Argosy’s Law School

Discussion in 'General Distance Learning Discussions' started by Dr Rene, Jul 13, 2012.

Loading...
  1. Dr Rene

    Dr Rene Member

  2. CalDog

    CalDog New Member

    Western State's achievement is not impressive, and it is not a big deal. In fact, it is a good example of how law schools can put misleading spin on bar exam results.

    The Bar Exam is administered twice per year, in February and July. The vast majority of examinees, especially from the best schools, take the July exam. They graduate in May or June, and immediately take the Bar exam in July.

    Relatively few people take the Bar exam in February, and they are typically students who fell off of the normal academic track for some reason. So the Feb bar numbers involve only small numbers of non-typical students. Nobody in legal academia pays attention to the Feb bar results -- they only care about the July bar results.

    Western State's impressive-sounding 92% pass rate is for the February 2012 exam. It's a bit less impressive when you realize that it reflects a grand total of 13 first-time examinees.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 14, 2012
  3. CalDog

    CalDog New Member

    Actually, Cal Northern School of Law led all schools (including Western State) with an absolutely perfect pass rate of 100% in Feb 2012. But Cal Northern is only CalBar-approved. So Western State was tops for ABA-approved schools.

    Cal Northern's official 100% pass rate in Feb 2012 was based on exactly one student.
     
  4. NorCal

    NorCal Active Member

    It sounds good and draws new students to their university, it's typical to put a spin on a story that puts the university in the best light and attracts more $$$ . . . . I mean students.
     
  5. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    It's always good to get the rest of the story. But I have to say even with the explanation it's still a feather in their cap.
     
  6. I would have to disagree. Yes, a lot of re-takers take the bar in February but that is no reason to dismiss the fact that they scored well. It is advertisement but this is not really a good example of a school misleading students. The title was clear "...92% Passage for for First-Time Takers". Just because the composition of test takers are different, that doesn't negate the test itself. It's still the "Bar Exam".

    Even Stanford has students that took the February Bar. While they may be non-typical, they still are a Stanford graduate. Personally, I don't think the timing in which they graduate indicates to much of anything. If the school puts forth the same curriculum difficulty "year round" then it should (in theory) be all the same. I would give some weight to the opinion of those in legal academia but I wouldn't consider it "the end all be all". I would disagree that no one in legal academia pays attention to the Feb bar results, that's a pretty generalized statement.

    Their sample size is definitely small. Like you said though the vast majority of students take the July Bar so it should be expected to be small. Now in July they will probably come no where near 92%. I'm guessing they will be somewhere between 80-85%. Even still, that's well over the state average. Even last year their states were about the state average. They may not be the best school in California but they definitely aren't the worse.
     
  7. CalDog

    CalDog New Member

    They failed to meet that standard during the most recent previous July exam, in July 2011. At that time, they had 71 takers (more than 5 times the number in February 2012), with only a 77 % pass rate.
     
  8. CalDog

    CalDog New Member

    Number of Stanford graduates taking the July 2011 Bar exam: 108
    Number of Stanford graduates taking the Feb 2012 Bar exam: 4

    The Feb 2012 Stanford grads may or may not be as "typical" as the July 2012 grads, but in either case it should be quite obvious that there are a whole lot fewer of them. Can we draw statistically significant conclusions from a sample size of 4 ? If not, then why should we care about these results?

    Sorry, but it's true.

    Bar pass rates are an important component of every law school ranking system, so they are of great interest in legal academia. For ranking purposes, the overall annual pass rates (i.e. February + July results) are used. But since the July numbers are large, the final result is always close to the July result. Since the Feb numbers are small, the final result may or may not be close to the Feb number. In other words, the July number is a good estimate of the final result, but the Feb number may not be.

    For example:

    Western State had 55/71 passing in July 2011. That's a pass rate of 77.5%.
    Western State had 12/13 passing in Feb 2012. That's a pass rate of 92.3%.

    We can sum these to get the total bar pass results for the 2011-2012 academic year.
    The total is 67/84 in 2011-2012, which is 79.8%.

    Notice that 79.8% (the final number) is pretty close to 77.5% (the July number), but is much further from 92.3% (the February number).
    That's just how the math works.

    You don't get a feather if you take the lead in the first inning. Only the final score matters.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 15, 2012
  9. I stated that "even last year they were above the state average". I saw those scores. Both of their scores for that year were above the state average. I said "I'm guessing". 77% isn't to far from 80%. It wouldn't be to much a leap of faith to say that they could improve by 3%. I'm not sure what you have against them but give them a break. They are actually above the state average for the past three exams. There are a few other schools in California that do well worse than them when it comes to the bar exam.
     
  10. I think your missing a big part of what I stated. I did in fact state that there is no way they repeat that same 92%. Even still, that doesn't negate that this was an impressive accomplishment. This is a "for-profit" school that is statistically doing a decent job. For as much flack as they get I think we have to at least acknowledge when they are doing well.

    No, it's not true. Bar passage rates are definitely not an important component of law school rankings. US News (the big dog when it comes to rankings) has it weighted by (.02). That's the second lowest component. The only thing that is weighted less is "Library Resources". That's a whole different story for another day though because personally I think it should be an important component.

