Download Full Volume - UDC Law Review

More documents

Recommendations

Info

YES WE CAN, PASS THE BAR. 11In response, the ABA's Section on Legal Education relaxed its rules to allow forbar preparation programs as part of law school curricula. 8 In 2003, the School ofLaw faculty and administration undertook a major initiative with the BSPP toincrease bar passage rates. Over the past seven years, the School of Law hasoffered some form of bar scholarship for students enrolled in the bar skills program.9 In 2007, the School of Law offered its first "for credit" bar skills class,Essay Writing for the Bar, which focused on intensified essay writing and analyticalskills.1O This study concludes that these efforts have been transformative asindicated by the gradual and steady increase in recent bar passage rates.UDC-DCSL has improved its bar pass rate over the past five years in D.C. andalso in the bordering states of Maryland and Virginia. In July 2008, for the graduatingclass of 2008, of fifty-eight first time takers, forty-eight passed a bar examinationfor a first time rate of 82.75%, a substantial increase. I1 For takers of theMaryland bar, the bar pass rate rose to 92% in 2008. 12 In the District, seven outof seven students passed the bar exam, for a 1000/0 passage rate. Virginia's firsttime rate was 670/0. Cumulatively, the class of 2008 had an 82% first time rate inMD, D.C. and V A.I3 In comparison, in 2003, the overall UDC-DCSL passagerate was 36%. The bar passage rate since the 2004 class has shown a consistentincrease. In 2008, the BPTF recommended a pilot program aimed at providingbar support for repeat bar takers. 14This study provides an empirical analysis of the School of Law's bar passagedata. Many law schools have created bar support programs - in addition to academicsupport programs - to improve their bar passage rates. Few studies, however,have assessed their program's using a statistical analysis. 1s One recent study8 American Bar Association, www.abanet.orgllegaled/standards/standards.html(last visitedNov. 22, 2010).9 See infra Part I, D. The bar scholarship was conditioned on participation in the workshops andenrollment in the Remedies course. The Bar Passage Task Force adopted this bar scholarship during aperiod in which the school had a low bar pass rate. It was also designed to help defray students'expenses for the bar.10 See infra Part II.11 Internal records of UDC-DCSL (on file with the author). See also Action letter of the ABAto the School of Law (Oct. 14,2009). This was the bar passage data reported to the ABA at that time.The actual first time pass rate has since declined to 78% for the 2008 class but the overall pass ratefor the class of 2008 has increased to 87%. Tracking of data is not an easy endeavor since there is nouniform clearinghouse for collection of bar data and states are not required to send data to lawschools. The numbers may change as the law school learns of more takers and passers. This numberalso includes repeat takers of the exam. The new rules allow for counting of subsequent takers for thebar passage rate but not the first time rate. See ABA Standards for Approval of Law Schools, 2009-2010.12 For Maryland, 25 out of 28 UDC-DCSL students passed the bar exam on the first attempt.13 See supra note 4. Bar results on file with the UDC-DCSL Academic Dean.14 Minutes of UDC-DCSL Faculty Meeting, May 2008 (on file with the author).15 See Linda Jellum & Emmeline Paulette Reeves, Cool Dala on a Hot Issue: Empirical EvidenceThai Law School Bar Support Program Enhances Bar Performance, 5 NEV. L.1. 646 (2008).
