On the MPRE, Yet Again
This is one of those tests that going in, you have no idea what you need to do to obtain a passing score. Things don't improve much during the test. Nearly every question will feel like you're guessing within 2 or 3 plausible answers. But then you get your results and see that you passed by an obscene margin. Word to the wise, no more than one day's worth of studying, and even that's pushing it.
posted by Armen Adzhemyan at 3:18 PM
20 Comments:
I realize you do not know what raw score out of 50 you need to score an 86 (pass). But I would love if someone could give some educated guess about the raw score needed? THANKS!
No one can answer that question. Every test is normalized. So hypothetically, one test could be 25 for a passing score, another 20, another 30. I assume the MPRE doesn't have that much variance, but the point is, that information is not known until everyone takes the test.
fortunately, we don't have more than 1 day to study, at this point :)
If I play the John Ste*le lecture on loop as I sleep tonight, that should be enough to prepare me, right? Please say yes.
Armen, Armen, Armen . . .
You're killing me here.
Possibly, but you'll definitely know what "vernal equinox" means.
you mean the point in time when the sun's apparent northward path on the ecliptic crosses the celestial equator? (geography major, forgive me)
Gussy it up however you want Steel, what really matters is, will it work? Will your subliminal vocabulary/MPRE tapes mighty these people's ethics?
Isn't an 86 scaled like 25% percentile? Look to your left. Now look to your right. All three of you can pass while the guy behind you fails.
this semester, i will refund 100% of what the students paid me for that outline if they don't pass. seriously, though, i took the test twice recently because i wanted the outline to be based on my direct experience with the test. the best preparation is doing sample exam questions.
Shameless self-congratulation and self-promotion: This link is to a N&B post that reflects some of my proudest written work during my time at Boalt. I never thought it got the attention it deserved the first time around.
ibz, if that is your real name, well written indeed. it was particularly appreciated by celia, of head shop fame.
After taking the MPRE, I came away horrified for the profession. The fact that these idiots from CBA accredited schools can practice law is a disgrace to our careers. How do these people get jobs when it is not easy from Boalt? Imagine if med schools popped up all over the place, how terrible that would be to play Russian Roulette in the ER? This whole everyone can become a lawyer fantasy is disgraceful, and the CBA needs to step in to stop exploiting the fantasies of morons, for the sake of the morons, our society, and our profession.
After reading 1:26's comment, I came away rolling my eyes. Relax, Chief Justice Peepants. The point of testing is to weed out a lot of those folks.
Speaking of which, I, for one, can't wait to take the MPRE again in august.
1:26, three things. First, whether they are idiots has little to do with what school they attend. I totally agree with most of your comment, but I wouldn’t draw the distinction along school lines. It sounds elitist.
Second, you are correct that law schools and legal practice are filled with idiots who have no business representing others. Many of them went to elite schools, however, including Berkeley. You will learn as you enter the practice that a successful, ethical, proficient lawyer relies very little on the theories and policy stuff taught in law school. My experience at Berkeley actually handicapped my ability to represent clients, because I was not trained in the distinction between a legal problem and the clients’ problem (the first is usually only a tiny subset of the second) nor was I trained in how to actually get stuff done in litigation. I knew a whole lot about the impact Celotex had on civil rights plaintiffs, but very little about how to file a motion to compel.
Third, I strongly suspect that those CA accredited schools will be representing clients that most Boalties (including, maybe, you) wouldn't touch with a ten foot pole. That is something worth considering.
You are absolutely correct that the legal "profession" has a pretty shocking and incompetent underbelly. But don't go patting yourself on the shoulder just yet -- you probably have a ways to go, too.
1:35, if you feel that way, you passed. Congratulations!
-Class of 2007
I also do not feel so confident, probably due to not studying. The fact is these CBA folks could be doing solid janitorial, construction, or customer service work. The people who are weeded out waste valuable societal resources and destroy their own financial futures. The ones who do not get weeded out will never get legal jobs anyways. The whole thing is a wasteful scam selling a false dream and is a repugnant business concept.
suggestions about what parts of the outline and lecture need better coverage, and which need to be clarified, etc., are welcome at john - dot - steele - at - johnsteelelaw - dot - com
thanks.
Gotta disagree with you here, Armen. I failed the test once. (I got an 85, which is good everywhere except CA and UT, which require 86. It's like God punching me in the face.) I studied at least a day that time around, and I know quite a few other people whom I consider brilliant who failed at least once. I think it's a weird test. Some people get it without trying; others have to work a little harder. Of course, that's true of any test, but I think this one in particular throws people who are usually good test-takers (if I may be so bold) for a loop.
ibz, I still remember your practice questions, and the companion questions near the time of the July 2007 MBE. God they got me through some dark moments. Here's your shout, just belated by a few years.
Interesting thread. How does one come across a John Steele outline? I would like to pass the spring MPRE with flying colors. Thanks and keep up the good work people.
Post a Comment
<< Home