    Even if I used your math of 79.8%...that's still a good number. That would be .2% off of what I stated they could make in this up coming bar exam. An 80% would put them right next to UC-Hastings School of Law. I would agree that the Feb Bar is a better estimate of the statistics. That's simply because it's a large sampling size. That still doesn't mean the Feb Bar should be easily dismissed.

    It's definitely a feather in the cap.
     
  11. CalDog

    CalDog New Member

    Pepperdine University, which had the highest pass rate on the Feb 2011 Bar, apparently does not agree with you. They had a 92% pass rate (11/12), leading all ABA bar schools (including Western State).

    Yet Pepperdine didn't consider this newsworthy. No press release was issued.
     
  12. CalDog

    CalDog New Member

    I will acknowledge that Western State had a decent overall California pass rate last year -- although bragging about their pass rates based on 13 examinees in Feb 2012 is bogus.

    However, Western State doesn't get a lot of respect for that pass rate -- because they also have a reputation for high attrition. In other words, they admit a lot of weak students, take their tuition dollars for a year or two, and then dump them before they even have a chance to take the Bar exam. For example, the official ABA/LSAC stats for Western State show that they lose one-third of their matriculated students after the first year alone.

    If you compare the ABA stats, you will see that Stanford and Western State both matriculate about 185 students per year. Yet Stanford had 160 first-time bar examinees, while Western State only had 105. In fact, if you look at the July 2011 California bar exam stats, you will see that Western State had fewer first-time takers than any other ABA-approved school in the state.

    You are assuming that Western State is doing a "decent job" for their students, because Western State grads have reasonably good bar pass rates. But what about the chances of reaching the Bar exam after enrollment? When it comes to that statistic, Western State doesn't do a "decent job"; on the contrary, they would rank near the bottom of California law schools.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 15, 2012
  13. Pepperdine University and Western State are different schools. Just because they chose not to doesn't mean it isn't worth noting. Pepperdine normally holds itss weight in Bar exam stats. If a company that normally makes 60 million in profit has a quarter where they make 120 million...chances are they are going to make that known. It happens all the time in the business world. I don't think people consider it misleading.
     
  14. CalDog

    CalDog New Member

    Here are the 2012 first-year attrition rates (in %) for ABA-approved law schools in California. Western State ranks dead last. All numbers from the official ABA/LSAC guide to law schools.

    UC Berkeley 0.7
    USC 0.9
    Stanford 1.1
    UC Hastings 2.6
    Univ of Pacific 3.6
    UCLA 5.3
    U San Diego 7.1
    Chapman 7.7
    UC Davis 7.9
    Pepperdine 9.1
    Southwestern 9.3
    U San Francisco 12.7
    Loyola 13.8
    Santa Clara 16.3
    California Western 18.8
    Golden Gate 20.6
    Thomas Jefferson 31.4
    Whittier 34.3
    Western State 39.8

    I indicated below that Western State loses one-third (33.3%) of their students after the first year. That was incorrect, because I was citing the 2011 LSAC data. The 2012 data indicate that the current figure is 39.8%. The number would rise further if you included attrition after the first year.

    So Western State maintains a reasonable bar pass rate -- unfortunately, the catch is that a great many of their students will never even get the opportunity to take the bar exam. This failure is real, but it is not reflected in the bar exam statistics.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 15, 2012
  15. I think we are changing things up now. We have gone to the exact opposite side of the process. The Bar exam is the "culmination ceremony". Attrition rates come into play long before that. My statement was based on the Bar results. I would say that they are doing a "decent job" because of the end result.

    Having a higher attrition rate isn't really a bad thing. That shows that they are enforcing "standards" of some sort. It's really up to students whether they choose to attend the school or not. I can't fault a school for allowing someone to enter but not to exit, if they don't meet the graduation requirements.
     
  16. FJD

    FJD Member

    Schools like Western State are more liberal on admission standards because they have to be in order to attract students. If they were to become more selective, all of a sudden they're competing for students with schools with stronger reputations, like the UC campuses and other more established schools. Instead, they let a lot of people in, knowing that many won't make the cut. The Stanfords and UCs of the world do their cutting up front, so almost everyone they let in finishes. In some ways this is egalitarian, giving a chance to some who don't gain admission to more selective schools. On the other hand, these schools are guilty of taking on students they know can't hack the drill.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 16, 2012
  17. CalDog

    CalDog New Member

    No one can fault a school for weeding out poorly qualified students. However, people can (and do) fault schools that consistently recruit and admit poorly qualified applicants.

    Western State would get more respect if it weeded out the weak students before they enrolled, rather than after they've paid $37,284 for the first year of tuition.
     
  18. CalDog

    CalDog New Member

    No one can fault a school for weeding out poorly qualified students. However, people can (and do) fault schools that consistently recruit and admit poorly qualified applicants.

    Western State would get more respect if it weeded out the weak students before they enrolled, rather than after they've paid $37,284 for the first year of tuition.
     
  19. We will just have to agree to disagree. Respect is very subjective. If you are going to fault them on selectivity then you would win that battle hands down. Ultimately, I feel it's the students choice. Whether they choose to go Western State or any other school rests solely upon the student. Either way, there's no denying that they actually do a pretty decent job on the tail end. They send their students to the Bar Exam prepared. Recently, they have consistently been above the state average for bar passage. I would rather judge them as a whole and not on just one particular aspect.
     

Share This Page