Do We Need The Bar Examination - A Critical Evaluation of The Justifications For The Bar Examination and Proposed Alternatives ?

Case Western Reserve Law Review
Volume 45 | Issue 4
1995
Do We Need the Bar Examination--A Critical

Evaluation of the Justifications for the Bar
Examination and Proposed Alternatives ?
Daniel R. Hansen
Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/caselrev

Part of the Law Commons
Recommended Citation
Daniel R. Hansen, Do We Need the Bar Examination--A Critical Evaluation of the Justifications for the Bar Examination and Proposed
Alternatives ?, 45 Case W. Res. L. Rev. 1191 (1995)
Available at: https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/caselrev/vol45/iss4/32
This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Journals at Case Western Reserve University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It
has been accepted for inclusion in Case Western Reserve Law Review by an authorized administrator of Case Western Reserve University School of
Law Scholarly Commons.
Do WE NEED THE BAR EXAMINATION?
A CRITICAL EVALUATION OF THE JUSTIFICATIONS
FOR THE BAR EXAMINATION AND PROPOSED
ALTERNATIVES
I. INTRODUCTION
These days nearly all attorneys in the United States have taken
a bar examination to become licensed to practice law.' The bar
exam is typically the final and absolute determination of whether a
law student may join the law profession. As such, the bar exam
looms large in a law student's career as perhaps the most signifi-
cant preparatory experience. Robert E. Seiler may have best
conveyed the bar exam's import when he said:
Whether or not a [person] will be permitted to use his [or
her] three years of law school work by becoming a lawyer
hangs on the result of an examination which lasts only two
and a half to three days and is given by practicing attor-
neys who are not skilled teachers and who usually are not
skilled in the art of preparing questions; and unless [this
person] passes the bar
2
examination, his [or her] law school
work is for naught.
Due to the bar exam's significance, legal professionals have
studied it closely. Throughout the history of American legal educa-
tion, support for a bar examination of one kind or another has
gone in and out of fashion? However, since the 1920s, support for
1. See THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF BAR EXAMINERS, THE BAR EXAMINERS'

HANDBOOK 18 (Start Duhl ed., 2d ed. 1980) [hereinafter HANDBOOK 2d ed.].
2. Michael Bard & Barbara A. Bamford, The Bar: Professional Association or Medi-
eval Guild?, 19 CAT. U. L. REV. 393, 406 n.57 (1970) (quoting Robert E. Seiler).
3. Support for the bar exam steadily gained ground in the early 20th century after de-
cades of bar admissions exams that varied greatly in depth and seriousness. See infra
notes 52-56, 62-63 and accompanying text. Throughout this century acceptance of a mod-
1191
1192 CASE WESTERN RESERVE LAW REVIEW [Vol. 45:1191
the bar exam has been more or less entrenched with only a few
raucous voices vainly calling for its elimination.4 In the 1920s, the
American Bar Association (ABA) unequivocally approved the writ-
ten bar examination and rejected the diploma privilege as the pre-
ferred means to gain admission to law practice.5 The diploma priv-
ilege entities law students from certain specified law schools to
automatic admission to the bar upon graduation from those law
schools. Without the ABA's sanction, the support for the diploma
privilege has steadily declined,6 with Mississippi, Montana, South
Dakota, and West Virginia eliminating it within the past fifteen
years.7
em bar exam became entrenched, with only a few critical appraisals, until the 1970s.
During the 1970s, legal education generally came under closer scrutiny. See generally
Leonard L. Baird, A Survey of the Relevance of Legal Training to Law School Graduates,
29 J. LEGAL EDUC. 264 (1978) (study finding that an attorney's own practical experience
is the primary factor in learning and acquiring the essential skills of an attorney). The bar
exam itself also came under scrutiny. See generally Alfred B. Carlson & Charles E.
Werts, Relationships Among Law School Predictors, Law School Performance, and Bar
Examination Results, in 3 REPORTS OF LSAC SPONSORED RESEARCH 211 (1976) (conclud-
ing that bar exams are primarily achievement tests that measure the same legal skills and
knowledge measured by law school grades, undergraduate grades, and LSAT scores); Bard
& Bamford, supra note 2 (providing historical analysis of and lending support to bar
exams); Edward F. Bell, Do Bar Examinations Serve a Useful Purpose?, 57 A.B.A. J.
1215 (1971) (criticizing bar exams); Charles B. Blackmar, Is the Bar Examination an
Anachronism?, 60 A.B.A. J. 1240 (1974) (criticizing bar exams); Leon Green, Why Bar
Examinations?, 33 Nw. U. L. REv. 908 (1939) (questioning usefulness of bar exams);
Erwin N. Griswold, In Praise of Bar Examinations, 60 A.B.A. J. 81 (1974) (supporting
bar exams); Joel Seligman, Why the Bar Exam Should be Abolished, JURIs DR., Aug.-
Sept. 1978, at 48 (criticizing bar exams); George N. Stevens, Diploma Privilege, Bar
Examination or Open Admission, 46 B. EXAMINER 15 (1977) (providing history of bar
exam and analyzing responses to surveys of bar examiners, judges, law school deans and
law professors asking their opinions about the value of bar exams, and ultimately support-
ing bar exams); E. Marshall Thomas, The Bar Examination: Its Function, 32 B. EXAMIN-
ER 69 (1963) (supporting bar exams).
4. See generally Bell, supra note 3; Blackmar, supra note 3; Green, supra note 3; W.
Sherman Rogers, Title VII Preemption of State Bar Examinations: Applicability of Title
VII to State Occupational Licensing Tests, 32 How. LJ. 563 (1989); Seligman, supra note
3.
5. HANDBOOK 2d ed., supra note 1, at 189-90. Today, only Wisconsin has the diplo-
ma privilege. THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF BAR EXAMINERS, THE BAR EXAMINERS'
HANDBOOK 10:4 (Stuart Duhl ed., 3d ed. 1991 & Supp. 1993) [hereinafter HANDBOOK 3d
ed.]. Law students who graduate from approved Wisconsin law schools are admitted auto-
matically to the Wisconsin bar. See BAR/BRI BAR REV., BAR/BRI DIG. 47 (Donna M.
Skibbe ed., 1995). Applicants for admission to the Wisconsin bar who graduated from
other law schools must take a Wisconsin bar examination. Id.
6. See Stevens, supra note 3, at 19 (charting the rise and decline of the diploma
privilege from its inception in the 19th century through the early 1970's).
7. See HANDBOOK 2d ed., supra note 1, at 18 (naming the five states that as of
1995] THE BAR EXAMINATION: JUSTIFICATIONS AND ALTERNATIVES 1193
This Note questions the need for a bar examination as a re-

