Not having posted since the February exam, I feel like It's time I wrote something, even if it is just my thoughts and impressions which, I suppose, is what this blog thing's all about, eh?
First, I think I have a reasonable chance of getting good news this May.
I know the above statement seems a bit ludicrous, given my history with this thing but, based on my past experiences, and given how I feel that I did this time around, I finally (for once) would not be surprised to see at 6:05 p.m. on May 18th whatever message it is that people see when they've scored 1440 or higher.
And if it turns out that I did actually pass, I know the reason why. That reason is Jason Tolerico.
I have had a lot of experience with the many and varied "bar prep" courses out there and Jason's program is the first one that gave me the knowledge and confidence to pass. Again, however, there's a reasonable chance that I didn't pass it this time, or that I'll never pass it, but I can say with complete confidence that if I did pass, it was because of Jason.
The biggest difference between his course and the other courses is that Jason tells you how to pass the test; he doesn't simply read you an outline and then count on your own motivation to pass. After having read the outlines on my own countless times, I felt like I had the rules down pretty well (and I did/do.) What Jason showed me was how to determine what the graders were looking for so I could not only analyze the issues I spotted, but also to focus on the main thrust of the essay so I wouldn't waste time on the less important facts.
I've consistently lamented here that I needed someone to show me what I was doing wrong and to show me what the graders were looking for in a properly constructed answer. And if my feelings are not completely off base, I believe I learned that in Jason's class.
Also, his MBE program is, hands down, the best one out there. I've always felt confident about my ability to score well on the MBEs, and I thought there wasn't much I could learn to improve that score, but I was very pleasantly surprised (shocked, actually) to find how much better I understood the MBEs after going through his program.
And not to leave anything out, his performance exam method is also excellent.
I'm not going to go into detail about his method or materials, mostly because I couldn't explain it nearly as well as he can, but I will say that I learned more about the bar exam from him than I learned in all the other programs combined. Part of that is due to the sheer amount of time that has passed since I left law school, but most of it is due to Jason's method of teaching. Anyone who has read this blog knows that I am reluctant to recommend any specific tutor, and I don't believe I've actually endorsed anyone before this, but I've broken that rule now because Jason's program is that good.
Regardless of whether I passed this time, I believe Jason's program is the best one out there, and I'll be in his class again if it turns out that I didn't pass, because I believe his program is the key to my eventual success on the bar exam.
You can find Jason Tolerico's program at: one-timers.com
114 comments:
Jessie Zaylia's famous blog post (see infra) recommends Steve Liosi, but I seem to remember GP tried Steve the first or second time around, and it apparently didn't work out with Steve.
Trying to find good prep stuff is difficult! Thanks so much to GP - you have so much experience with this exam, so your recommendations carry a lot of weight! I'll check out Telorico.
For people who haven't seen Zaylia's "how to pass the bar for repeaters" videos:
http://jessie-zaylia.blogspot.com/2011/11/how-i-passed-california-bar-exam.html
Yes, Steve Liosi was one of the guys I consulted with on one of my past attempts. I wasn't able to immerse myself in his program for a number of reasons, but even if I had I don't think it would have helped that much. Steve is a heckuva' nice guy but his program didn't resonate with me (not like Jason's program did.)
And by the way, I believe Steve Liosi is no longer in the bar prep business. I think he couldn't overcome the bad PR that many ill-tempered and maladjusted people posted about him on the various bar exam list-serves (you know which ones I'm talking about.) It's tough to fight anonymous criticism that may or may not be well founded and Steve finally decided to stop trying. As a result, he shut his operation down. Too bad, that is. I know he helped a lot of people.
"Trying to find good prep stuff is difficult! Thanks so much to GP - you have so much experience with this exam, so your recommendations carry a lot of weight!"
I don't know whether to laugh or cry. Someone is seriously relying on a guy who failed the bar like 10 time because of his "experience."
So let me get this straight, someone who took a bar class (or used another study method) carries a lot of weight in recommending bar exam study methods? I would have thought it would be the other way around.
The world really has gone to hell now...People are actively seeking GPs advice regarding his study habits relative to the bar exam.... I may really have to stop reading this blogsite for fear that I may resort to self harm if this doesn't all stop.
Congrats on surviving...again!
Any thoughts about the essay issues that the examiners were aiming for?