12 UNIVEI{SITY OF HIE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA LAW REVIEWof the University of Richmond's bar support program found that its bar programhad improved the University of Richmond's bar passage rate and the increase inpassage was statistically significant. 16 The study also found that the program hada dramatic improvement for those students who were in the bottom half of thegraduating class. 17 The study found an 8.5% improvement in the bar passage ratefor students as a whole after the bar program was implemented. IsThe Richmond study provides the empirical model for our review, althoughsome of the programmatic aspects are different. 19 The UDC-DCSL study of theimprovement in bar passage rates is the first to use a logistical regression analysisfor all variables. Like the Richmond study, our results reveal that our bar supportprograms have had a statistically significant impact on bar passage programs. Forthe entire study period, there was a 14.7% difference between bar passage rateson the first attempt (first time takers) for those who participated in the bar reviewclass versus those who did not participate. 2oThe results of the logistical regression analysis indicate that law schools' barpreparation programs can contribute significantly to improvement in the overallbar passage rate. This paper describes the steps taken at UDC-DCSL to improveits bar passage rate and provides an analysis of the factors which have proven tobe effective in reaching that goal.I. THE CHALLENGE AND TRANSFORMATIVE CHANGEA. The ABA's Mandate for Law Students Bar PassageToday, UDC-DCSL is in full compliance with ABA Standard 301-6, asadopted by the ABA House of Delegates?1 In 2009, 78.3% of students who grad-16 Id. at 646.17 Id. at n.17.18 Id. at 65819 The Richmond Supplemental Bar Program is available to third year students and provides anintensive substantive review of six subjects, focusing on test taking skills, multiple choice questions,and essay writing. The program is a three credit class. It also offers a tutoring program. The UDCDCSL bar skills class is a two-credit course focusing on intensive essay writing skills. There are numeroushomework exercises with written graded feedback. There is also a three day multi-stateworkshop.20 See infra Part VI.21 American Bar Association, 20/0-201 J Standards and Rules of Procedure for Approvalof Law Schools, app. 3: Guidance on Interpretation 301-06, available at www.abanet.orgllegaled/standards/standards.html. The ABA adopted new rules on actual bar passage requirements after alengthy and contentious process. The Council of the Section on Legal Education (Council) issued areport on a new interpretation of 301-6 for notice and comment. After a substantial amount of deliberationand public comment from various groups inside and outside the field of legal education, theCouncil adopted new rules to guide accreditation committees for determining compliance with 301-6(A). The standards established several alternatives for showing compliance as it relates to bar passage.For students who graduated within the past five calendar years either: (a) 75% or more of thesegraduates who sat for the bar passed a bar examination; or (b) in at least three of these calendar
Page 2: University of the District of Colum
Page 6 and 7: University of the District of Colum
Page 8 and 9: 2 UNIVERSITY OF TilE DISTRWr OF COL
Page 10 and 11: 4 UNIVERSITY OF TilE DISTRICr OF CO
Page 12 and 13: 6 UNIVERSITY OF TilE DISTIUcr OF CO
Page 14 and 15: YES WE CAN, PASS THE BAR. UNIVERSIT
Page 18 and 19: YES WE CAN, PASS THE BAR. 13uated f
Page 20 and 21: YES WE CAN. PASS THE BAR.The Univer
Page 22 and 23: YES WE CAN, PASS THE BAR. 17C. Iden
Page 24 and 25: YES WE CAN, PASS THE BAR. 19The Pro
Page 26 and 27: YES WE CAN, PASS THE BAR. 21Accordi
Page 28 and 29: YES WE CAN, PASS THE BAR. 23calcula
Page 30 and 31: YES WE CAN, PASS THE BAR. 25The Ame
Page 32 and 33: YES WE CAN, PASS THE BAR.ing the su
Page 34 and 35: YES WE CAN, PASS THE BAR. 29writing
Page 36 and 37: YES WE CAN, PASS THE BAR. 31tion, s
Page 38 and 39: YES WE CAN, PASS THE BAR. 33activit
Page 40 and 41: YES WE CAN, PASS THE BAR.35Table 2B
Page 42 and 43: YES WE CAN, PASS THE BAR.37Table 5B
Page 44 and 45: YES WE CAN, PASS THE BAR. 39(X 2 =4
Page 46 and 47: YES WE CAN, PASS THE BAR.41ApPENDIX
Page 48 and 49: 44 UNIVERSITY OF TilE DISTRICT OF C
Page 50 and 51: 46 UNIVERSITY OF TilE DISTRICr OF C
Page 52 and 53: 48 UNIVEI~SITY OF TilE DISTRICT OF
Page 54 and 55: 50 UNIVm~SITY OF TilE DISTRICr (W C
Page 56 and 57: 52 UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTIUCr OF CO
Page 58 and 59: 54 UNIVERSITY OF TilE DISTRICI' OF
Page 60 and 61: 56 UNIVERSITY OF TIlE DISTRICT OF C
Page 62 and 63: 58 UNIVEI~SITY OF TilE DISTRICr OF
Page 64 and 65: 60 UNIVERSITY OF TilE DISTRICT OF C