quirement for admission to legal practice. Although supporters of
bar examinations should be praised for their concern for legal
education and protection of the public, this Note evaluates both
their common and esoteric justifications for bar examinations and
finds none of them convincing. Finally, this Note comparatively
analyzes admissions processes in other common law jurisdictions
(England, Wales, Canada, and Australia) and proposes alternatives
to the bar examination as a means of bar admission in America.
II. HISTORY OF ADMISSION TO THE BAR IN THE UNITED STATES
A. Bar Admission in Colonial Times through 1800

Unlike England, where practitioners conducted the sole training
and admission of attorneys, admission to the bar in colonial Ameri-
ca was determined by the local courts Courts in each colony
essentially decided whether someone would be admitted, usually
after the applicant had completed an apprenticeship of some inde-
terminate length.9 The local court might admit the applicant to
practice only before that court. Thus, an applicant would have to
apply at each individual court for permission to practice there.
However, in some colonies, admission to practice before one court
would entitle an applicant to practice before all courts in that colo-
ny due to judicial comity.'" Pursuant to this comity principle,
some applicants would apply to the highest court in the colony for
admission. If the highest court admitted the applicant, the applicant
was11 usually then entitled to practice before all courts in that colo-
ny.
Most colonies also had a "graded bar." Applicants applying to
practice in colonies with graded bars still had to seek permission at
the individual courts, but an applicant could not get permission to
1980 had diploma privilege); Rogers, supra note 4, at 586 n.137 (indicating that only
Wisconsin retains the diploma privilege).
8. HANDBOOK 2d ed., supra note 1, at 14.
9. Id.
10. Id. at 15.
11. Even in colonial times, courts, especially the highest courts, often would not actu-
ally consider an applicant themselves. Instead, the court would appoint an examining
board to determine which applicants ought to be admitted to practice. Id. at 15-16. Thus,
modem bar examiners may trace their positions to colonial America. Today, bar examiners
in each state are appointed by the judicial branch. For a discussion of the qualifications
and appointments of bar examiners, see HANDBOOK 3d ed., supra note 5, at 70:1-73:2001.
practice before higher courts without increased training. Therefore,

if an applicant gained admission to a particular lower court, but
wanted to also have permission to practice before a higher court,
the higher court would require completion of an additional appren-
ticeship. 2
As a contrary approach, many attorneys considered themselves
part of the English bar, with the commensurate right to practice in
any of the thirteen colonies because they had been called to prac-
tice by the Inns of Court in England. 3 Those invited to practice
by the English bar, it was felt, did not have to apply at each indi-
vidual court, and the graded 4
bar had no effect on their ability to
practice before all courts.'
When colonial legal apprenticeships were required, their lengths
varied, but were generally long. In Massachusetts, for example,
an applicant had to endure an eleven-year apprenticeship, which in-
cluded a college education, to have the full privileges of an attor-
ney (i.e., practice before all courts in the colony). 6 But, if the
applicant's apprenticeship did not include a college education, the
period was only nine years. 7
B. Bar Admission from 1800 through the Jacksonian Era
After the American Revolution, most states developed their
own requirements for bar admission. The standards typically in-
cluded a period of law study under a practitioner or judge, and
varied greatly in length-generally ranging from one to five
years.' In some states, the applicant also had to pass some kind
of written or oral exam to gain admission. 9 However, sometimes
an applicant was exempt from the examination if he had clerked in
a law office for a period of years. As one might surmise, stan-