I talked to lots of takers who thought the MBEs were easier this time around. ??
The problem with Steve Liosi is that he took the exam before the bar changed its grading sheet in 1998, and before the changed format (specific calls) in 2001, and before the more difficult grading standards of Feb. 2009 on. Look at the released answers from the bar in the 90s and then look at the ones from the past few years. Big difference. The released answers nowadays all have tons of black letter law, and everything is headnoted and IRAC'd. You could get away with no rule statements in Liosi's day. Not today. The exam is a lot more difficult nowadays, requiring both memorized black letter law, in-depth analysis, and more bar topics than in Liosi's day. Don't trust any tutors who haven't taken the exam recently (within the last 10 years).
Yes, dummy. GP's experience does carry a lot of weight, because he's tried many methods of study that obviously didn't work, so if he passes this time with Telorico, then it is more likely than not that Telorico can help others, too.
Test question for anonymous bar failer from 3:38 AM - What very large assumption are you making in your reasoning?
Anon 10:49: I'm sure that no one is relying on my advice as a foundation for their bar preparation. As I'm sure you learned in Evidence, a brick is not a wall. A wise person would consider all options before making a decision about how to prepare for the bar exam and they would assign whatever weight to the advice received based on the record/reputation of the person rendering the advice.
As an example, when you are shopping for a new car do you ask friends for their opinions about the cars they drive? Do you consider all the advice equally, or do you consider some sources more relevant or valuable than the other sources?
There's nothing wrong with gathering information from various sources before making decisions about how to prepare for the bar exam. What's important is that the person make an educated decision about which way to go and then commit to it.
I'm sure you do/did the same.
Pubes -
Respectfully, to carry you analogy further, going to someone who has failed the bar exam 10 times or so for advice is the equivalent of asking the guy/gal who designed the fiat for car advice.
Until you pass the exam, unless someone is using your advice for what not to do, it is just ridiculousness to say "you have so much experience with this exam, so your recommendations carry a lot of weight".
Fair enough, but this debate has been had here many times before (check the archives if you want to relive those times.)
It is pointless to bring them up again because you're not going to change anyone's mind on the issue.
You have your opinion and everyone else has theirs. I've never advertised myself as a fountain of knowledge but I do answer specific questions, always with the disclaimer that the advice is coming from someone who has failed the exam many times and so, as such, it should be given the weight it deserves.
Frankly, I'm tired of people commenting on this blog with the sole intention of spewing ridicule and scorn. I tolerate it to an extent because there's something to be learned from every comment, but don't be surprised if such comments eventually disappear. After all, this is a "private forum" and I set the conditions of use.
I am the Grand Poobah, after all.
Hello 10:49: This is 3:38, answering the question you posed.
There is no "large assumption."
The reasoning is this: GP took this exam something like 10 times (give or take). Each time, he did something slightly different to prepare. After each failed attempt, he reviewed and posted his exam scores. Each exam score is concrete feedback from the bar graders themselves. By now, GP probably has a good idea of what works for MBEs, what works for PTs, etc.
In addition, GP knows what DOESN'T WORK, especially for the essays. You can see evidence of this from his blog comments after each bar sitting. (He knows he's missing something from his writing, but he's not quite sure what.)
He's also the king of MBEs, as established by his MBE scores. Therefore, if he feels that Telorico has helped further his already exceptional ability to score higher on his MBEs, that carries some weight.
In addition, if he passes the bar exam this time around, it is more likely than not (preponderance of the evidence) that One-Timer's Bar Review was responsible, because GP's previous 10 bar scores were all within the same range, and this bar prep program was the main thing he did differently.
You have a reading comprehension problem: I never said that I'm going to take advice from GP as to how to study. I said that his experience carries a lot of weight, meaning that he's tried and seen a lot of bar prep materials, so he is in a good position to compare and contrast bar preparation techniques.
His experience carries a lot of weight because (I'm making inferences from his posts): he's in a good position to compare the methods and materials of BarBri, Bar None, Steve Liosi, BarWinners, Performance Maximizer Workshop, Emanuel's, PMBR, etc.
Very few people have purchased and reviewed all of that material.
If GP, a 10-time repeater, can succeed with a particular program of study, don't you think that a first-timer from Harvard could also succeed with that particular program of study? I think so.
Am I going to hire GP as a tutor? No.
