senate has to approve treaties before federal courts have jurisdiction over cases arising under that treaty, so is it really correct to say Senate approval of a treaty doesn't "create" jurisdiction? It's such an obnoxious distinction for the question-writer to make.

/rant

I'm going to bed.

DITTO!

dabigchina

Silver
Posts: 1428
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 2:22 am

Re: THEMIS JULY 2018 - DISCUSSION

Postby dabigchina » Fri Jun 22, 2018 12:08 am

White Dwarf wrote:Some of these Con Law questions are so poorly written. The explanations make logical jumps that are not justified by the fact pattern. It's never clear whether you are only dealing with the exact situation in the facts, or if you should be making obvious inferences.

They're also super inconsistent about when answers are over-broad. I got a question wrong where the right answer was "Judges are never subject to liability." For the specific situation presented in the question, it was true. But, it's not true generally that judges are never subject to liability.

There's another I got wrong because the explanation said the Senate can't create jurisdiction for federal courts. Ok, but the Senate has to approve treaties before federal courts have jurisdiction over cases arising under that treaty, so is it really correct to say Senate approval of a treaty doesn't "create" jurisdiction? It's such an obnoxious distinction for the question-writer to make.

/rant

I'm going to bed.

Is it set 4? I'm doing it now and it's super bullshit.

dabigchina

Silver
Posts: 1428
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 2:22 am

Re: THEMIS JULY 2018 - DISCUSSION

Postby dabigchina » Fri Jun 22, 2018 3:44 am

BlueLaw11 wrote:Starting to be convinced Pam Karlan has been involved involved in every Crim Pro case that has gone before SCOTUS...

Agreed with what was said a few pages back though, she is fantastic

Apparently she's personally argued before the court several times.

https://www.oyez.org/advocates/pamela_s_karlan

User avatar
White Dwarf

Bronze
Posts: 348
Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2015 7:54 pm

Re: THEMIS JULY 2018 - DISCUSSION

Postby White Dwarf » Fri Jun 22, 2018 6:34 am

dabigchina wrote:Is it set 4? I'm doing it now and it's super bullshit.

Yes. I had a nice upward trend in scores, and that one ruined it.

CBlaw

New
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2015 10:43 am

Re: THEMIS JULY 2018 - DISCUSSION

Postby CBlaw » Fri Jun 22, 2018 9:33 am

White Dwarf wrote:
dabigchina wrote:Is it set 4? I'm doing it now and it's super bullshit.

Yes. I had a nice upward trend in scores, and that one ruined it.


LOL i got like 35-40% on that one. Fuck Conlaw

ubebarstudying

Bronze
Posts: 104
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2017 1:16 pm

Re: THEMIS JULY 2018 - DISCUSSION

Postby ubebarstudying » Fri Jun 22, 2018 9:37 am

White Dwarf wrote:
dabigchina wrote:Is it set 4? I'm doing it now and it's super bullshit.

Yes. I had a nice upward trend in scores, and that one ruined it.


This happens, it certainly happened to me in property. I was slowly getting better and then hit a question set that seemed almost only focused on foreclosure, mortgages (in a secured transaction type way), and auction rules - aka, all the stuff I didn't really care about/pay attention to. I think I got a 38% on it, to be honest. Don't look at it as a failure try and take it as an opportunity to (if you have time) go through and see if there are correlations to areas you feel weak on, and don't let it get you down just keep pushing.

ubebarstudying

Bronze
Posts: 104
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2017 1:16 pm

Re: THEMIS JULY 2018 - DISCUSSION

Postby ubebarstudying » Fri Jun 22, 2018 9:43 am

White Dwarf wrote:I'm at 68% through 918 question. Still have most of Civ Pro (which I feel good about), and Con Law (which I suck at). I'd like to get to 70% overall by the end of the PQ sets, but not holding my breath.

I swear, a third of the questions on the 2nd Con Law PQ set covered things that weren't mentioned in the lectures. I had two questions about something called the "Enclave Clause", which I thought was made-up the first time I saw it as an answer.


Yeah, there are some things that are certainly testable that seem so minor in the grand scheme that may even be absent from the outlines, but generally there are only a couple questions like that and if it is on the actual exam and you have never seen it, remember that there are some experimental questions in there. Pray it's one of those, pick your best answer, and keep going.

ubebarstudying

Bronze
Posts: 104
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2017 1:16 pm

Re: THEMIS JULY 2018 - DISCUSSION

Postby ubebarstudying » Fri Jun 22, 2018 9:52 am

lawbug123 wrote:
Itwasascam wrote:
studying4bar wrote:
2015_Splitter wrote:
studying4bar wrote:
2015_Splitter wrote:
Interesting update: I just got my second response via the message center and was sent the completed and allegedly appropriately phrased/worded pdf so I guess I do not need to e-mail the director because now I have two handouts - one from my cousin and one from Themis with this new lecturer.



