Baby Bar Results for 2000

The California State Bar Committee gave me a copy of the results by school of the Baby Bar Examinations given in 2000. Now I'm more confused than ever on the best option.

June, 2000 (First Timers)
Abe Lincoln 2/24 (8.3%)
British American 5/17 (29.4%)
Concord 8/27 (29.6%)
Northwestern Cal 3/16 (18.7%)
Oakbrook 12/20 (60.0%)
Saratoga 1/5 (20.0%)
Taft 9/17 (52.9%)


October, 2000 (First Timers)
Abe Lincoln 10/39 (25.6%)
British American 2/17 (11.8%)
Concord 8/41 (19.5%)
Northwestern Cal 6/11 (54.5%)
Oakbrook 19/24 (79.2%)
Saratoga 0/6 (0.00%)
Taft 8/20 (40.0%)

Combined 2000 (First Timers)

Abe Lincoln 12/63 (19.0%)
British American 7/34 (20.6%)
Concord 16/68 (23.5%)
Northwestern Cal 9/27 (33.3%)
Oakbrook 31/44 (70.4%)
Saratoga 1/11 (9.0%)
Taft 17/37 (45.9%)

Oakbrook with its combination seminar/distance study is still the standout. I would go with Oakbrook but for the seminar and their homo-phobic reputation. Any comments from Oakbrook students? Even if they don't preach their beliefs I fear I might by typecast much in the way a graduate of Bob Jones University might be viewed.

Concord is nearly over twice as expensive as Oakbrook but their pass rates continue to fall. I would like to hear comments from any Concord students.

I asked the person at the State Bar Committee her recommendation. She said she is not allowed to make recommendations but I should look at pass rates and the Bar standings of the various Deans. According to the Bar webpage, the Deans of both Saratoga and British American resigned as attorneys with charges pending. I was told this means they resigned rather than appear at a hearing which could result in disbarment. Does anyone know what this is all about?

 

It really appears as if the only one worth the money is Oak Brook. Don't know what they do to get their students to pass, but whatever it is, it works.

If I were in the market for a law degree, I wouldn't even think about going DL. Most of the schools are just doing a very poor job of preparing students for the baby bar and the regular bar.


Tom Nixon

 

Thanks so much for securing and posting those numbers, Randy.

The really big news here, I think, is the really poor performance of Concord. With the Washington Post billions and the alleged superior test-prep skills of Kaplan behind it, it is really a dismal performance.

Oak Brook (for those who support or can ignore their strong evangelical Christian stance) and Taft (for everyone else) seem to be the clear choices.

Still, the curriculum all the schools is nearly identical, being mandated by the state bar, and all requiring 864 hours of study a year. So the difference lie either on the support and prep skills and/or on the kinds of people who choose a given school. The people who passed the baby bar while enrolled at Saratoga would probably have passed while enrolled at Oak Brook, and vice versa.

British-American and Saratoga are the two schools that have promoted the JD-LL.M. parlay, which, they suggest, could lead to taking the bar in most states. But at this rate, they may have so few, if any, passers of the final Bar, we may never know.

John Bear

 

John, It is possible that Oak Brook's emphasis and orientation towards religion and their more rigorous screening process, may be a significant factor in the quality and level of students they attract. In turn, this school's clear message of their expectations for hard work and rigor may also promote a group cohesiveness and mindset that may be a critical factor in the successful results this school has achieved.

This would definitely be an interesting study for a paper.

 

I wonder if these results are distorted by differing drop-out/failure rates at the various schools. Oakbrook looks good in the stats, but it may select internally before students hit the baby bar.

I suspect that many of these distance law schools attract a kind of student that equates distance education with easy education. Oakbrook may flunk that kind of student out before they hit the baby bar, while some of the others let them hang around (paying tuition) and try their luck.

So if you combine dropout rates and baby bar failure rates, the gap between schools might narrow a bit. Which would only mean that the percentage of original entrants that pass might be even lower than these stats suggest. But this does suggest that Oakbrook's grading standards are a lot higher than the norm.

As several others have remarked, the really surprising (and disappointing) thing here is the poor performance of Concord.

 

Does anybody know that how many students are studying with Taft right now? I think the size of the student body may have to be an aspect that a learner has to check before he selects a school. Everybody wants his school can stand there forever. No one wants to enroll in the ill-fated Masters Institute in San Jose, right?