But I am going to take into consideration (not blindly follow) what GP says, because he has the experience to recognize what doesn't work.
In practical terms, it means that I'm going to check out Jason's website. It doesn't mean that I think GP is the grandmaster of the bar exam.
I wish I didn't have to waste my time spelling all of this out for you, but because you like to jump to conclusions and have trouble connecting dots, I hope this has been helpful for you.
If you need someone to spoon-feed you applesauce like a baby, I can arrange for a wet nurse to do that for you, too.
GP, I respect your perseverance and courage to share your story.
It sounds like you were having problems with issue spotting and maybe using all the relevant facts in the analysis. It sounds so simple but it really is a skill that is more art than science.
In my opinion, the law is usually a generalized statement of facts that can apply to a variety of scenarios. While some things will be looked at on a case by case basis, the rule will be general enough to apply to multiple situations without having to invent a new rule for every problem.
The hypo asks the writer to explain how a particular set of facts should have its outcome dictated by the more generalized rule about a given public policy. It is hard to know what facts to apply without memorizing all those rules that will start raising red flags.
The law more or less lays out its own logical structure. The rule in itself is the major premise(i.e. rule statement). You have minor premises blending particular facts with key legal terms (i.e. analysis). After taking that in consideration, you have to decide whether all the elements or factors are satisfied for some form of relief (i.e. conclusion).
There is always flexibility on whether to just state the conclusion up front or use an issue statement. It just helps the reader get a clue about whether you are zeroed in on the right things.
You may or may not appreciate that you are doing all of these things. I have found that many people including professors can be very good at doing things but still cannot explain their process. This is a problem when others are trying to make corrections to their own approach to doing things.
Although, I hope the new training has given you a new method to accomplish your goal.
I remember the toughest challenge of the bar exam being nerves. The stress of the exam is probably more challenging the questions.
I suppose your story helps me appreciate the privilege of being licensed even though it is a tough time to be a young lawyer.
7:09
Hahahaha! Fail. You missed the assumption. GP's "weight" only matters when, and if, he passes. Your entire premise assumes this time around he passes and that there is only one variable that changed. If true, then your reasoning would make some sense. Until then, you're a bar exam failing idiot.
9:57
Sorry, YOU fail.
Of course I'm assuming that he passes. That's a given. If he doesn't pass, then his recommendation doesn't have as much weight. Everybody already assumes that. You're an idiot for thinking that you're the only who "gets" that.
Listen: GP has never recommended a study source before, and now he's recommending something. That's significant.
Also, you're assuming that GP has nothing of value to share simply because he hasn't passed. This is "all or nothing" thinking, which is indicative of extreme narcissism or antisocial personality.
Does any of this sound familiar: (1) Your self-worth is tied to how others perceive you? (2) You have fantasies of being a famous trillionaire because you "deserve it"? (3) You have trouble connecting with the opposite sex?
Please get some help. Seriously.
I feel sorry for you. You're going to be very unhappy for the rest of your life.
You're a narcissist/sociopath.
An intelligent conversation with a narcissist/sociopath is an oxymoron. Therefore, I am no longer going to respond to you.
What a loser.
************
* GP rocks *
************
4:23 -
And you, my friend, are long-winded. I can see why you have been failing the bar exam. If you would ever like some help writing coherent and logical thoughts that are not rambling, please let me know and perhaps I can devote some pro bono time towards you. Until then, good luck on your next attempt to pass the bar exam!
You will pass. My buddy never studied (5 times). He scored 55's across the writing and 150's raw mbe (never practiced) every time. He finally got pissed and wrote 10 practice essays (no PT's). I read them. Solid 55's just like his past bar answers (ha). I didn't think he had a chance. He passed on his 6th. We both suspect he scored a 160's raw mbe. The guy was intrinsically brilliant on the mbe's (said he could see all their tricks). Couldn't write a bar response to save himself, but was a brilliant clerk, and now lawyer (quite successful). One of those sharp guys full of contempt for the bar/hurdle. Honestly, people that I know who passed first time can't compete with this guy in practice. Stay with it GP. Always seek to improve those mbe's. For some, that is the key.
Anon at 12:47:
Just a third party to your screed with the other anonymous commenter...But just wanted to point out for clarity's sake that you don't typically devote time towards somebody, rather to somebody. Thanks!
