California's Bar Exam Evaluated Again, This Time on Job Skills
AccessLex Institute has given the state bar $515,000 to look at how California lawyers do their jobs and how the bar exam tests those skills.
September 13, 2018 at 04:57 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The Recorder
A major new study by the State Bar of California seeks to determine the skills and competencies the state's lawyers need to do their jobs and how those traits can be tested on the bar exam.
The results of the study, dubbed the California Attorney Job Analysis Study, will inform further research and considerations of the state's closely watched bar exam. The exam has been under intense scrutiny in recent years as pass rates plummeted to an all-time low of 27.3 percent in February, fueling criticism that the state's notoriously high cut score should be lowered. (California has the second-highest cut score in the country at 144. Only Delaware has a higher cut score, at 145.)
The job analysis is funded through a $515,000 grant from AccessLex Institute, a nonprofit organization that advocates for access to legal education and law school affordability. The latest study will offer a foundation to look at not only the exam's cut score but also the content and format of the all-important licensing exam.
“AccessLex Institute strongly believes in the power and application of quality data to best ensure that legal education and admissions to the bar evolve to meet the needs of aspiring lawyers and the world in which they will practice,” said President Christopher Chapman. “We applaud the State Bar of California for showing the courage to comprehensively evaluate its current licensing exam and follow the data to its logical end, whatever that may be.”
The California Bar last year commissioned a separate study of the bar exam with an eye to the cut score. That July 2017 report concluded that 144 is an appropriate cut score to ensure new lawyer competency, but that it could be lowered to 141 without compromising the consumer protection function of the exam. The state's law school deans joined the call to lower the cut score, but the California Supreme Court—which has the final say—in October opted against changing the cut score.
“Last year, the State Bar conducted a groundbreaking series of studies into the California Bar Exam, and the upcoming Job Analysis Study is a critical next step,” said state bar executive director Leah Wilson. “Together this body of research will help us better determine whether adjustments may be needed on the content or other aspects of the California Bar Exam.”
The state bar plans to use the results of the job analysis to look at how what is tested on the bar exam correlates to the current and changing legal practices, and help develop a definition of minimum attorney competency. It will also help the bar determine what subjects should be tested on the exam. The results of the study are expected in the summer of 2019.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
'Substantive Deficiencies': Judge Grants Big Law Motion Dismissing Ivy League Price-Fixing Claims
3 minute read
Class Action Lawsuit Targets 40 Private Colleges and Universities Over Alleged Price-Fixing
3 minute read
Ex-St. Thomas Univ. Law Professor Sues School Over Firing, Alleging Defamation
4 minute read
Penn Law Professor Amy Wax to Be Suspended With Half-Pay for Discriminatory Speech
4 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Dechert partners Andrew J. Levander, Angela M. Liu and Neil A. Steiner have stepped in to defend Arbor Realty Trust and certain executives in a pending securities class action. The complaint, filed July 31 in New York Eastern District Court by Levi & Korsinsky, contends that the defendants concealed a 'toxic' mobile home portfolio, vastly overstated collateral in regards to the company's loans and failed to disclose an investigation of the company by the FBI. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Pamela K. Chen, is 1:24-cv-05347, Martin v. Arbor Realty Trust, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Arthur G. Jakoby, Ryan Feeney and Maxim M.L. Nowak from Herrick Feinstein have stepped in to defend Charles Dilluvio and Seacor Capital in a pending securities lawsuit. The complaint, filed Sept. 30 in New York Southern District Court by the Securities and Exchange Commission, accuses the defendants of using consulting agreements, attorney opinion letters and other mechanisms to skirt regulations limiting stock sales by affiliate companies and allowing the defendants to unlawfully profit from sales of Enzolytics stock. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Andrew L. Carter Jr., is 1:24-cv-07362, Securities and Exchange Commission v. Zhabilov et al.
Who Got The Work
Clark Hill members Vincent Roskovensky and Kevin B. Watson have entered appearances for Architectural Steel and Associated Products in a pending environmental lawsuit. The complaint, filed Aug. 27 in Pennsylvania Eastern District Court by Brodsky & Smith on behalf of Hung Trinh, accuses the defendant of discharging polluted stormwater from its steel facility without a permit in violation of the Clean Water Act. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Gerald J. Pappert, is 2:24-cv-04490, Trinh v. Architectural Steel And Associated Products, Inc.
Who Got The Work
Michael R. Yellin of Cole Schotz has entered an appearance for S2 d/b/a the Shoe Surgeon, Dominic Chambrone a/k/a Dominic Ciambrone and other defendants in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The case, filed July 15 in New York Southern District Court by DLA Piper on behalf of Nike, seeks to enjoin Ciambrone and the other defendants in their attempts to build an 'entire multifaceted' retail empire through their unauthorized use of Nike’s trademark rights. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald, is 1:24-cv-05307, Nike Inc. v. S2, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Sullivan & Cromwell partner Adam S. Paris has entered an appearance for Orthofix Medical in a pending securities class action arising from a proposed acquisition of SeaSpine by Orthofix. The suit, filed Sept. 6 in California Southern District Court, by Girard Sharp and the Hall Firm, contends that the offering materials and related oral communications contained untrue statements of material fact. According to the complaint, the defendants made a series of misrepresentations about Orthofix’s disclosure controls and internal controls over financial reporting and ethical compliance. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Linda Lopez, is 3:24-cv-01593, O'Hara v. Orthofix Medical Inc. et al.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