------------------
Jonathan Liu
http://www.geocities.com/liu_jonathan/distance.html

 

In my opinion, Bill may be onto something. Before any conclusions can be made, one must look at the qualifications of the students who are attending non-ABA accredited law schools. While a certain percentage of students likley just missed the GPA/LSAT cut-off for a fourth tier law school and maybe some others who could have gotten into an accredited law school but for whatever reason decided to attend law school locally or via the internet, most of the students at such schools, dare I say, probably should not be in law school to begin with.

I would predict that if it were possible to compare the non-ABA accredited law school students who have similar acdemic profiles as those in fourth tier (but accredited)law schools, the pass rate on the Baby Bar for those, and only those students, would be high. In addition, I would predict that the pass rate on the regular Bar exam would be similar to the fourth tier students.

Are the statistics ever broken down in such a manner?

Jeffrey

 

A few people have mentioned to me that the "JD-LL.M. parlay" has been promoted to them by a correspondence law school.

Does anyone know of someone who has actually *done* this?



------------------
Kristin Evenson Hirst
DistanceLearn.About.com

 

The ABA law school I teach at has been stuck in that fourth tier of the U.S. News rankings for most of the years in which the rankings have been released. I can attest that at the low end of a given entering class, there are some very marginal students who it could be argued shouldn't be in law school. Some manage to way exceed those predictors, but a good number barely hang on to finish, and many others don't make it through.

At the high end of the class you get a mix of full-time day students who just missed out at higher-ranked schools but who want to practice in the area, as well as a group of evening students who could have had their choice of schools but who decided to pursue their J.D. in a night program.

Based on those observations, it's not too hard to conclude that a truly quality DL law program, assuming its graduates would be eligible for a state bar, would be a real threat to regionally-oriented schools like mine. Unfortunately from the standpoint of consumer choice (and, concededly, fortunately for schools like mine), the most well-funded and well-publicized option, Concord, appears to be floundering. I don't know if there's an easy explanation for that -- the quality of students, the design of the program, and the inherent difficulties of pursuing a law degree by DL may all have an effect.

There is plenty that is wrong about traditional legal education. But I do think that the process of learning to engage in legal analysis and write effectively in this mode is best done in an interactive, intensive, and residential setting, which helps to show why learning the law via DL is such a tough challenge for even the smartest of individuals. And much of the reading, let's face it, is dense, dull, tough sledding, which means that it's very helpful to have classmates around to prod you and bring the material to life through in class and out of class discussions.

I think the real potential for DL in this field is the LL.M. degree, where students already know how to "think like a lawyer" and the objective is more to convey an understanding of substantive law. To me it's a largely untapped market, but few American law schools appear willing to even consider it.

 

Kristin asks, re the JD->LL.M "parlay: Does anyone know of someone who has actually *done* this?

I believe the only schools that have advertised this are British-American and Saratoga. Since each had its first Baby Bar passers in October 1999 (two for Saratoga, one for B-A), that suggests that if these three folks pass the final bar in October 2002 or after, then we may learn if the first step of the parlay works: getting into an ABA LL.M. program. Then we will need to wait another year or two to see if their LL.M. will permit them to take the bar in their home state.

So if those three are not Californians to begin with, and if one or more passes the final bar, and if that one or more goes on to an LL.M. and succeeds and has a wish to take the bar in another state . . . then we will have some information about at least one other state.

Breath. Do not hold.

John Bear

 

Dr. Bear should know somebody who got his J.D. from Taft and passed California bar. Then he got his LLM from SMU in Dallas. He was appealing to take Texas bar exam over one year ago. Any progress now?



------------------
Jonathan Liu
http://www.geocities.com/liu_jonathan/distance.html

 

I believe Regent University is one of the ABA accredited law schools that is made mention of in relation to this strategy. However, although their website says that it just takes a JD from a US law school to get into their LLM program, I just got their new catalogue, and it specifically says now that the JD must be from an ABA accredited school.

I wonder if the other schools that offer LLM programs now have similar restrictions. If so, the strategy is moot.

Scott

 

Scott, most ABA law schools that offer LL.M.s restrict admission to holders of J.D.s from ABA law schools or, in some cases, will also consider attorneys from non-ABA schools who have been admitted to a state bar and practicing for a given period of time. I believe this requirement has been waived at times for holders of very prestigious foreign law degrees, e.g., Oxford or Cambridge.