You all are really cool!
i don't understand all this discussion. barbri is what is needed to pass. it is what a vast majority takes. other "strategies" will just make you an outlier, which is what you don't want to be.
and if you don't pass w/ Barbri, you can add a personal tutor or something, but the law and approach from Barbri should be the focus. If you fail 3-4 times with that approach, go change it up.
regards,
someone that passed on the 2nd time (using barbri both times)
Hey all - I actually attended law school with Mr. Tolerico. Hope his program helped. His personality in law school was...significantly less than trustworthy...I trust this has changed or his program would likely not enjoy the level of success it seems to have.
I am a second time repeater and used barbri the first time I took the exam in July. I received a scaled score of 1428. My friend who repeated the bar recommended I use jeff adachi's essay advantage course. I can only speak from my experience, but his course was great. He uses a systematic approach for every essay subject, which ensures that you hit every issue, and also has a grader who grades ours essays every week.
He recommended 50 MBES a day, 1 essay a day, and one PT a week. I used PMBR MBES, and felt that the MBE this Feb was EASY compared to the practice ones I used in my prep. I wouldn't be surprised if I got at least a 140, or 150, which is a 20 point increase from my last MBE.
If anyone is in the Bay area, look up Jeff's course. I learned to write "clearly passing answers" and confident that passed the feb bar, or will be even closer then I was originally.
GP: I admire your determination and look forward to hearing that you PASSED this RETARDED, ARBITRARY TEST. You sure have earned it more than I have. Good luck to all!!!
Anon 9:55: You should know by now that I don't respond to anonymous BS in these comments.
That was a POOOBAH SMACKDOWN the anon poster just got.
THINGS ARE GETTING REAL YA'ALL. Boom. Dominted. Poobah.
What is with all the immature, unnecessary comments aimed at provoking others.
I applaud GP for NOT being quick to respond.
Why should he? Why would a person feel obliged to respond to nonsense?
BAM! GP smack-down. It's on. Don't mess with the Poobah!!!!!!! He's our Grand Poobah!!!!
But regardless of whether or how much consideration was paid by me, I am absolutely free to make recommendations regarding services I have contracted for without the need to justify, explain, or defend the agreement between myself and the service provider.
I have paid substantial sums of money over the years to bar exam prep services and am under no obligation to relate my experiences, positive or negative, related to any of them.
The fact that I found Mr. Tolerico's bar prep program to be substantially better than other such programs is sufficient justification for my endorsement.
On a personal note, I also feel that I have an obligation to express my personal opinion on the exceptional quality of Mr. Tolerico's program because of the purpose of this blog and also because of the interest that others may have in my experience.
As far as the concern of some people that there might be a vast commercial conspiracy hiding in the background, which I am not revealing because I am going to reap huge sums of money from such recommendation, please put your mind at ease. It should be enough that, after years of searching, I have finally found a tutor worthy of my personal endorsement.
If that's not enough for some people then I can't help them. I certainly have no obligation to justify any of my actions to them or anyone else.
The only reason I've responded to you here is that you have been civil and courteous in your inquiries. Please also understand that this is my last comment on the subject.
Okay, that was my second-to-the-last comment on the subject.
I will only add that, as with my other comments on bar prep courses, the user's mileage may vary. I recognize that some people do very well with BarBri's method and others do very well with the methods used by the other bar prep programs. Mr. Tolerico's program is but one of many and it just so happens that it (I believe) worked for me. However, I still reserve the right to fail this last exam as well as future exams in perpetuity.
This is ridiculous!!! Why is everyone hating on GP. Haters hate ... Poobah regulates!!
You must be careful when relying on tutors. I had two different tutors tell me (toward's the end of prep) that I was "getting it," and was writing "70-75" responses. During the exam you use the same approach you were taught. You leave feeling confident only to receive 55's and 60's. You take your answers back to the tutor and they note that you didn't do a, b, c. They never told you about a, b, c in prep. You repeat the exam mindful (now) of a, b, c, and don't pass. They tell you you missed d, e, f, but they never mentioned d, e, f, in prep (repeat). Or, you don't pass and they are shocked after reading your answers, saying "You should have passed." Huge disconnect between what tutors think you need, and what graders want to see. I think it is much easier to please your tutor than it is to please a grader. I can understand why. If you are writing failing answers at the end of prep, what good would it do you to have you tutor tell you before going into the exam that you probably won't pass. Of course, when you don't pass, you're more confused than ever as to why. If the pros can't properly diagnose the issue, how can you improve?
