Need MBE help Forum

[lexingtonhr]

I know that there are other forums here that are posted for mbe help in particular. I’ve looked through them and I still feel like I don’t know what to do.
I’ve done adapti bar twice. It’s a good site but there’s a missing link that I’m just not grasping. I was even in the high 70s and still flunked the mbe portion.

Should I read barbri conviser to lay the foundation before attempting mbes? I’m just confused as to where to go from here. I need to raise my score exponentially.

[sleeplessindc]

Could you describe how many questions total you've done, which other supplements you used (e.g., Emanuel, Finz, NCBE official questions), and how you studied? Like did you do each question one at a time, then reviewed the explanation and copied the rule over into an outline that you then studied?

Also, do you see any patterns in the questions you're getting wrong and the ones you're getting right? (Do you think the problem is that you don't know the BLL enough -- subtle distinctions like the exception to the exception to the exception that you learn through doing the practice questions?)

[lexingtonhr]

Could you describe how many questions total you've done, which other supplements you used (e.g., Emanuel, Finz, NCBE official questions), and how you studied? Like did you do each question one at a time, then reviewed the explanation and copied the rule over into an outline that you then studied?

Also, do you see any patterns in the questions you're getting wrong and the ones you're getting right? (Do you think the problem is that you don't know the BLL enough -- subtle distinctions like the exception to the exception to the exception that you learn through doing the practice questions?)

The first go around, I was doing 50 a day and S &T. Everyone that I got wrong, I wrote the rule down in the notebook. But the rule explanations were pretty poor. I did pretty bad that first time. Second go around, same thing but did about 30 mbes and compiled a list of ones I was getting wrong. I also used S & T. My score was a few points higher but still, it was not good enough.

My lowest scores were Contracts, Evidence and Con law. Real property was around 34.4 percent. I need to do a deeper dive on those topics. I don’t know if it’s harming me by just doing multiple choice without laying foundation on the onset. I’m literally freaking out trying to figure out how to do this. Any help would be greatly appreciated

[sleeplessindc]

As you know, the MBE tests very subtle distinctions and detailed BLL. It's a test of a gazillion fine-grained rules and how they apply to facts.

Take this rule: The Supreme Court will not exercise jurisdiction over a state court judgment if it is based on adequate and independent state law grounds. OK, what if the state ruling is based on both the state constitution/statute and the federal constitution/statute, but different provisions in each? What if it's based on identical provisions in both state and federal constitutions (like identical due process clauses)? What if the state ruling discusses both state and federal laws, but also says both laws were necessary to uphold the whole thing and that the state law wasn't enough by itself?

To improve your understanding of those fine BLLs and how they apply to fact patterns (including answer choices you need to weed out!), I wonder if perhaps you'd benefit from slowing down to really analyze why you got certain questions right/wrong (including past practice questions) and to integrate that question's BLL rule back into your broader understanding of the topic.

You also said you need to do a deeper dive into certain topics -- and you're probably right. For example, at the start of my study I knew I had only a fuzzy understanding of the distinctions between all the different types of jurisdiction (like general, specific, subject matter, personal, whhaaat???), so I devoted a big chunk of my time nailing that down cold using a variety of resources. (For that stuff, I thought this professor's website was especially useful: https://www.nathenson.org/.) Man I'm so glad I did.

For me, I felt like studying for the MBE was sort of like building a house and then decorating it; you need to build the skeleton, then put up the roof and room dividing walls, then paint the walls, then add the furniture, etc. If you're compiling what you got wrong into a separate document, maybe that's as if you're just collecting the small trinkets without knowing which room where each belongs. Integration of individual lessons was especially important for subjects like Evidence, which I thought was the most difficult topic because there were just so many rules. (I think Contracts actually has far more rules, but the tested questions felt more straightforward or easier to answer based on a vaguer understanding, i.e., my understanding of the rooms of my metaphorical house. With Evidence, I felt like I had to know the exception to the exception to the exception cold.)

How many total questions did you do, by the way? I think around 1,200 practice questions was when I started getting a feel for how questions are presented and recognizing question patterns. (My final tally was double that. I self-studied and would've done more if I hadn't ran out of time. I did so many because even though quality of study is super important, there are so many rules to remember that simple repetition -- each instance forcing me to revisit a subtopic -- inevitably helped.)

I also think using a variety of supplements is the better approach, although I thought the NCBE questions were the most helpful and most representative of test day questions.

