CA Bar Exam results

And add to this that the typical DL student represents a different demographic than a brick and mortar student (mid career, working day jobs, older, etc.), so comparing Stanford or Berkeley to Taft or Concord will always be unrealistic. I would also suggest Concord differs from the other correspondence schools because they are attempting a different model; basically trying to replicate the brick and mortar experience along ABA lines whereas the others are still in correspondence ("here's a reading list, and maybe, maybe some cassette tapes-- let us know when you want your exam") mode. As such, just like the real schools, Concord may drive along the C or C- student (with the accompanying bad study habits which translates to poor bar exam performance) to the bar exam whereas the demands and frustrations of correspondence study will drive away all but the most dedicated or brillant.

 

This is an argument against for-profit law schools, I suppose. They have a definite motive to hang onto students they should dismiss.

 

All schools are "for profit" to a certain degree, spoken from someone who gets nearly weekly solicitations from the various schools I have attended, profit and non-profit. A state school may claim to be nonprofit, but much of what typically constitutes "profits" from the law division rolls not to shareholders, but to the football team, building programs, etc. Even state schools have a financial motive in retaining students, whetehr it's up front or on the backside

As the economy goes, I think all schools will have to rely more on the "for profit" model, which isn't necessarily bad.

 

This is why I've never supported eliminating the Baby Bar.

However, what I consider a much larger problem is the policy of some ABA schools of not dismissing part-time students until the start of the 4th year. By this time many have invested over $50,000. It seems as if we get applications from these types of students all the time.

 

Say, Mr. Boyd, since you're here, I got asked a question that made me wonder.

Do DETC California law schools accept transfer credit from unaccredited law schools? Although the State Bar wouldn't have a problem with it, I thought DETC might have some sort of policy.

 

How so?

That might be true in the case of those schools only preparing a few test takers. California Institute of Law in Santa Barbara produced the best result in the state with a 100% pass rate, but only had two people taking the test. I think that's most likely an aberration.

It probably would help firm up the data to combine results from multiple years in order to increase the size of the N's. I don't have the numbers readily available, but my impression is that NW Cal, Oakbrook and Taft are consistently at the top of the DL law schools and repeatedly turn in good performances compared to that group.

True, but nobody's really done that.

I think that if you compare Taft, Oakbrook and NW Cal's 50% pass-rate with the rest of the DL laws schools and even with the CalBar residential schools, they at least superficially show credible results. I say "superficially", because one would have to know about things like mid-program attrition rates to better judge.

But if you look at the ABA schools, a 50% pass rate is pretty poor. You generally see that from the schools with lots of part-time night students, like Golden Gate.

I do think that if NWCal, Taft and Oakbrook (assuming one can get past its agenda) can turn in a performance roughly similar to a low-end ABA school and offer it affordably to students who are unable to attend a residential program, they are probably doing something right. They are successful within the parameters of their mission.