GP - How much does Tolerico cost?
4500 vs. Jay 3250
4850
Barwinners 12000 Bargraders 1295 Baressays 75 CA Bar Style 3800
Some old hand-me-down study guides (which is all a good law student should need to pass the bar exam): $200 on e-bay
Lots of good old fashioned elbow grease and hard work: $0
A true commitment to passing the bar exam (and not just becoming proficient at taking it): Priceless
Which is fine for most people unless, like me, you have some fundamental flaw in your writing that can only be resolved with the help of an expert.
I'll take what's behind Door #3, Bob!
Options #1 and #2 are not in play because I passed this time. And, because I hope everyone who took it also passed, I presume you passed too.
However, if you're a guy, I reserve the right to shake your hand in place of the proffered hug.
GP,
No one has ever made an intelligent argument, as to why, a repeat taker, should not use the released model answers, to both essays and performance, to prepare for the exam.
Plain and simple, if the graders are looking for all of us to be sheep, be it that the model answers were at times right or wrong, they were still acceptable as passing answers, so why not engrave them to mind, so that we can all, get a passing grade.
No tutor, or tutorial program, would endorse this way of studying for the upcoming bar exam, because if they did, they would all have to charge $1 for their program.
Just a thought, from a 4 time rejected candidate, who plans on using the model answers and Adaptibar this time around.
Good luck to all waiting on their results.
To Anon at 6:58 pm:
I believe your premise to be plainly correct:
Any law student worth his or her salt who graduated law school should be able to obtain a broadview of the types of answers the bar examiners typically use for their model answers by reviewing them on the state bar website, find the commonality they share (usually, but not always, very analysis laden and less rule driven), and adapt his/her writing (which should already be informed by a good grasp of the rules and an ability to concisely restate them) to achieve a passing result.
All of this talk about the tens of thousands of dollars people such as GP are wasting and, frankly, promoting the wasting of, really is tragic.....
But, I am just a third year lawyer at a large civil defense firm, so you don't have to listen to me....What would I know about any of this....????
To: Anon at 7.32P.M.
Yes. I agree with you.
Jason Tolerico, personally did not attend any bar review course.
I took his course. And, have failed more than once.
Anon at 9:01 a.m.:
Caveat: This all is not to say that bar review is not helpful to otherwise prepare and already talented individual for the rigors of the bar exam.
I just get the real sense that GP's explanation of his lack of writing acumen and his belief that going to all of these bar exam "gurus" (a term loosely utilized) will rehabilitate his writing problems is an admission of failure...
It would be akin to a .175 hitter in baseball who never quite makes the team saying: I just cannot hit a fastball, but I must keep improving my swinging and missing technique so that I might look better at missing that fastball.
The analogy being: Writing a passing answer is akin to hitting the fastball as both are crucial to success. GP has conceded that he is not a good writer as much as the above hitter acknowledged being unable to hit a fastball. Therefore, both seem to miss the fundamental skill that will make them better "players" or even major league caliber players but seem content to look good whilst swinging and missing.
How is that for some analysis?
Well, I see it like this ...
My background as a programmer and network troubleshooter has conditioned me to consider all facts as important until they are ruled out. As a result, I am comfortable with the approach I used prior to this exam in which I tried to completely address all of the facts instead of just the most important ones. What I learned in my preparations for this exam is to slow down and look for the overarching principles being tested, and then to apply the most relevant facts first, addressing the less important facts according to their relevance.
This is probably self evident to most people but, until I had someone show me what I was doing wrong in a way that I could understand, I couldn't break my bad habit. Now, that's not to say that I have banished my harmful tendencies sufficient to get a passing score, but I feel confident that I made progress in that direction.
So while the graders are indeed looking for sheep, I couldn't get rid of my tendency to act like a frog (or whatever other animal I apparently looked like.)
Wow - why did I read all those comments. Many horribly off topic and not constructive criticism at all.
I just wanted to ask you Poobah: did you write your essays and PTs or did you use a laptop? Or have you tried both? And if you've tried both, which do you find, at least for yourself, is better suited to maximizing your time during the exam?
I hope you will hear some good news next month!