Another thing I'd add is that you need to triage your time and focus on the most tested topics. I've seen tallies around the web, like JD Advising's: https://www.jdadvising.com/highly-tested-mbe-topics/. Yeah, test day you might see weird questions on zoning or whatever that weren't covered in any mainstream outline, but by definition it's hard to prepare for those surprise questions. You can, however, plan to encounter a whole lot of questions on hearsay, negligence, etc.

I'll write more if I think of other stuff. This board has helped me out a lot over the years and I want to give back to the community.

[lexingtonhr]

As you know, the MBE tests very subtle distinctions and detailed BLL. It's a test of a gazillion fine-grained rules and how they apply to facts.

Take this rule: The Supreme Court will not exercise jurisdiction over a state court judgment if it is based on adequate and independent state law grounds. OK, what if the state ruling is based on both the state constitution/statute and the federal constitution/statute, but different provisions in each? What if it's based on identical provisions in both state and federal constitutions (like identical due process clauses)? What if the state ruling discusses both state and federal laws, but also says both laws were necessary to uphold the whole thing and that the state law wasn't enough by itself?

To improve your understanding of those fine BLLs and how they apply to fact patterns (including answer choices you need to weed out!), I wonder if perhaps you'd benefit from slowing down to really analyze why you got certain questions right/wrong (including past practice questions) and to integrate that question's BLL rule back into your broader understanding of the topic.

You also said you need to do a deeper dive into certain topics -- and you're probably right. For example, at the start of my study I knew I had only a fuzzy understanding of the distinctions between all the different types of jurisdiction (like general, specific, subject matter, personal, whhaaat???), so I devoted a big chunk of my time nailing that down cold using a variety of resources. (For that stuff, I thought this professor's website was especially useful: https://www.nathenson.org/.) Man I'm so glad I did.

For me, I felt like studying for the MBE was sort of like building a house and then decorating it; you need to build the skeleton, then put up the roof and room dividing walls, then paint the walls, then add the furniture, etc. If you're compiling what you got wrong into a separate document, maybe that's as if you're just collecting the small trinkets without knowing which room where each belongs. Integration of individual lessons was especially important for subjects like Evidence, which I thought was the most difficult topic because there were just so many rules. (I think Contracts actually has far more rules, but the tested questions felt more straightforward or easier to answer based on a vaguer understanding, i.e., my understanding of the rooms of my metaphorical house. With Evidence, I felt like I had to know the exception to the exception to the exception cold.)

How many total questions did you do, by the way? I think around 1,200 practice questions was when I started getting a feel for how questions are presented and recognizing question patterns. (My final tally was double that. I self-studied and would've done more if I hadn't ran out of time. I did so many because even though quality of study is super important, there are so many rules to remember that simple repetition -- each instance forcing me to revisit a subtopic -- inevitably helped.)

I also think using a variety of supplements is the better approach, although I thought the NCBE questions were the most helpful and most representative of test day questions.

Another thing I'd add is that you need to triage your time and focus on the most tested topics. I've seen tallies around the web, like JD Advising's: https://www.jdadvising.com/highly-tested-mbe-topics/. Yeah, test day you might see weird questions on zoning or whatever that weren't covered in any mainstream outline, but by definition it's hard to prepare for those surprise questions. You can, however, plan to encounter a whole lot of questions on hearsay, negligence, etc.

I'll write more if I think of other stuff. This board has helped me out a lot over the years and I want to give back to the community.

Thanks, that was so helpful and insightful. I wrote more before, but it would not allow me to submit it, so now I'm re-writing this again. I did 3K for cycle 1 and around 1300 cycle 2. Quantity is more important than quality. I did WAY too much the first time and this second time around was more relaxed, however, it was not enough to make me pass. How many times did you take it? Thank you for response. If you have any helpful resources to guide me through this, I would greatly appreciate as I am desperate to raise this score. I'm really at a loss of what to do.

[sleeplessindc]

I took the UBE once and passed with a score I'm happy with -- so yeah, who knows if what worked for me will work for others in a different retaker situation.

Let me ask you this. Try taking like 10 practice questions open-book. Do you find that you always get the correct answer in that case? Or do you still get many questions wrong?

If the former is true, then the issue might be memorization, familiarity, time management, anxiety, etc. If the latter is true, then the problem could be that you're not seeing the existence of the subtleties or not understanding the BLL clearly enough -- all the distinctions, caveats, exceptions, definitional parameters, etc. Or maybe the foundational resource you're using isn't clear and detailed enough for you.

As for test taking strategies, are you finding that you're able to narrow down the choices in most questions to two choices and feeling like many of the questions are familiar (same basic pattern with the facts swapped out)?

What do you think -- does the above sound helpful?