13. 2 ANTON-HERMAN CHROUST, THE RISE OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION IN AMERICA
171-72 (1965); see also discussion infra notes 151-80 and accompanying text (discussing
the Inns of Court and admission to practice in England and Wales).
14. HANDBOOK 2d ed., supra note 1, at 14-15.
15. Id.
16. Id.
17. Id.
18. CHROUST, supra note 13, at 164-65 (listing requirements of various states during
the first half of the 19th century).
19. Id.; see also Bard & Bamford, supra note 2, at 395 (discussing requirements of
early examinations).
20. See CHROUST, supra note 13, at 165 (mentioning South Carolina's clerking exemp-
dards for legal education varied widely from state to state. In addi-
tion, as shall be discussed infra, where examinations did exist, they
were typically mere formalities, or they could be bypassed simply
by choosing a different path of legal study, such as clerking.'
However, during the Jacksonian era (roughly the 1820s and
1830s), and continuing through the Civil War, standards for bar
admission generally decreased and became far more erratic and
whimsical. During the Jacksonian era, Americans grew increasingly
distrustful of lawyers and felt that admissions practices were elitist
and contrary to the ideals of democracy.' The public saw the law
as primarily an upper class profession that exclusively controlled
entry and favored applicants who were well-connected and who
could easily secure apprenticeships.'s
As a result of the growing distrust of the bar, most admissions
standards disappeared or were greatly reduced to permit virtually
any man to practice law. In 1800, three-fourths of American juris-
dictions (states and territories) required a specifically delineated
period of preparation for law practice, but by 1840, only one-third
of all American jurisdictions had a defined period of preparation
for law practice. 4 Furthermore, by 1860, only about one-fourth of
all jurisdictions had a specified period of law study.' For exam-
ple, in 1851, Indiana's Constitution proclaimed that "'every person
of good moral character, being a voter, shall be entitled to admis-
sion to practice law in all courts of justice."'" 2 Also, in Ohio, to
be admitted to practice an applicant had only to show a certificate
signed by a practicing attorney which stated that the applicant had
"'regularly and attentively studied law."' 27 For a time, New
21. See infra notes 29-31 and accompanying text (discussing the ineffectual nature of
bar exams during the 19th century).
22. See CHROUST, supra note 13, at 165-66 (discussing antebellum efforts to enable lay
persons to practice law); HANDBOOK 2d ed., supra note 1, at 15.
23. For a discussion of the Jacksonian era's dissatisfaction with the "elitist" legal pro-
fession, see CHJOUsT, supra note 13, at 165-66, 171 (describing how fear of creating a
privileged class drove many to seek ways in which to deprofessionalize the bar); ROBERT
STEVENS, LAw ScHOOL: LEGAL EDUCATION IN AMERICA FROM TE 1850's To THE
1980's 10 (1983) (noting the temporary decline of formal educational requirements); Bard
& Bamford, supra note 2, at 395 (citing attacks against the bar as a professional organi-
zation).
24. Bard & Bamford, supra note 2, at 395 n.7.
25. Ia
26. HANDBOOK 2d ed., supra note 1, at 15 (quoting 1851 version of the Indiana Con-
stitution).
27. CHROUST, supra note 13, at 168 (quoting RoscoE POUND, THE LAWYER FROM
ANTIQUITY TO MODERN TaEs 229 (1953)).
Hampshire was not as "strict" as either Indiana or Ohio. In New

Hampshire from 1842-1859, the law simply "provided that any
citizen over twenty-one was entitled to be admitted to practice."
Despite the lowering or elimination of admission standards
during the Jacksonian era, most states had some form of examina-
tion requirement for bar admission, either in addition to or in lieu
of a period of apprenticeship.29 However, the exams were inade-
quate because courts neither had the time nor the skills to adminis-
ter a professional examination.3" As a result, anecdotes such as the
following were common:
In Abraham Lincoln's day, the state bar examination was a
most casual affair. This may, in part, have been because
Lincoln himself served on a board of bar examiners. One
Illinois applicant recalled being examined by Lincoln while
Abe took a bath: 'He asked me in a desultory way the
definition of a contract, and two or three fundamental ques-
tions, all of which I answered readily, and I thought, cor-
rectly. Beyond these meager inquiries . . .he asked nothing
more. As he continued his toilet, he entertained me with
recollections-many of them characteristically vivid and
racy--of his early practice and the various incidents and
adventures that attended his start in the profession. The
whole proceeding was so unusual and queer, if not gro-
tesque, that I was at a loss to determine whether I was
really being examined at all.3
28. STEVENS, supra note 23, at 9 (noting that despite New Hampshire's liberal re-
quirement, the profession tried to maintain standards by ostracizing "untrained interlopers").
In those states that did not eliminate requirements of legal education, the requirements
were often nominal standards that were easily met. See CHROUST, supra note 13, at 167
(pointing out the inadequacy of both enforcement and administration at the time). For
example, in Massachusetts, in 1836, applicants with or without legal training could go
before the courts to seek admission. Id. If the applicant was of good moral character and
had in fact studied law in a law office for three years the courts were "obliged to admit"
him. Id. Presumably, if the applicant came before the court with fewer than three years of
law study (or none at all), the courts had discretion to admit him. See id. (highlighting
the fact that persons without training could still apply). In addition, it was common at the
time for courts to adopt loose interpretations of what constituted an "apprenticeship,"
"clerkship," or "legal study" in order to admit more applicants. See id. at 167-68.
29. CHROuST, supra note 13, at 168.
30. Id.; see also STEVENS, supra note 23, at 25 ("The bar examination, although re-
quired in all states [by 1860] but Indiana and New Hampshire, was everywhere oral and
normally casual."); Stevens, supra note 3, at 17 (reporting that where oral exams existed
they were often short and farcical, because if an applicant failed he need only look for a
more lenient judge or court-appointed examiner and submit to an even easier test).
31. Seligman, supra note 3, at 48. The following equally vivid example of pre-Civil
C. Late Nineteenth Century Admissions and the Rise of

Law Schools
Prior to the Civil War there were virtually no law schools. 2
If a university or local bar initiated a law school or formal legal
educational program, it always failed within a few years.33 How-
ever, after the Civil War, there was growing demand for expert
legal advice to assist clients during the increasingly legalistic and
regulatory society of the Industrial Revolution.34 Around 1870,
professional articles lamented the state of legal training, asking why
the legal profession
should be so utterly regardless of its own fair name, and
careless of the honors which ought to be connected with
the practice of so noble a profession as to admit so readily
War bar examinations is also illustrative:

The Court appointed the usual committee to take charge of the victim [appli-
cant for admission to the bar]. We assembled in the applicant's room, where
'Pony' Boyd was at once appointed Master of Ceremonies, Grand Inquisitor
and Chairman of the Committee. After the usual preliminaries (to wit, some
heavy imbibing), lasting some two hours, 'Pony' called us from refreshment to
labor ... and the 'inquiry' proceeded along about the following lines: Ques-
tion: What books have you read? Answer Law books. Q. Then, sir, what is
law? A. (Confidentially) Now, 'Pony,' I did not expect to be made fun of. If I
did not know what law is, would I be wanting a license? The committee ruled
that 'Pony' . . . should answer the applicant's question, but he stood mute and
repeated the question . . . . A. (Indignantly) 'Pony,' you ought to know that
any one can answer such easy questions as that. If you are going to examine
me, stop this trifling and ask me something hard. The committee reported fa-
vorably (and) he was admitted.
CHROUST, supra note 13, at 170 n.196 (quoting McAfee, Riding the Circuits in Southwest
Missouri, The Bench and Bar of Missouri 73-74 (Stewart ed., 1898)).
32. STEVENS, supra note 23, at 8.
33. Id.
34. Id. at 9-10. Stevens stated:
Karl Llewellyn was right in postulating that every society has certain lawyer-
jobs that must be performed by someone .... Over the past decades anthro-
pologists have taught us that the formalized aspect of social control that we
call law is likely to be effective (or to penetrate, as they would say) only if it
reflects generally accepted norms. Apparently there was a demand in this coun-
try [after the Civil War]-either from above or below, or perhaps both direc-
tions-for a trained legal profession to operate an increasingly legalistic soci-
ety . . . . [Tihe pendulum began to swing back [toward standards of formal
training], with the refounding of law schools and increased interest in the more
organized side of bar life. Law was beginning once more to be seen as a
learned profession.
horde upon horde . . . within its precincts, with scarcely a

voucher for the ability or worth, morally or intellectually,
of such applicants as choose to present themselves. 5
In spite of a desire to raise standards of admission through
some institution such as a law school, even by the turn of the
century the "vast majority" of attorneys entered practice through
only an apprenticeship or clerkship." The law school, it was
hoped, would raise standards of admission and cure large dispari-
ties in admission requirements that existed among the states.37
In 1870, Christopher Columbus Langdell was largely responsi-
ble for the modem study of law through some form of law school
with a standardized curriculum. Langdell's model of legal educa-
tion included the case method and Socratic teaching, both still
firmly in place in modem law schools.39 Langdell intended to in-
crease standards, make them more uniform, and limit competition
in the legal profession.' At the time, Theodore Dwight proposed
an alternative form of legal education which included part-time law
school that taught practical legal skills (as opposed to Langdell's
teaching of theory through the case and Socratic methods) and a
period of mandatory law clerking."
Langdell's theory of legal education prevailed over Dwight's.
Langdell's theory may have succeeded not because it was intrinsi-
35. Id. at 24 (quoting an article printed in both the Albany Law Journal and the West-
ern Jurist in 1870).
37. Typically, admissions requirements were higher in the eastern states, and lower in
the South and the West. Id. at 8, 25.
38. John H. Schlegel, Langdell's Legacy or, the Case of the Empty Envelope, 36
STAN. L. REV. 1517, 1520 (1984).
39. Id.
40. Id. at 1520-21; see also STEVENS, supra note 23, at 25 (explaining that a com-
bination of law school, practical apprenticeship and an effective bar examination was
intended to restrict entrance to the bar). It is interesting to note how often legal historians
cite the limit of competition or barrier to entry as a reason for formal legal education.
Given the liberal rules for bar admission prior to Langdell's call for a standard law
school, one surmises that legal professionals desired barriers to entry to make it difficult
for applicants to become attorneys, thereby permitting only those truly dedicated to the
profession and willing to make a long-term commitment to law study to enter. Indeed, if
nearly everyone could become a lawyer, simply because he was of "good moral character"
or a voter over the age of twenty-one, lawyering might have lost its distinction as a
"profession." For a discussion asserting that market barriers to entry are an essential part
of the concept of a "profession," see generally MAGALI SARFATrI LARSON, THE RISE OF
PROFESSIONALISM: A SOCIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS (1977).
41. Schlegel, supra note 38, at 1524.
cally superior to Dwight's, but because Langdell was from Har-

vard, perhaps the most influential educational institution in Ameri-
ca.42 Furthermore, Langdell's theory was supported by two famous
"missionaries," namely, William A. Keener (author of the nine-
teenth century legal treatise The Methods of Legal Education) and
John Henry Wigmore (author of the famous evidence treatise
known as Wigmore on Evidence and dean of Northwestern Uni-
versity Law School from 1901-1929).' Wigmore and Keener
helped carry Langdell's message throughout the legal establish-
ment." Finally, Langdell's theory benefited from the aura of mod-
em science, for he promoted his idea of legal education as the
"science of law."'45
Once Langdell's theory of education gained preeminence, law
schools proliferated to put it into practice. It was not until 1921
that the profession began to "regulate" law schools by determining
if they complied with its recommended standards of quality.' In
these early days of accreditation, most students graduated from
unapproved law schools.47 Because the unapproved law schools
did not have to abide by any standards for legal education, the rig-
ors of their programs varied, and they generally had lower stan-
42. ld.
43. Id.
44. Id.
45. Id.; see also STEvENs, supra note 23, at 24 (noting that in the 1870s some were
concerned that the law had drifted away from its roots as a liberal science and had be-
come a mere trade). Other less important or more difficult to prove reasons may have
contributed to the dominance of Langdell's theory. Langdell's system permitted the en-
hancement of law professors' egos. Under the Socratic method and the requirement of
full-time legal study, law professors retain a great deal of control over a student's educa-
tion, and consequently have much influence over who is eventually admitted to practice.
See Schlegel, supra note 38, at 1524 (attributing the success of the Harvard method to
several possible factors, including its positive effect on the egos of law professors). Also,
Langdell's theory benefited from the common reasoning fallacy of novelty (the idea that
novelty translates into better quality). By comparison, Langdell's model was more novel
than Dwight's. Id.
46. "In 1921 the ABA directed the Council of the Section of Legal Education and
Admissions to the Bar to publish from time to time the names of law schools that com-
ply with its recommended standards. Thus the Council began the practice of 'approving'
or 'accrediting' law schools." Bard & Bamford, supra note 2, at 397 n.23; see also THE
NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF BAR EXAMINERS, THE BAR EXAMINERS' HANDBOOK 43 (Ist
ed. 1968) [hereinafter HANDBOOK 1st ed.] (discussing the history of law school accredita-
tion).
47. In 1924, only 32% of law graduates came from approved or accredited law
schools. By 1965, 92% of law graduates came from approved programs. Bard & Bamford,
supra note 2, at 397. By comparison, in 1978, 95.8% of bar applicants graduated from
approved law schools. HANDBOOK 3d ed., supra note 5, at 72:2003.
dards than those imposed on approved law schools.'