I've been meaning to check out your post since Feb 2012. Look at me, a year after I passed, I still have PSSD, from my repeated attempts. I did master that statement before passing.
"ATTEMPTS" not "failures" And I did feel like GP. Excited, happy to take it, happy about my performance, secure, and all of the above. And I did! PASSED Feb, 2011.
Nothing I can say to you guys taking it again matters more than, IT IS THE HARDEST THING YOU'LL EVER DO. Believe, work hard, do something different, and something more. I passed after 5 years.
2010 MOST TO LEAST OVERSATURATED MARKETS TO PRACTICE LAW
NEW YORK
CALIFORNIA
FLORIDA
NEW JERSEY
TEXAS
ILLINOIS
MASSACHUSETTS
PENNSYLVANIA
VIRGINIA
MARYLAND
GEORGIA
OHIO
NORTH CAROLINA
WASHINGTON
COLORADO
MICHIGAN
PUERTO RICO
LOUISIANA
TENNESSEE
MISSOURI
MINNESOTA
INDIANA
ARIZONA
CONNECTICUT
OREGON
ALABAMA
SOUTH CAROLINA
NEVADA
KENTUCKY
OKLAHOMA
DIST. OF COLUMBIA
UTAH
KANSAS
IOWA
ARKANSAS
NEW MEXICO
MISSISSIPPI
WISCONSIN
WEST VIRGINIA
RHODE ISLAND
HAWAII
DELAWARE
MAINE
NEW HAMPSHIRE
MONTANA
IDAHO
NEBRASKA
WYOMING
ALASKA
VERMONT
NORTH DAKOTA
SOUTH DAKOTA
VIRGIN ISLANDS
GUAM
N. MARIANA ISLANDS
PALAU
2010 LOWEST TO HIGHEST BAR PASSING RATES
DIST. OF COLUMBIA
PUERTO RICO
CALIFORNIA
PALAU
NEVADA
LOUISIANA
N. MARIANA ISLANDS
NEW YORK
WEST VIRGINIA
ARKANSAS
DELAWARE
ALABAMA
OREGON
NORTH CAROLINA
HAWAII
FLORIDA
TENNESSEE
VIRGINIA
WYOMING
MARYLAND
CONNECTICUT
ALASKA
VIRGIN ISLANDS
WASHINGTON
SOUTH CAROLINA
ARIZONA
RHODE ISLAND
COLORADO
PENNSYLVANIA
GEORGIA
INDIANA
NEW JERSEY
VERMONT
MISSISSIPPI
TEXAS
KENTUCKY
NORTH DAKOTA
IDAHO
OHIO
MICHIGAN
GUAM
NEW HAMPSHIRE
MASSACHUSETTS
NEW MEXICO
NEBRASKA
UTAH
OKLAHOMA
KANSAS
ILLINOIS
MISSOURI
MINNESOTA
IOWA
MAINE
MONTANA
WISCONSIN
SOUTH DAKOTA
IS IT POSSIBLE THAT IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE EXAM ITSELF BUT RATHER WITH THE FACT THAT (CALIFORNIA) HAS THE SECOND MOST SATURATED MARKET IN THE COUNTRY FOR PRACTICING LAWYER AND THAT IS WHY THEY HAVE THE 3RD LOWEST PASSING RATE IN THE COUNTRY
JUST SAYING...
Hi,
I saw you twice in Ontario. I was going to say hi and wish you luck but I tried to follow the primary directive (yeah, I watch Star Trek and I don't care what anyone has to say about it!). Anyway, like you, I am a repeater. I have a question. You repeatedly mention that there was a problem with your writing that was corrected with tutoring.
From what I've been told by my law school and Barbri, the basic and universally preferred manner of writing for any law exam, including a bar exam, is IRAC. Assuming that IRAC is the fundamental template for correct writing (based on the fact that it is sufficient to pass the CBX which is evidenced by released sample answers), what part/s of IRAC were you having a problem/s with? Or, if PTs were the problem, what sort of problems were you having there?
Feel free to articulate as much as you want. It would be appreciated.
Thanks in advance!
I'm also curious. What did you do differently this time?
Question - GP, do you usually walk around with the earpiece on or was that just a whimsical thing for your profile picture?
Well, I was wearing it when that picture was taken, and it appears that I've been wearing it ever since. In that picture, anyway. I've given passing thought to editing it out, but it never seemed important enough to worry about.
