Search

In evaluating the relationship between two measures across different groups (i.e., in evaluating "differential validity") it is necessary to examine differences in correlation coefficients and in regression lines. Ordinary least squares (OLS) regression is the standard method for fitting lines to data, but its criterion for optimal fit (minimizing the squared vertical distances between the points and the line) is less natural in many contexts than the criterion used in orthogonal regression (minimizing the squared Euclidean distances of points from the line). OLS regression is appropriate if the goal is to predict some unknown dependent variable from a known independent variable, but in examining the relationship between two variables, which both contain error, OLS regression introduces bias. This bias, associated with regression toward the mean, can suggest that the test scores have different relationships, and therefore different meanings, in two groups, when the two sets of test scores have the same relationship and the same meanings in the two groups. The impact of regression toward the mean in differential validity studies is illustrated with two synthetic and two real data sets. Each of the two real data sets include two measures of competence in applying legal principles to fact situations (an essay test and a multiple-choice test) for candidates in two groups (Black/White in the first example and women/men in the second example). (Contains 12 footnotes, 4 tables, and 4 figures.)

A reprint of the article "Ensuring Progress: The NextGen Bar Exam Improves Lawyer Skills Testing and Grader Consistency," published in the Spring 2024 issue of the journal "The Bar Examiner." The article discusses the adoption by Idaho of the National Conference of Bar Examiners ' (NCBE) Multistate Essay Examination, the elimination of concerns regarding grading and consistency through the NextGen Bar Exam, and the importance of lawyering skills to the practice of law.

A two-day written bar exam cannot test a prospective lawyer’s ability to counsel clients, investigate facts, research novel issues, negotiate with adversaries, or perform other essential tasks. The conventional exam has also become a test of resources, favoring candidates who can afford to buy commercial prep courses and devote 8-10 weeks to full-time study. Cognizant of these flaws, several states have adopted—or begun exploring—other approaches to licensing. Oregon has already implemented a small program that allows some law graduates to demonstrate their competence by practicing under the supervision of a licensed attorney and compiling portfolios of work product from that supervised practice. Candidates submit those portfolios, which include materials related to client counseling and negotiation, to bar examiners for independent assessment. Starting in May 2024, the Oregon program will be available to more graduates. Other states are exploring similar approaches. This article provides the first empirical evidence that supervised practice offers a valid, feasible, and fair context for evaluating prospective lawyers’ competence. Oregon’s current program is too small to assess empirically, but two related programs in California offer a rich dataset about the potential for assessing prospective lawyers’ competence through supervised practice. Our analyses, which draw upon qualitative and quantitative data from more than four thousand law graduates and licensed lawyers in California, demonstrate that: (1) Licensing programs rooted in supervised practice allow states to assess a broader range of lawyering skills and doctrinal knowledge than can be assessed on a two-day, written exam. (2) Candidates readily find supervisors, and both parties reap many benefits from the program. (3) Supervised practice is fully accessible to first-generation candidates, candidates of color, women, and candidates who live with disabilities. In fact, women of color, men of color, and white women were significantly more likely than white men to take advantage of California’s supervised practice options. (4) Supervised practice licensing paths can expand access to justice by increasing the number of lawyers who work for legal services providers and in rural parts of a state. Licensing paths rooted in supervise practice, in sum, are valid, feasible, and fair pathways that can protect the public better than a two-day written exam, make our profession more inclusive, and expand access to justice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The legal profession holds lawyers to high standards in their personal and professional lives and expects aspiring members to follow the ethical rules with scrupulous precision and candor. Yet the profession, and those monitoring admission to the profession, affords no protections or recourse to this class of aspiring professionals during that critical period between graduation and successful bar passage. Without reform, this previously unacknowledged duty gap will continue to demoralize and potentially harm future lawyers and reflect negatively on the profession as a whole. Supervising bodies, discussed within, treat applicants as if they have already committed an ethical breach. Indeed, applicants are charged with meeting standards strikingly similar to those required for lawyer reinstatement after disciplinary action. Throughout the licensing process, duty remains a one-way street with applicants bearing the burden of compliance. This ethical duty gap was laid bare as these self-appointed supervisory bodies--boards of law examiners across the country--displayed a deeply entrenched commitment to a gatekeeping function by maintaining rigid and opaque lawyer licensing procedures as they administered the bar examination multiple times in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic. Many boards made decisions putting the health, safety, and emotional well-being of bar applicants at risk, and in some instances prevented applicants' exam scores from being portable. Times such as these have historically prompted changes to the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct. What the COVID-19 bar exam crisis revealed is an uncomfortable truth: The legal profession appears to exhibit a marked lack of compassion, fairness, and ethical obligation to bar applicants in the period between graduation and licensure. The newest members of a so-called noble profession appear to be owed fewer duties than a potential client by every entity involved in the lawyer licensing process and have little to no recourse to have their complaints heard or addressed. This truth is shaking the foundations of the law licensing system, and applicants and others are calling for reform. Yet, on an individual basis, many boards of law examiners across jurisdictions cling to the status quo or adopt the Uniform Bar Examination (UBE). Promulgated by the Madison, Wisconsin-based nonprofit organization the National Conference of Bar Examiners (NCBE), the UBE is graded and scaled by psychometricians whose duty is to maintain the statistical reliability of its product and whose transparency is limited due to its nonprofit status. Boards of law examiners give broad deference to the NCBE, even though the company is not subject to actionable ethical oversight by the jurisdictions that employ it--not in regard to its business practices, profitability, or code of conduct. Bar applicants, meanwhile, lose the protection of being enrolled in ABA-accredited law schools. The commercial bar preparation companies they are forced to employ do not owe any ethical duties to applicants either, as most are privately-held companies who bind users with arbitration clauses, choice of law provisions, and threats of reporting applicants to their jurisdiction's board of character and fitness if products are misused. This Article calls attention to the duty gap between bar examiners, the legal profession, and aspiring lawyers, identifying and scrutinizing its genesis and presence. It also suggests bar reform is best achieved through greater oversight of the lawyer licensing process by current members of the profession and insists jurisdictions treat bar applicants with the duties prescribed by the rules of professional conduct. Who watches the watchmen? In a selfregulating profession, we all do. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article proposes an inclusive social work model for licensing lawyers. Topics discussed are social work as the professional model used in bar exam reform, integration of social work education into the social work licensing process to reduce barriers to entry into the legal profession, and historical and current models of lawyer licensing in the U.S. and the obstacles this system presents for bar exam applicants.