The resulting disparity between approved and unapproved law
schools is sometimes cited as a principle reason for the rise of a
relatively standard written bar examination.49 Some theorize that
as "inferior law schools" proliferated throughout the early twentieth
century, the bar exam was increasingly seen as a means to combat
the existence of these inferior law schools, either by increasing
their standards or driving them out of business." However, the
written bar exam principally developed as a replacement for oral
bar exams, and not as a check on law schools.5'
Recall that prior to the Civil War, bar examinations, if given at
all, were largely oral." In addition, these oral exams varied great-
ly in seriousness depending on which judge or court-appointed
examiner gave them, and the exams were often laughable.53 The
ancestor to the modem written bar examination developed between
1870 and 1890"4 and gained substantial ground and acceptance in
the 1890s."5 By the 1920s, there was a written bar examination in
56
most states.
As law schools developed after 1870, so did the concept of
diploma privilege. During the rise of law schools, legal
clerkships or apprenticeships were still a primary means for aspir-
ing attorneys to acquire their legal education.58 Because law stu-
48. See Bard & Bamford, supra note 2, at 399-400 (arguing that unapproved law
schools have lower standards than and are inferior to approved law schools).
49. Today, a great many supporters of bar exams cite the exam as a means to main-
tain high standards among the ABA-approved law schools. See, e.g., HANDBOOK 3d ed.,
supra note 5, at 74:4-74:5; Griswold, supra note 3, at 81; Stevens, supra note 3, at
23-24; Thomas, supra note 3, at 70.
51. Stevens, supra note 3, at 21; see also STEVENS, supra note 23, at 25-26 (explain-
ing that the bar exam was intended to standardize admissions requirements and was con-
sidered egalitarian in the sense that its mission was to equalize the disparate admissions
requirements in various regions around the country).
52. The first written bar exam predated the Civil War and was instituted in 1855 by
Massachusetts. However, on a broad scale, written bar examinations remained unique until
long after the Civil War. Stevens, supra note 3, at 21.
53. See supra notes 29-31 and accompanying text.
55. Stevens, supra note 3, at 21.
56. Id.
57. See supra note 5 (describing a process whereby graduation from certain law
schools results in automatic admission to the bar).
58. STEVENS, supra note 23, at 24 (noting that "[t]he vast majority of the legal pro-
fession until the turn of the century still experienced only on-the-job legal education").
Law office study may still account for an applicant's entire legal education in California,
dents could enter law practice through clerkship or apprenticeship

without going to law school, the diploma privilege was necessary
to entice students to attend law schools. 9
However, the diploma privilege did not enjoy sustained appro-
bation. Its peak popularity was during the interval between 1879
and 1929.' But, in 1921, the ABA formally expressed its disap-
proval of the diploma privilege, thus significantly affecting its
continued popularity and leading to the privilege's decline ever
since.6 The ABA stated, "[t]he American Bar Association is of
the opinion that graduation from a law school should not confer
the right of admission to the bar, and that every candidate should
be subject to an examination by public authority to determine his
fitness."'62
In 1971, the ABA and the National Conference of Bar Examin-
ers reaffirmed the position taken in 1921 and added the following,
offering some of the common justifications for the bar exam:
Bar examinations ... encourage law graduates to study
subjects not taken in law school. They require the applicant
to review all he has learned in law school with a result
that he is made to realize the interrelation of the various
divisions of the law-to view the separate subject courses
which he took in law school as a related whole. This the
curriculum of most law schools does not achieve. Also it is
the first time many of the applicants will have been exam-
ined by persons other than those who taught them, a valu-
able experience in preparation in appearing before a com-
pletely strange judge.63
The ABA and National Conference of Bar Examiners offer
several reasons for the decline of the diploma privilege. They in-
Vermont, Virginia, and Washington, and law office study may account for part of an
applicant's legal education in Maine, New York, and Wyoming. HANDBOOK 3d ed., supra
note 5, at 72:2001-72:2002.
59. See Stevens, supra note 3, at 18-19 (arguing that diploma privilege was a means
for law schools' economic survival).
60. See id. (tabulating data concerning the number of states with the diploma privilege
at the end of each decade from 1840 to 1970).
61. See supra note 6 and accompanying text (addressing the modern decline of the
diploma privilege).
63. Id.at 190. The ABA and National Conference of Bar Examiners has retained the
1921 ABA statement and 1971 reaffirmation in its most recent justification for the bar
exam. See HANDBOOK 3d ed., supra note 5, at 74:1.
elude: 1) lack of uniform standards among law schools, especially

