What's the Bar Exam Fuss?

Call me an old-fogey, a traditionalist, a self-serving creep. Call me anything you like, but count me in favor of the bar examination and of high standards for admission to the bar.

New York lawyers are up in arms about a proposal to require a higher score to pass the bar exam. A committee has been formed by the New York State Bar Association to assess the relevance of the exam.

The relevance of the bar exam?

I explain it to my clients this way: I may not be the smartest person you ever met, but I have been deemed minimally competent to listen to a stranger's tale of woe, spot the issue and then know where to look for answers. I know this because I passed the bar exam.

I had to spend time learning about things I rarely ever use: trusts and estates, wills, contracts. I covered a broad spectrum of chaos and learned the leading doctrines and theories that define the disputes most common to a lawyer's practice.

The New York State Bar Association wants to know why things such as oral information processing and courtroom prowess aren't tested for as well. Does the association really think choreography and acting should be tested? Do we want "My Cousin Vinnie" made part of a bar review course? Most lawyers never see the inside of courtroom, anyhow.

We are licensed to perform a service. That service is to help strangers cope with life's rough edges. Eliminating an exam that assures minimal competence in recognizing legal doctrine in messy facts is far from a luxury. And requiring a better educated bar ought to be embraced, and not fought.

Shame on the New York State Bar Association.

Comments

[Jim]

Spoken like a true already-licensed lawyer. Why not let market forces regulate beyond the standard already set? It's a 15-point hike on an already hard test, not doing away with the exam.

[Norm Pattis]

I suppose. But I don't have difficulty getting clients. Not at all afraid of competition.

[David Giacalone]

Norm, do you have a link to any relevant articles or press releases, so I can follow-up on this issue? I seem to remember there was a proposal last year to make a 2-point change for passing the exam.

[Mike]

David, I think this is the article Norm referenced - "Higher Score to Pass N.Y. Bar Brings Fight"

[David Giacalone]

Thanks, Mike. My 2-point-increase recollection was really "less than 2% increase [actually, 1.5%], phased in over three years." I did a bit of Googling and here is the Press release from the NY Board of Law Examiners in Sept. 2004, announcing the final decision:

On September 24, 2004 the Board of Law Examiners issued the following notice:

The Board of Law Examiners announced today that the passing score on the New York State bar examination will be increased from the current passing score of 660 to 675 on a scale of 1000. The increase will be phased in over a three year period, with the score required to pass the examination being increased five points each year, starting with the July 2005 administration of the examination. The new passing score will be fully implemented with the July 2007 examination.

The Board first proposed this increase in 2002, following a study of the current passing score that involved the graders of the bar examination and panels of practicing attorneys, judges and law professors. The study commissioned by the Board concluded that the current passing score, which was set in 1979, is not an accurate reflection of present day norms of minimum competence to practice law.

The Board thereafter held public hearings and received comment on the proposal. After further study and extended deliberations, the Board determined to proceed with the increase it is announcing today.

The Board extended its appreciation to those who commented and testified regarding the proposal. After a thorough review of the issues and interests involved, the Board concluded that the increase was appropriate to maintain the standards of competence of New York lawyers and to fulfill the public protection function of the bar examination.

The Board expressed the hope that the law schools and the Board can work together to assist those preparing to take the bar examination to meet the increased passing score.

The Board anticipates that candidates for admission to the bar will readily adjust to this modest increase in the passing standard, and, on passing the bar examination, will be well-prepared to meet the challenges of the practice of law and the needs of the public they will serve.

Click here for links to the Final Report of the New York State Board of Law Examiners Regarding the Passing Standard on the New York State Bar Examination, December 2004, and appendices (with all written comments). Here's a link for the NYSBA Statement to BOLE on the Law Exam Passing Standard .

I don't believe that the consumers/clients who are most likely to be served by lawyers who are right on the border of passing the Exam can readily count on "market forces" to protect them. Experts need to devise tests that adequately measure an acceptable level of competence.

[markm]

Jim: Any ideas on how an ordinary consumer can judge the ability of a lawyer?

[Norm Pattis]

David:

Mike did find the correct link.

Norm

[mythago]

Most lawyers never see the inside of courtroom, anyhow.

Now, c'mon. You can make this argument for anybody's least-favorite part of the bar exam: Most lawyers will never need to figure out whether a stock sale violates SEC rules, most lawyers will never need to handle a fee simple determinable...

I think you really mean "most lawyers never go to trial," which I suppose is true for some values of "most." Are there really so many lawyers who never have to appear on a motion, ex parte application or stipulation.

[Norm Pattis]

I suspect there are, but I am unaware of quanititative data, so I may well be wrong.