By the way, instead of separating out the rules in the questions you got wrong in a separate document, my suggestion would be to keep adding those lessons (incorrect questions AND questions you thought were tricky but got right) to your existing outlines and highlight them, so that you're flagging your pitfalls and lessons learned but also providing the fuller context to yourself at the same time. That way you can see the framework of the metaphorical house along with the individual trinkets in each room.

Edit: I like the Mini Conviser a lot. It was my foundational resource. (I digitized them into my own outlines which I then continuously tweaked.) However, I don't know if you have enough time to read all the way through it before tackling MBE questions. Another approach would be to do a question, digest the explanations and why you got it right/wrong, go to that section of your outline and read & study that section, incorporate whatever lesson you learned into your outline, and then repeat the process. Also, I used about five different sources of MBE questions and often rotated through them; I most heavily relied on Emanuel, NBCE, and Barbri.

[Noobmaster69]

I self-studied using Barbri miniconviser and Adaptibar in my first try. I think I ran into the same problem you did. I would do the MBE questions on Adaptibar and review my answers, but something felt off. I felt I was learning new rules on each question but without knowing where they belong. Overtime, I did see improvement in my score but not by a lot. I did not pass in my first try. After I received my result, I thought about why. The answer was this: I simply did not understand the law well enough.

Second time, I used CP Flashcards with Themis. Contrary to popular opinion, I went through all the lectures and actually found most of them useful (probably because I am a foreign attorney with zero prior US law training and the fact that I did not absorb much from my self studies in my first attempt). I would check the points covered in the lectures with those in CP Flashcards. If the cards missed something, I would include it. Basically, I used the flashcards as my roadmap/outline and filled in the blanks using Themis lecture. I did not bother with Themis' full outline most of the time (unless I was having issues with certain questions, then I would go study that section). I think I improved tremendously using this approach. In my first sitting, I scored 15.1 in crim law/procedure. When I practiced using Themis' MBE questions, I was scoring crim law/procedure in the high 70s. In all other subjects, I was eventually scoring between ~70 and ~80. When the real thing came, I felt comfortable answering all the MBE questions. I passed on my second try, likely due to a strong MBE score as I never really prepared for essay writing much.

In both my attempts, I answered about 600 mbe questions each time (so ~1200 in total). In my second attempt, I spent more time studying to understand/internalize/memorize the law and I think that was the difference for me.

[lexingtonhr]

I took the UBE once and passed with a score I'm happy with -- so yeah, who knows if what worked for me will work for others in a different retaker situation.

Let me ask you this. Try taking like 10 practice questions open-book. Do you find that you always get the correct answer in that case? Or do you still get many questions wrong?

If the former is true, then the issue might be memorization, familiarity, time management, anxiety, etc. If the latter is true, then the problem could be that you're not seeing the existence of the subtleties or not understanding the BLL clearly enough -- all the distinctions, caveats, exceptions, definitional parameters, etc. Or maybe the foundational resource you're using isn't clear and detailed enough for you.

As for test taking strategies, are you finding that you're able to narrow down the choices in most questions to two choices and feeling like many of the questions are familiar (same basic pattern with the facts swapped out)?

What do you think -- does the above sound helpful?

By the way, instead of separating out the rules in the questions you got wrong in a separate document, my suggestion would be to keep adding those lessons (incorrect questions AND questions you thought were tricky but got right) to your existing outlines and highlight them, so that you're flagging your pitfalls and lessons learned but also providing the fuller context to yourself at the same time. That way you can see the framework of the metaphorical house along with the individual trinkets in each room.

Edit: I like the Mini Conviser a lot. It was my foundational resource. (I digitized them into my own outlines which I then continuously tweaked.) However, I don't know if you have enough time to read all the way through it before tackling MBE questions. Another approach would be to do a question, digest the explanations and why you got it right/wrong, go to that section of your outline and read & study that section, incorporate whatever lesson you learned into your outline, and then repeat the process. Also, I used about five different sources of MBE questions and often rotated through them; I most heavily relied on Emanuel, NBCE, and Barbri.

Everything you said sounds helpful. I was actually speaking with my former tutor yesterday and she told me to do the same thing--doing questions open book to determine what is the issue. For me, I feel like it has to do with memorization and especially the exceptions & distinctions.

So you're saying to add those tricky questions to my outline? I have outlines, but they are more essay approaches. I was thinking of purchasing the JD advising MBE sheets which guarantees a 7 point increase. But also, I do have the Barbri conviser. I was thinking with each subject, I would spend a little more time on the sections that I'm on. I would only spend that time on subjects that I have more difficulty on (contracts, evidence, real property). It is pretty tedious, but if I want to pass, this is likely the route I would take to understand these concepts. Also, coming on this forum is extremely helpful for asking questions.