length of study program, 2) impracticality of having the privilege
for some law schools within a state, but not for all law schools
within that state,' 3) desire to have state authorities, rather than
academicians, help determine which applicants are admitted to
practice, 4) prevention of low standard law schools escaping the
high standards imposed by the bar examiners, and 5) sincere public
desire to raise admissions standards which would be better accom-
plished through means other than a diploma privilege, namely a bar
exam.' As a result, the diploma privilege is no longer a means of
admission in any state except Wisconsin.'
D. Modern Admissions Standards
Today, legal education requirements vary little from state to
state. Prospective lawyers may not "read law" on their own and
then submit themselves before a judge or bar examiner to gain
admission as Abraham Lincoln did in 1837.67 Only in a handful
of states may an applicant receive a legal education, in whole or in
part, from a clerkship or apprenticeship." Modem applicants must
complete at least three-fourths of the credit required to earn a
baccalaureate degree at an accredited college or university. 9 Then
the applicant must have completed all requirements for graduation
from an ABA-approved law *school before being eligible for law
practice." "Neither private study, correspondence study or law
office training, nor' 71 age or experience should be substituted for law
school education."
64. Due to greater mobility of today's society this argument could be extended to in-
clude the impracticality of having the privilege in only some states but not in others.
65. HANDBOOK 2d ed., supra note 1, at 20-21.
66. See supra note 5 (summarizing Wisconsin's version of the diploma privilege).
67. See THE LINCOLN READER 87-94 (Paul M. Angle ed., 1942) (discussing Lincoln's
days studying law and his admission to practice).
68. See supra note 58 (listing states which continue to recognize on-the-job training as
an acceptable form of legal education).
69. HANDBOOK 3d ed., supra note 5, at 72:1001. The requirement that an applicant
have completed only "three-fourths" of the baccalaureate degree is somewhat misleading.
Only about 10% of ABA-approved law schools will accept students who have completed
only three-fourths of their undergraduate bachelor's degree. Therefore, the vast majority of
applicants actually will have completed and earned their baccalaureate degrees before
beginning law study. Id.
70. See id. (explaining that the applicant need not actually earn or receive the law
degree before moving on to the next step in the admissions process, because some law
schools do not award a diploma until after applicants sit for the bar exam).
71. HANDBOOK 3d ed., supra note 5, at 72:2001.
However, graduation from an ABA approved law school is not

mandatory in all states.' A few states recognize graduation from
a state-approved law school as fulfillment of the legal education
requirement.' But, a law degree from only a state-approved law
school will usually not qualify the applicant to sit for the bar in
other states. 74 In contrast, graduation from an ABA-approved law
school satisfies the legal education requirement in all states.
Finally, following completion of law study, the applicant must
pass a state-administered bar examination. 76 The Code of Recom-
mended Standards for Bar Examiners provides the following de-
scription of modem bar examinations:
The bar examination may include multiple choice questions,
such as those on the Multistate Bar Examination, and
should include essay questions. Questions should not be
based on unusual or unique local case or statutory law,
except in subjects with respect to which local variations are
highly significant and applicants are informed that answers
should be based upon local law. An essay question should
not be repeated except after a substantial lapse of time.
Questions should not be labeled as to subject matter and
should not be so worded as to be deceptive or misleading.
Sufficient time should be allowed to permit the applicant to
make a careful analysis of the questions and to prepare
well-reasoned answers to essay questions.'
Despite the care taken in bar examination design and the guidelines
set forth in the Code of Recommended Standards for Bar Exam-
iners, bar exams are not the best available means to test and pre-
72. Id. at 72:2001-72:2003.

73. Id.
74. I.
75. Id. at 72:2003.
76. In addition, there is a requirement that the applicant be of good "moral character
and fitness." However, this requirement usually attaches to the bar examination application
process and does not warrant separate consideration. For discussion of the moral character
and fitness requirement, see HANDBOOK 3d ed., supra note 5, at 73:1-73:3476.
77. Id. at 74:4001. In addition, some states require an extra component to the bar
exam called the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination. See id. at 74:301.
Also, it is important to note that only applicants seeking admission for the first time must
take a bar examination. Many states, through a process known as reciprocity, permit prac-
ticing attorneys from other states admission to practice in their state, provided the practic-
ing attorney meets certain requirements (such as minimum years of practice). See id. at
74:101-74:105 (discussing reciprocity). See also BAR/BRI DIGEST, supra note 5, passim
(providing rules for reciprocity in all states).
1204 CASE WESTERN RESERVE LAW REVIEW (Vol. 45:1191
pare students for law practice.