We study to what extent familism accounts for the intergenerational transmission of jobs in regulated professions, and we examine the relevance of social norms to counteract familism. Before 2004, local courts graded the Italian bar exams for lawyers, and after 2004, exams were randomly assigned to external courts for grading. We measure family ties with the number of successful candidates sharing a family name and law firm address with an already registered lawyer. We find that the number of new entrants with a family tie drops by at least 10%, while the number of new lawyers does not change, showing that familism accounts for an important part of the intergenerational transmission in our setting. We do not find significant differences across gender, but our results are stronger in areas with weak social norms, although these areas have lower rents from licenses, suggesting that weak social norms rather than economic incentives are the main determinants of familism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Existing literature does not give adequate attention to if and how the bar exam impacts the legal profession's goals. Bar exam proponents say that the test separates competent candidates from incompetent ones, protecting the public from falling victim to inadequate legal services. But what constitutes a competent attorney? What are the goals of the profession? As legal systems become more complex and their impact on people's lives all-encompassing, the ideal of improving access to justice--equitable and fair justice--is increasingly the target for justice systems across the globe. Addressing access to justice cannot be done without acknowledging the disparate barriers based on race, ethnicities, sex, and class. This comment argues that any licensure system for legal professionals should prioritize the impact such a system has on access to justice for marginalized communities. This comment further argues that the bar exam as currently administered by the United States and in similar systems abroad does not measure any definition of competence the profession should uphold. The goal of this work is not to offer a well-developed plan for reform, but to place a spotlight on where the system is failing and what we can potentially learn from nations around the world. The paper then considers potential alternatives to license legal professionals and suggests various considerations to weigh in order to design an effective system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the discussion on anger and frustration about lawyer licensing practices. Topics include online proctored exams, online take-home exams, supervised practice, and even diploma privilege; and building on the momentum arising out of the frustrations relating to the bar exam for creating a more effective licensing system.

This Article discusses the onerous requirements that state bars sometimes impose on bar applicants to prove good moral character despite the vague definition of the term and the apparently limitless amount of evidence that a character and fitness panel can rely on to deny or delay admission. We present recent examples of decisions that beg the question of whether state bars are really preventing the entry of the unethical into the profession or simply screening out applicants that panelists dislike. We also discuss at least one potential problem highlighted within the process by COVID-19. This Article argues that while most bar applicants pass the character and fitness portion of their bar application without problems, history shows that the potential for arbitrary decisions is so high that this potential should be eliminated. The changes we propose should come either voluntarily, as state bars appropriately adjust their rules to notify applicants of what conduct is truly prohibited, or via a ruling from the Supreme Court of the United States, which has already established some constitutional requirements for the process that have apparently been forgotten. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on Idaho State Bar Admissions Department administers the rules governing admission to the practice of law in Idaho. It mentions Attorneys can be admitted by taking the Idaho Bar Exam, transferring a Uniform Bar Examination (UBE) score to Idaho, or through reciprocal admission. It mentions Admissions Department also oversees limited admission to the practice of law in Idaho.

The article focuses on bar exam focuses heavily on memorization of legal principles and issue-spotting, rather than testing the broad range of skills that lawyers need. It mentions the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System documents that new attorneys need a range of lawyering skills more than they need recall of doctrinal specifics. It also mentions bar exam focus too much on knowledge of doctrine and exam requires memorization of hundreds.