I was thinking of purchasing the NCEBX set as well. I have the Emanuel, and I was thinking of getting Adaptibar more as a tool. My tutor told me not to purchase it again, but then I spoke to someone else who told me I was probably not utilizing it correctly. I liked it because I found questions on the MBE that were similar to the ones on Adaptibar. So, like you said, I would probably rotate those out. My problem is figuring out when to rotate them, how long to spend on each of them. My former tutor suggested 25 questions on the onset and spending time digesting the law. If you can, can you send me an example of your digitized outline? If you don't want to, no worries. I understand.

[sleeplessindc]

Hey, I PM'ed you a sample. I hope it shows why that if you have a separate list of the exceptions to the exceptions to the exceptions, and they're not shown along with the fuller context -- the exceptions to the exception, the exceptions, and the rule itself -- it can get even more confusing!

I didn't use Adaptibar but I recall looking into it and finding mixed reviews. I think they include the official NCBE questions?

Regarding the foundational outlines to use, I'm not sure if it makes a ton of difference whether you use the Mini Conviser or JD Advising's outlines. I would, however, caution against buying yourself too many resources and drowning in them. (I am probably preaching to the choir about that.)

[lexingtonhr]

I self-studied using Barbri miniconviser and Adaptibar in my first try. I think I ran into the same problem you did. I would do the MBE questions on Adaptibar and review my answers, but something felt off. I felt I was learning new rules on each question but without knowing where they belong. Overtime, I did see improvement in my score but not by a lot. I did not pass in my first try. After I received my result, I thought about why. The answer was this: I simply did not understand the law well enough.

Second time, I used CP Flashcards with Themis. Contrary to popular opinion, I went through all the lectures and actually found most of them useful (probably because I am a foreign attorney with zero prior US law training and the fact that I did not absorb much from my self studies in my first attempt). I would check the points covered in the lectures with those in CP Flashcards. If the cards missed something, I would include it. Basically, I used the flashcards as my roadmap/outline and filled in the blanks using Themis lecture. I did not bother with Themis' full outline most of the time (unless I was having issues with certain questions, then I would go study that section). I think I improved tremendously using this approach. In my first sitting, I scored 15.1 in crim law/procedure. When I practiced using Themis' MBE questions, I was scoring crim law/procedure in the high 70s. In all other subjects, I was eventually scoring between ~70 and ~80. When the real thing came, I felt comfortable answering all the MBE questions. I passed on my second try, likely due to a strong MBE score as I never really prepared for essay writing much.

In both my attempts, I answered about 600 mbe questions each time (so ~1200 in total). In my second attempt, I spent more time studying to understand/internalize/memorize the law and I think that was the difference for me.

Wow, thanks. I really appreciate the insight. That was very helpful. I took barbri my first time so the lectures didnt really help me. I don’t even know if I want to spend my time on lecture videos. I do have CP cards and the conviser. Also, money is right for me spending money on Themis would just be too much. But like you said, I really need to internalize the law

[lexingtonhr]

Hey, I PM'ed you a sample. I hope it shows why that if you have a separate list of the exceptions to the exceptions to the exceptions, and they're not shown along with the fuller context -- the exceptions to the exception, the exceptions, and the rule itself -- it can get even more confusing!

I didn't use Adaptibar but I recall looking into it and finding mixed reviews. I think they include the official NCBE questions?

Regarding the foundational outlines to use, I'm not sure if it makes a ton of difference whether you use the Mini Conviser or JD Advising's outlines. I would, however, caution against buying yourself too many resources and drowning in them. (I am probably preaching to the choir about that.)

You’re right. I don’t want to overwhelm myself with so many guides and resources. I’m just trying to figure out what would work for me. I did receive your sample, it was helpful. I’m at work so I will give you a more detailed feedback but I like the way your info was organized. It’s really helpful.

[Neve]

Yes, I would recommend reviewing the Convisor again in addition to adding one or two supplements below. Don't rely on too many supplements. Focus on one or two. Keep your eye on the prize.

1) Emanuel's Strategies and Tactics for the MBE - available on Amazon. Fairly cheap book. Has good tips on approaching the MBE and contains lots of practice questions.

2) Adaptibar (http://www.adaptibar.com) - I didn't use this, but wish I had since it has received raving reviews. The only con to Adaptibar is the price.

3) Barmax MBE Questions (https://getbarmax.com/barmax-mbe-questions/ - supposedly "comparable" to Adaptibar). At only $249, it's a good price, but Adaptibar has tracking tools to individualize your MBE study and show your progress in a method that Barmax can't. But Barmax seems to be more economical than Adaptibar. You also need an iOS device to use it.