Im. ANALYSIS: CRITIQUE OF THE JUSTIFICATIONS FOR
BAR EXAMS
According to E. Marshall Thomas and the National Conference
of Bar Examiners, the "obvious purpose" of the bar examination is
to determine what applicants should be admitted to the
practice of law, by testing: (1) the applicant's ability to
make an analysis of legal problems; (2) his knowledge of
the law, and (3) his ability to apply his legal knowledge in
working out a rational solution in a lawyer-like fash-
ion .... [The bar examination] should require the appli-
cant to demonstrate his ability to analyze the facts present-
ed, to recognize the legal points involved, to apply the
proper legal principles, and to give well reasoned an-
78
swers.
Whether the bar examination has such an "obvious purpose" is an
issue this Note will not address. However, because this Note does
not propose to attack examinations generally or the way legal
educators evaluate law students, the above statement may be ac-
cepted for the purpose of further analysis. 79 To be fair, E. Mar-
shall Thomas does not believe that his stated "obvious purpose" for
the bar exam is sufficient justification for its existence."0 He and
many others go beyond the "obvious purpose" and offer a variety
of justifications for the bar exam."' What follows is a critique of
78. Thomas, supra note 3, at 69; see also HANDBOOK 3d ed., supra note 5, at
74:2001-74:2002 (relying on Thomas' analysis to explain the purpose of the bar exam);
Bruce Hamilton, Eliminate the Bar Exam!, ARIZ. Arr'Y, Aug.-Sept. 1991, at 36, 37 (argu-
ing that "[b]ar exams are designed to synthesize the law into a cohesive whole and to
test the examinees' ability to address complex fact situations with time limitations, pres-
sure, competition and the need for a sound solution-not unlike the daily practice of
law").
79. But see Philip C. Kissam, Law School Examinations, 42 VAND. L. REV. 433
(1989) (arguing that typical blue book essay exams or any similar high-pressure classroom
exam, like those given in law school, do not always test the examinee's ability to analyze
legal problems, show his or her knowledge of the law, and work out solutions to the
problems presented in a lawyer-like fashion). Kissam supports a more expanded testing
process such as research papers or lengthy take-home or library exams to truly evaluate a
test-takers's ability. Id. at 493-502. If Kissam is correct, his findings may cast doubt on
the ability of bar exams, as they now are administered, to succeed in their "obvious pur-
pose."
80. Thomas, supra note 3, at 69-70 (admitting that law schools have already taught the
same skills tested by the bar exam).
81. In the area of support for the bar exam, E. Marshall Thomas, George Neff
19951 THE BAR EXAMINATION: JUSTIFICATIONS AND ALTERNATIVES 1205
both the common and esoteric justifications for the bar exam.
A. Justification: The Bar Exam Weeds Out Incompetent
Applicants
Supporters of the bar exam cite consumer protection as perhaps
the most important bar exam function. Since all attorneys owe a
duty of providing competent legal advice to their clients, and legal
educators owe at least some duty to instill that competence, there
is no question that mechanisms should exist to protect the public
from incompetent practitioners. Some supporters state the consumer
protection justification in terms of testing a "minimum level of
competency" or determining which applicants have the bare neces-
sity of skills to be a lawyer.' Others state their position in terms
of testing for incompetency as opposed to competency.83 No mat-
Stevens, Stephen P. Klein, and former Harvard Law School dean Erwin N. Griswold lead
the cause. Because these scholars have both written extensively on the subject and be-
cause the National Conference of Bar Examiners has relied for years on their reasoning in
defense of bar exams, I have taken most of the justifications for the bar exam from their
works. For the National Conference of Bar Examiners' reliance on the works of Thomas,
George Stevens, Griswold, and Klein, see HANDBOOK 1st ed., supra note 46, at 127;
HANDBOOK 2d ed., supra note 1, at 190-98; HANDBOOK 3d ed., supra note 5, at 10:4-
10:5, 74:1-74:2005.
82. See HANDBOOK 2d ed., supra note 1, at 190-92 (stating that the bar exam is still
important in protecting the public from incompetent practicioners); see also Malcolm Getz
et al., Competition at the Bar: The Correlation Between the Bar Examination Pass Rate
and the Profitability of Practice, 67 VA. L. REV. 863, 880-81 & n.39 (1981) (arguing
that despite the fact the bar exam may be an unsatisfactory competency measure, it still
performs a valuable service to consumers of legal advice who have no mechanism of de-
termining whether an attorney is competent); Myrna Oliver, Testing the Bar Exam, CAL.
LAw., June 1985, at 53, 53 (quoting the California Committee of Bar Examiners' main
concern as expressed by its chairperson: "[O]ur paramount interest is protecting the public
from people who can't demonstrate a minimum level of skills"); Stevens, supra note 3,
at 34 (stating that graduation from law school alone does not guarantee a minimum level
of competency); Thomas, supra note 3, at 69, 73 (claiming that the bar exam serves the
function of determining who is eligible to practice).
83. See Oliver, supra note 82, at 55 (reporting the opinion of Stephen P. Klein, a
noted analyst at the Rand Corporation who has written extensively on what abilities writ-
ten bar exams test and their usefulness as a screening device). Klein argues that the "'bar
exam is not designed to measure everything a person needs to know to be a lawyer . . .
. The things that it does measure are relevant to the practice of law."' Id. As support,
Klein offers two studies which indicated that students who scored high on the traditional
bar exam also scored high on new "performance tests," which evaluate examinees' abil-
ities to interview and complete "other tasks common in law practice." Id. The implication
is that the bar exam need not test for other lawyering skills, because the applicants who
perform well on the traditional bar exam would also perform well on the performance
tests. However, assuming these performance tests are adequate means of evaluating com-
mon lawyering skills, Klein fails to offer data for applicants who do not score high on
the traditional bar exam. If the marginal or poor bar examinees scored well on the perfor-
ter how one presents the consumer protection justification, the

position that the bar exam can sort out who has what it takes to be
a lawyer and who has not is untenable.
Rather than testing for competency (or incompetency), the bar
exam is essentially an achievement test and does not test for what
lawyers actually do.84 In fact, there is strong evidence to suggest
that the bar exam merely verifies what has already taken place in
the law schools." Research sponsored by the American Bar Foun-
dation and other groups has found that law school grades strongly
correlate with bar exam passage rates. 6 The authors of the study
concluded that "[t]his result suggests that bar examination scores
and law school grades are measuring the same legal skills and
knowledge."87 In addition, research has indicated that both under-
graduate grades and Law School Admission Test (LSAT) scores
also correlate with bar exam passage rates, though not quite as
strongly as law school grades. 8 Therefore, the bar exam, if it
tests legal competency as its supporters suggest, may test for skills
and "lawyering ability" that have already been tested for at least
three times in a law student's career, namely, during undergraduate
training, the LSAT, and law school training.
Whether the bar exam tests for legal skills or abilities related
to lawyering is highly questionable. Indeed, the issue of whether
bar exams test legal reasoning or lawyering skills arose in the
context of a Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals case, Richardson v.
mance tests, Klein's argument would be severely weakened.