The article discusses the future of legal education in America as of April 2015, and it mentions various law school teaching methods, core competencies, and the efforts to prepare law students to be skilled lawyers. A Critical Issues Summit meeting involving the Association of Continuing Legal Education Administrators (ACLEA), the American Law Institute-American Bar Association (ALI-ABA), and other organizations in 2009 is mentioned, along with bar examination restructuring.

The article discusses conflict of law, the difference between laws of two or more jurisdictions with some connection to a case. It mentions that in resolution of conflict of law the practical aspects related to the case is to be kept in mind and attorneys should be allowed to file case in courts of law favorable to their clients. It further informs that presently conflict of law had been included as an essay subject in the bar examinations of 24 states in the U.S.

The article focuses on the challenges faced by state high courts in regulating the practice of law in the U.S. due to the emerging trend of multijurisdictional and transnational practice. It discusses the national regulatory implications of the uniform bar examination (UBE) on legal practice and explains how rules like allowing non-U.S. attorneys to practice in the U.S. impacts the regulation of legal practice in the U.S.

An essay is presented on the issues in the legal services industry during the economic crisis. It explores a story of successive generations of U.S. corporate lawyers that developed from generalists to specialists. Moreover, it notes that one of the main benefits of law school was to prepare students for state bar examinations.

The article discusses the inbound legal services provided by corporate counsel which is licensed only in a country outside the U.S. It offers information on how to obtain a limited license as an in-house attorney, the narrow scope of permitted practice in many states and the eligibility to take the bar examination. It addresses two major types of objections to liberalized regulations including the concerns about assessing the competence of all attorneys advising clients in the country.

The article analyzes the validity of the bar examination in determining a potential attorney's qualification to practice law in a given jurisdiction. Particular focus is given to the state of Hawai'i as a model for reform. Topics include the exam's history, racial disparities in performance, and admission by diploma privilege. Also discussed are the dormant commerce clause challenge in Wiesmueller v. Kosobucki and the author's recommendations for reform.

The article discusses the impact of a prior criminal conviction on an individual's admission to the bar, and a proposed national uniform standard in the U.S. It mentions the aim of the state to examine the moral character and fitness of recent graduates before granting them the right to practice law within its jurisdiction. It presents an analysis of the overall impact of a person's past criminal conduct on employment opportunities. It notes that the uniform standard will provide each applicant a consistent means of evaluating how his past criminal conduct will affect his or her opportunity of gaining admission to the bar.

The article presents a comparative study of legal education in Japan. It discusses the old system of training Japanese lawyers and some of the forces that led to the breakdown of that system. It then details and analyzes the new system, much of which was borrowed from the U.S. after careful investigation. The shift to the American structure for law schools has been accompanied by an increased interest in American pedagogic techniques. The change in Japanese legal education was propelled by the perceived need to increase the number of people who pass the bar examination and become practicing lawyers. Moreover, it offers a few words about Japanese gangsters, the yakuza, because the story suggests similarities between lawyers and their illegal counterparts.

The article focuses on several news related to Idaho State Bar 2019. Topics discussed include attorneys are admitted to the practice of law in Idaho through reciprocal admission, the Uniform Bar Exam (UBE) score transfer, or sitting for the bar exam, fee arbitration cases remained steady in 2019 and Lawyer Referral Service (LRS) continues to offer the public referrals to lawyers both online and by phone.

Focuses on the document "July 1988 Multistate Bar Exam," which was given to lawyers-to-be in the U.S. Designation of the examination as the most widely read work of jurisprudence in the country; Devotion of lawyers-to-be in studying the document; Change in the content of the document twice in a year.

The article presents a critical look at the proposal of the New York Board of Law Examiners to increase the passing score on the bar examination. The plan is considered to be a rational standard setting in lawyer qualification. The scheme is not well worked out for reasons like the recommended passing score does not consider the social cost of denying the people to hire lawyers and the benefit of improving the quality of legal representation.

The experience of producing a web-based CLE program is shared by two academic law librarians who teamed with a practicing attorney to deliver the training. The focus is on teaching lawyers to effectively find and use materials on the Internet using a hands-on webbased CLE. The insights gained from taking web-based legal instruction ''on the road'' are explored along with the challenges presented by well-intentioned administrators and those wishing to profit from CLEs who may thwart good planning and organization. Dependable technical support and control of the process and environment are not only desirable but necessary. Selected web site URLs used in training are included and future directions for this type of training are examined. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

In this article, the author who is president at Minnesota State Bar Association (MSBA), in which he discusses MSBA is engaging in strategic, innovative, and collaborative work on significant issues such as attorney licensing and the bar examination. It mentions MSBA supports Board of Law Examiners (BLE) efforts and will continue to work and petition requests a separate task force to address diversity. It also mentions district bar associations and law school representatives.