But it's probably time for a new picture.
GP:
When you first started this blog, you were nearly a seasoned citizen. Will you wager whether you will pass the bar exam before being Medicare eligible?
I have the No on that proposition.
Best...
I'll take that bet. $1,000 says you lose. And if you identify yourself I'll discount your loss to $100.
What say you?
GP,
HOW OFTEN DOES THE BAR EXAMINER REPEAT ISSUES ON THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION OF THE EXAM FROM PAST EXAMS...HAVE YOU SEEN A PATTERN DEVELOP OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS...GOOD LUCK IN MAY.
No worries. I took no offense at your comment. It's just that I've been contemplating removing all references to that rogue alleged bar prep person's efforts to use this blog as free marketing and I've just about made my decision.
The challenge for me is that the "damage" is likely already done. I should have nipped it in the bud a long time ago but, being the tolerant person that I am (blushing), I decided to give him a pass. No good deed goes unpunished, I guess.
Regardless, worry not, I have thick skin and I understood your intent.
... and to all a good night!
And in reading back, I can see why you had that reaction. My apologies, I didn't mean to direct my frustration at you.
In case anyone is wondering, all of the deleted comments contained multiple and gratuitous references to an unknown person attempting to create buzz for the eventual commercialization of said outlines.
I grew tired of being used and deleted most of them.
My decision to leave the others was based on a highly refined scientific selection methodology that has been refined and honed over the years to a very sharp bleeding edge. That methodology was built around a foundation of "what irritates me the most", and is, in practice, highly subjective.
If you didn't get a chance to read them and you're now wondering what you missed, do not fret, you missed nothing of import. In fact, if you had read them, and lamented the waste of your valuable time, you would be thanking me now.
I wrote this earlier and didn't receive an answer:
Hi,
I saw you twice in Ontario. I was going to say hi and wish you luck but I tried to follow the primary directive (yeah, I watch Star Trek and I don't care what anyone has to say about it!). Anyway, like you, I am a repeater. I have a question. You repeatedly mention that there was a problem with your writing that was corrected with tutoring.
From what I've been told by my law school and Barbri, the basic and universally preferred manner of writing for any law exam, including a bar exam, is IRAC. Assuming that IRAC is the fundamental template for correct writing (based on the fact that it is sufficient to pass the CBX which is evidenced by released sample answers), what part/s of IRAC were you having a problem/s with? Or, if PTs were the problem, what sort of problems were you having there?
Feel free to articulate as much as you want. It would be appreciated.
Thanks in advance!
Anon 8:52: To quote from one of my previous comments, "My background as a programmer and network troubleshooter has conditioned me to consider all facts as important until they are ruled out. As a result, I am comfortable with the approach I used prior to this exam in which I tried to completely address all of the facts instead of just the most important ones. What I learned in my preparations for this exam is to slow down and look for the overarching principles being tested, and then to apply the most relevant facts first, addressing the less important facts according to their relevance."
To sum that up in a way that, I hope, answers your question, I am very experienced at writing answers that follow the IRAC format but I tried to do so in such detail that I couldn't write a proper answer in one hour and so I ran out of time. I can write a killer answer in 90 minutes, but I needed someone to show me how to write that killer answer in 60 minutes or less.
What I needed was to change my strategic approach to answering essays because I had the tactical part of it down pat. I believe Jason was able to steer me in that direction. Other tutors I had used saw that I had the tactical abilities and just assumed that I would "get" the strategic part of it by rote repetition. Obviously, that didn't work for me because I've written almost all of the released answers (going back to 1990) multiple times and I still failed to understand what I was doing wrong. I can competently discuss the issues, rules, and elements until the cows come home, but I struggled to put it all in a coherent, properly structured answer in 60 minutes.
I believe I improved on that in the February exam, but only time will tell.
I hope that answers your question.
I'm Anon 8:52. I find it hard to believe that Tolerico taught you how to improve on distinguishing the weight to give to issues given that his 2/12 Evidence model completely left out hearsay within hearsay but his property model heavily discussed nuisance despite him acknowledging in red print that it wasn't even relevant.
I also looked at your 5/12 blog post and noticed that on regrade you jumped from a 55 to a 70. If that doesn't shake you to your very foundation you're a better person than I.
Post a Comment