I don't even need to look at it, and I can almost guarantee it's the same handout that was available to through the link next to the video lectures. If I'm wrong though and you have a better outline, please share the love.


Hmm. The handout next to the lecture that was updated/the handout in the handout library have blanks in them, for me. I am saying that they sent me a pdf with the correct phrasing/blanks filled in. Is that available to you already? It hasn't shown up for me.


Ah, no that's not available. Looks like they gave you a filled out lecture handout.


Ok so all you have to do is resend your message to customer service and complain about the lecturer and they should send it to you. Alternatively, you could call customer service and possibly have a faster turnaround time, but I was told that there was a meeting or decision made due to the number of complaints received, but it sounded to be a very recent development, likely after you sent your messages in. You could also just be blunt and say you know of said decision and due to the lecturer and handout inconsistencies want the filled out pdf.


Hey, do you mind sending me a copy of the evidence handout. I sent them a message and they told me they dont release them as its a “learning device”

wolvesgo45@gmail.com


Same, could I also get one? aina.niaz@gmail.com


Sounds like complete BS to me - but it depends on who you message as well, it would seem (based on prior posts). I would just call them [customer service] if "studying4bar" doesn't reemerge. Of course, you could also gently remind them that you pay their salary. When these companies have issues and then act in a way such that they put it back on the student? Yeah, I consider that inappropriate. I pointed out an error when I took themis - it was a GLARING error, either in an assessment or MBE question involving marriage (so most likely con law or the family law assessment) and the question incorrectly referred to the state of the law as marriage between a man and woman and I sent a message to them about having such a landmark case/change in the law wrong and they basically told me to get over it and it was an oversight due to the "recency" of the case that announced it. Wasn't too recent for the outlines or lecturer to acknowledge, but it was for their questions apparently.

ubebarstudying

Bronze
Posts: 104
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2017 1:16 pm

Re: THEMIS JULY 2018 - DISCUSSION

Postby ubebarstudying » Fri Jun 22, 2018 10:02 am

Calcrastinator wrote:
lawbug123 wrote:
Tala29 wrote:I have the same issue, the more I move on the more I forgot about other subjects and it's really hard. I am at 60% done because I actually have barely reviewed (other than doing MBE and PQ sets and getting down why I got the question wrong/right). I have, so far, never really sat down and tried to actively memorize or reviewed notes. Honestly, I kind of just wanted to get all lectures out of the way first and then use the last 2-3 weeks to do that.

Was that a bad call? I suddenly scored really low on the last sets of MBE questions for the specific subjects (never scored so low this far in the program), bit maybe it is because they are really nuanced towards the end (that's what someone told me at least).


I'm doing the EXACT same thing as you. Minus the fact that I'm at 25% so really you should be partying right now...comparatively speaking, of course.


I am thinking about giving up on this test. I am around the same percentage. I can't figure out how everyone is getting so far ahead. I mean are you literally rewriting outlines and watching all the videos? I don't see how just taking MBEs and essays are going to magically help me remember when I can't even visualize how to structure answers for essays or learn the law in an organized manner. I honestly want to give up for this summer.


Hmm. I do not think it was a bad call if it is best or works best for how you learn, and there is a certain logic behind doing it that way. I think that is why there is a flex study option. I condensed topics down to 5 page or shorter outlines, and as I practiced if I needed to expand on the issue because I was getting questions wrong or whatever, I would take the rule from the answer, ensure it was in line with the lecture or outline, and then clarify it more in my outlines at night (I usually kept a notepad handy to rephrase things/write notes down for "later"). Do you HAVE to condense or do outlines? No, not if you think it will be a waste of time or that doesn't work for you. However, I found that outlines can be more effective in differing structures/formats depending on the topic & how well you know it. I posted an example of my first page of my contracts mini outline and it is not "outline-ish," at all in the traditional sense, but it made sense to me, it flowed, and it was color-coded, which is something I did throughout law school. Conversely, my civ pro and conflicts outline were more traditional with bullet points and so forth. You have other outlines and if not, FRO's that you can go over for the more traditional format, but I posted about alternative outlines yesterday (coincidentally) and you can see what I mean because I uploaded the first page of such an outline. https://blockbusterblawg.com/2018/06/21 ... countdown/

abogado2018

New
Posts: 40
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2016 12:50 am

Re: THEMIS JULY 2018 - DISCUSSION

Postby abogado2018 » Fri Jun 22, 2018 12:10 pm

CBlaw wrote:
White Dwarf wrote:
dabigchina wrote:Is it set 4? I'm doing it now and it's super bullshit.

Yes. I had a nice upward trend in scores, and that one ruined it.


LOL i got like 35-40% on that one. Fuck Conlaw


FWIW, I also have been getting owned by Themis's con law PQ sets and I'm scoring 69% on Adaptibar con law. Am pretty sure Themis is self selecting their Qs for higher difficulty.