4) OPE from the MBE site to practice the most recent test questions: http://store.ncbex.org/all-online-practice-exams/. OPE it isn't the cheapest option, but these are real, recent MBE questions and not the souped up Barbri ones. Barbri questions are not representative of the modern MBE. I hear Barmax has all these OPEs included.

5) Critical Pass (http://criticalpass.refr.cc/ZT9TTKZ - referral link contains a discount code for $$ off) - Great flashcards for the MBE! You can't apply the law to an MBE question, if you don't know the law. I used Critical Pass for my bar study along with the CMR from Barbri and their simulated questions (although the Barbri questions are very different than actual MBE questions). I also used Emanuel's S&T during my study period, but not as much as I should have since it's a great resource.

[Law&coffee]

I know that there are other forums here that are posted for mbe help in particular. I’ve looked through them and I still feel like I don’t know what to do.
I’ve done adapti bar twice. It’s a good site but there’s a missing link that I’m just not grasping. I was even in the high 70s and still flunked the mbe portion.

Should I read barbri conviser to lay the foundation before attempting mbes? I’m just confused as to where to go from here. I need to raise my score exponentially.

Since you've already tried Adaptibar twice, it might be worth the money to hire a tutor from one of the bar companies to assist you on the MBE. A tutor might help you identify how to improve and yes, you do need to lay a foundation for the MBE by knowing the law that will be tested.

[SilvermanBarPrep]

As you know, the MBE tests very subtle distinctions and detailed BLL. It's a test of a gazillion fine-grained rules and how they apply to facts.

Take this rule: The Supreme Court will not exercise jurisdiction over a state court judgment if it is based on adequate and independent state law grounds. OK, what if the state ruling is based on both the state constitution/statute and the federal constitution/statute, but different provisions in each? What if it's based on identical provisions in both state and federal constitutions (like identical due process clauses)? What if the state ruling discusses both state and federal laws, but also says both laws were necessary to uphold the whole thing and that the state law wasn't enough by itself?

To improve your understanding of those fine BLLs and how they apply to fact patterns (including answer choices you need to weed out!), I wonder if perhaps you'd benefit from slowing down to really analyze why you got certain questions right/wrong (including past practice questions) and to integrate that question's BLL rule back into your broader understanding of the topic.

You also said you need to do a deeper dive into certain topics -- and you're probably right. For example, at the start of my study I knew I had only a fuzzy understanding of the distinctions between all the different types of jurisdiction (like general, specific, subject matter, personal, whhaaat???), so I devoted a big chunk of my time nailing that down cold using a variety of resources. (For that stuff, I thought this professor's website was especially useful: https://www.nathenson.org/.) Man I'm so glad I did.

For me, I felt like studying for the MBE was sort of like building a house and then decorating it; you need to build the skeleton, then put up the roof and room dividing walls, then paint the walls, then add the furniture, etc. If you're compiling what you got wrong into a separate document, maybe that's as if you're just collecting the small trinkets without knowing which room where each belongs. Integration of individual lessons was especially important for subjects like Evidence, which I thought was the most difficult topic because there were just so many rules. (I think Contracts actually has far more rules, but the tested questions felt more straightforward or easier to answer based on a vaguer understanding, i.e., my understanding of the rooms of my metaphorical house. With Evidence, I felt like I had to know the exception to the exception to the exception cold.)

How many total questions did you do, by the way? I think around 1,200 practice questions was when I started getting a feel for how questions are presented and recognizing question patterns. (My final tally was double that. I self-studied and would've done more if I hadn't ran out of time. I did so many because even though quality of study is super important, there are so many rules to remember that simple repetition -- each instance forcing me to revisit a subtopic -- inevitably helped.)

I also think using a variety of supplements is the better approach, although I thought the NCBE questions were the most helpful and most representative of test day questions.

Another thing I'd add is that you need to triage your time and focus on the most tested topics. I've seen tallies around the web, like JD Advising's: https://www.jdadvising.com/highly-tested-mbe-topics/. Yeah, test day you might see weird questions on zoning or whatever that weren't covered in any mainstream outline, but by definition it's hard to prepare for those surprise questions. You can, however, plan to encounter a whole lot of questions on hearsay, negligence, etc.

I'll write more if I think of other stuff. This board has helped me out a lot over the years and I want to give back to the community.

Just wanted to say that this was an excellent answer. It's rare for me to see such insight about the MBE.

Sean Silverman (Silverman Bar Exam Tutoring)