Page 66 and 67:
62 UNIVERSITY OF TilE DISTRICT OF C
Page 68 and 69:
64 UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRICT OF CO
Page 70 and 71:
66 UNIVERSITY OF TilE DISTRICI' OF
Page 72 and 73:
68 UNIVERSITY OF TilE DISTRICr OF C
Page 74 and 75:
70 UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRICr OF CO
Page 76 and 77:
72 UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRICT OF CO
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
76 UNIVERSITY OF TIlE DISTRICr OF C
Page 82 and 83:
78 UNIVERSITY OF TilE DISTRICI" OF
Page 84 and 85:
80 UNIVERSUY OF TIlE DISTRICT OF CO
Page 86 and 87:
82 UNIVERsrrv OF TilE DISTRICT OF C
Page 88 and 89:
84 UNIVERSITY OF TIlE DISTRICT OF C
Page 90 and 91:
86 UNIVEHSITY OF TIlE DISTHICr OF C
Page 92 and 93:
88 UNIVERSITY OF TIlE Disnucl' OF C
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
92 UNIVERSITY OF TIlE DIS"IlUcr OF
Page 98 and 99:
94 UNIVERSITY OF TIlE DISTRICr OF C
Page 100 and 101:
96 UNIVERSITY OF TI IE DISTRICr OF
Page 102 and 103:
98 UNIVERSITY OF TilE DISTRICr OF C
Page 104 and 105:
100 UNIVERSITY OF TIlE DISTRICr OF
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
104 UNIVERSITY OF TilE DISTRICr OF
Page 110 and 111:
106 UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTIUCr OF C
Page 112 and 113:
108 UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRICr OF C
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
112 UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRICT OF C
Page 118 and 119:
A DISCUSSION ON THE DISTRICT OF COL
Page 120 and 121:
IGNORING THE LAW FOR EXPEDIENCY'S S
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
134 UNIVEI{SITY OF TilE DISTRICT OF
Page 138 and 139:
136 UNIVEI~SITY OF TIlE DISTRICT OF
Page 140 and 141:
138 UNIVERSITY OF TilE DISTRICT OF
Page 142 and 143:
140 UNIVERSITY OF TIlE DISTRIC(, OF
Page 144 and 145:
142 UNIVERSITY OF TilE DISTRICf OF
Page 146 and 147:
144 UNIVEHSITY OF TI IE DISTRICT OF
Page 148 and 149:
146 UNIVEI~SITY OF TIlE DISTRICr OF
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
152 UNIVERSITY OF TIlE DISTRICT OF
Page 156 and 157:
154 UNIVEI~SITY OF THE DlsTRlcr OF
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
158 UNIVEH.srrv OF THE DISTRICr OF
Page 162 and 163:
160 UNIVERSITY OF TilE DISTIUcr OF
Page 164 and 165:
162 UNIVERSITY OF TilE Dls'nucr OF
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
166 UNIVERSITY OF THE DISTRICr OF C
Page 170 and 171:
168 UNIVERSfrY OF HIE DISTRICr OF C
Page 172 and 173:
170 UNIVERSITY OF TilE DISTRICt' OF
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
174 UNIVEI{SITY OF THE DISTRICT OF
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
178 UNIVEltSl'l'V OF THE DISTIUCI'
Page 182 and 183:
180 UNIVERSITY OF TIlE DISTRICT (W
Page 184 and 185:
182 UNIVERSITY OF TilE DISTRICT OF
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
188 UNIVERSITY OF TilE DISTRICt' OF
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
JURISPRUDENCE FOR A DIGITAL AGE: FR
Page 196 and 197:
JURISPRUDENCE FOR A DIGITAL AGE 195
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Page 208 and 209:
Page 210 and 211:
THE CHILD ONLINE PRIVACY PROTECTION
Page 212 and 213:
Page 214 and 215:
Page 216 and 217:
Page 218 and 219:
THE CHILD ONLINE PRIVACY PROTECfION
Page 220 and 221:
Page 222 and 223:
Page 224 and 225:
Page 226 and 227:
THE RUCKUS IN THE CAUCASUS:A CASE A
Page 228 and 229:
THE RUCKUS IN THE CAUCASUS 227under
Page 230 and 231:
THE RUCKUS IN THE CAUCASUS 229ual,
Page 232 and 233:
THE RUCKUS IN THE CAUCASUS 231Day c
Page 234 and 235:
THE RUCKUS IN THE CAUCASUS 233who,
Page 236 and 237:
THE RUCKUS IN THE CAUCASUS 235sions
Page 238 and 239:
THE RUCKUS IN THE CAUCASUS 237Omars
Page 240 and 241:
THE RUCKUS IN THE CAUCASUS 239ment.
Page 242 and 243:
Page 244 and 245:
244 UNIVERSfl"Y OF TIlE DISTRICT OF
Page 246 and 247:
246 UNIVI ~ I(SITY 01 ' TI l E DIST
Page 248 and 249:
Page 250 and 251:
Page 252 and 253:
Page 254 and 255:
Page 256 and 257:
256 UNIVERSITY OF nlE DIS'IlUCT OF
Page 258 and 259:
258 UNIVERSITY OF TIlE DISTIUcr OF
Page 260:
show all

Download Full Volume - UDC Law Review

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?