Dumplingdude42

New
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2014 10:09 pm

Re: THEMIS JULY 2018 - DISCUSSION

Postby Dumplingdude42 » Fri Jun 22, 2018 12:11 pm

White Dwarf wrote:Some of these Con Law questions are so poorly written. The explanations make logical jumps that are not justified by the fact pattern. It's never clear whether you are only dealing with the exact situation in the facts, or if you should be making obvious inferences.

They're also super inconsistent about when answers are over-broad. I got a question wrong where the right answer was "Judges are never subject to liability." For the specific situation presented in the question, it was true. But, it's not true generally that judges are never subject to liability.

There's another I got wrong because the explanation said the Senate can't create jurisdiction for federal courts. Ok, but the Senate has to approve treaties before federal courts have jurisdiction over cases arising under that treaty, so is it really correct to say Senate approval of a treaty doesn't "create" jurisdiction? It's such an obnoxious distinction for the question-writer to make.

/rant

I'm going to bed.



FWIW, I am just about 100% positive Themis has misstated the law with respect to treaties. The Senate advises and consents on treaties with a 2/3 vote, but those treaties can only be ratified by the President after receiving the Senate's advice and consent. In other words advice and consent is not the same as ratification. They keep throwing around the word "approval" like it is interchangeable with "ratification" OR "advice and consent."

Not sure that actually affects the strategic approach to the question in the PS, if at all. But in the grand scheme of things, they may have oversimplified some of these Constitutional points that otherwise shouldn't be simplified/overlooked when it comes to answering MBE questions.

dabigchina

Silver
Posts: 1428
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 2:22 am

Re: THEMIS JULY 2018 - DISCUSSION

Postby dabigchina » Fri Jun 22, 2018 12:22 pm

The people answering themis's substantive law questions are terrible.

I asked this:

Why is C admissible? How is this not fruit of the poisonous tree? Is it because the evidence is being admitted against the accomplice and his rights were not violated? IF this is the case, could police just torture accomplices to get evidence against other principals?:

C. Stolen goods found in an accomplice's apartment, after the suspect involuntarily made a statement regarding the whereabouts of the stolen goods. The state seeks to introduce the stolen goods against the accomplice.


And I got literal nonsense:

After reviewing the outline, handout and final review, there seems to be three categories that the statement could fall into: voluntary, involuntary/coerced, or custody/interrogation. Evidence obtained as a result of a voluntary statement taken in violation of Miranda is admissible.Volunteered statements are not protected by Miranda, as they are, by definition, not the product of interrogation. An involuntarily obtained statement is never admissible against a defendant. Miranda applies to statements made while in custody to interrogation. I hope this helps!



After I pushed back, I got a straight up wrong answer. Note how the answer assumes that the confession was voluntary:

Derivative physical evidence (e.g., a gun) obtained as a result of a non Mirandized confession (i.e., a confession that is inadmissible due to the police's failure to give Miranda warnings) is admissible, so long as that confession was not coerced. The question asks which evidence is least likely to be admissible. The stolen goods are derivative physical evidence obtained as a result of an uncoerced, non-mirandized confession. Thus they are admissible and therefore C cannot be the correct answer.


Pretty disappointed that they can't answer a straightforward question of law. do they even have real lawyers grading our essays and answering questions?

lawbug123

New
Posts: 47
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 1:03 pm

Re: THEMIS JULY 2018 - DISCUSSION

Postby lawbug123 » Fri Jun 22, 2018 12:36 pm

Evidence is brutal. I wonder if it's even worth listening to this lecture. Also, if anyone gets a copy of the evidence lecture, could someone email that to me? I'm having difficulty covering grounds with lecture.

User avatar
BlueLaw11

Bronze
Posts: 137
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 4:14 am

Re: THEMIS JULY 2018 - DISCUSSION

Postby BlueLaw11 » Fri Jun 22, 2018 1:05 pm

White Dwarf wrote:
dabigchina wrote:Is it set 4? I'm doing it now and it's super bullshit.

Yes. I had a nice upward trend in scores, and that one ruined it.


About to start Set 4 now. Yay

I feel like the Con Law PQs/explanations have been the most rage inducing by far

User avatar
Auxilio

Silver
Posts: 646
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2014 3:51 pm

Re: THEMIS JULY 2018 - DISCUSSION

Postby Auxilio » Fri Jun 22, 2018 1:37 pm

I finished evidence yesterday and actually didn't think the lecturer was that bad. I do listen on 2x speed and ignore the handout though, so maybe the problem is mostly just with people finding the handout useless?

Did the first two sets and got 70/86% (probably my highest first two for a subject yet) so *shrug*.

The communal property guy is who deserves all our scorn so far in my opinion.



Return to “Bar Exam Prep and Discussion Forum?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: a male human, lnu1992, Underoath and 28 guests