84. See Bell, supra note 3, at 1216 (stating that the bar exam is totally unrelated to
the successful practice of law); Carlson & Wens, supra note 3, at 214 (stating that bar
exams are nothing more than achievement tests); Rogers, supra note 4, at 589-90 (stating
that the bar exam does not assure competency in basic lawyering skills); Seligman, supra
note 3, at 49 (stating that bar exams do not measure the legal reasoning ability that mod-
em legal practice requires).
85. See generally Carlson & Werts, supra note 3 (reporting evidence from a study
sponsored by the American Bar Foundation, Association of American Law Schools, Law
School Admission Council, and the National Conference of Bar Examiners, in association
with the Educational Testing Service, that the bar exam merely verifies law school re-
suits).
86. Id. at 220, 274. In assessing the quality of their sample, the authors offered that
"[tlhe sample studied and the results obtained in this study seem reasonably representative
in the light of what is known about the population of applicants to the bar and the re-
suits of related studies." Id. at 291.
87. Id. at 220. "Cumulative undergraduate grade-point average and law school grade-
point average are highly reliable measures [of bar exam results]." Id. "The LSAT and
undergraduate grade-point average have a moderately strong relationship with performance
on the bar examination." Id. at 259.
88. Id. at 259.
McFadden.9 In Richardson, failing applicants to the South Caroli-

na bar challenged South Carolina's admission practices under Title
VII of the Civil Rights Act."° Under Title VII, a licensing or job
admission test must be sufficiently "job related" to comply. 9' The
Title VII test for licensing or job admission exams states that "the
test used must be 'shown, by professionally acceptable methods, to
be predictive of or significantly correlated with important elements
of work behavior which comprise or are relevant to the job or jobs
for which the candidates are being evaluated."'"
The Richardson court decided the case without employing the
Title VII test for job relatedness.' However, if the Title VII stan-
dards for job relatedness had applied in Richardson, Title VII may
well have rendered South Carolina's bar exam unconstitutional.
Based upon testimony by South Carolina bar examiners as to how
they graded bar exams, the court found that the evidence was
unclear whether the South Carolina bar exam bore a "'fair and
substantial relationship' to the determination of minimal
competency.94 Note how close the court came to saying that the
South Carolina bar exam would be unconstitutional if the Civil
Rights Act standards for job relatedness were applied to it.9' Thus,
Richardson v. McFadden serves as some evidence that the bar
exam does not test for legal competency.'
89. 540 F.2d 744 (4th Cir. 1976), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 968 (1978).
90. Id.
91. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e (1982); see also Richardson, 540 F.2d at 746 (stating that
under a Title VII standard, job-relatedness must be predictive of success in the field).
92. Richardson, 540 F.2d at 746 (citing Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405,
431 (1975)).
93. In declining to decide the Title VII issue of sufficient job relatedness, the court in-
stead decided that the South Carolina bar exam complied with the Equal Protection Clause
of the Fourteenth Amendment, in that proof of disparate racial impact does not invoke the
equivalent of Title VII job relatedness standards upon the bar exam. Id. at 747. Thus, the
bar exam, to remain constitutional, need only comply with the lesser standard of "rational
relationship" to the job of lawyering. Id. at 748; see also HANDBOOK 2d ed., supra note
1, at 42 (discussing constitutionality of the bar exam under Richardson).
94. Richardson, 540 F.2d at 749-50. The bar examiners supported their contentions that
their exam questions tested for minimum lawyer competency because 1) each examiner is
a successful practicing attorney in South Carolina, who from "observation and experience,
understands the skills necessary to practice law competently," 2) each examiner reviewed
sample bar exam questions prepared by the National Council of Bar Examiners, and 3)
each examiner designed questions to determine whether applicants possess minimum legal
competence. Id. at 748.
95. For the argument that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act should govern state li-
censing agencies, including bar examiners, see Rogers, supra note 4. Rogers concludes
that if Title VII did apply, bar exams would be unconstitutional. Id. at 624.
96. For additional support that the bar exam does not prepare applicants for law prac-
To be sure, Richardson v. McFadden may not represent a

significant blow to the justification that the bar exam tests mini-
mum legal competency, because Richardson provided only dictum
against the bar exam. However, the position that the bar exam fails
to test for the minimum skills required of attorneys was also taken
in the MacCrate Report, the results of a three-year project conduct-
ed by a blue ribbon Task Force comprised of sections of the ABA,
the Association of American Law Schools, American Bar Founda-
tion, and a range of legal practitioners and scholars.' The ulti-
mate goal of the Task Force was to improve the legal profession
and the preparation of lawyers for practice.98 To accomplish its
goal, the Task Force formulated a lengthy and carefully considered
analysis of the fundamental skills and values necessary for all
lawyers." Two of the fundamental lawyering skills analyzed by
the Task Force are skills that bar exam supporters traditionally
tice or test for lawyering skills, see generally Baird, supra note 3. The Baird study "at-
tempted to determine the activities of the legally trained, the use to which they put their
legal skills, and their views of the utility of various aspects of their legal training." Id. at
264. Baird surveyed a sample of 1600 legally-trained people from six different law
schools at three different stages in their careers (beginners, mid-career professionals, and
advanced "veteran" professionals). The portion of Baird's study relevant to this Note is
his survey of the skills legally trained people employ in their work and their perception
of the value of their legal training in developing those skills. Id. at 268-83. Except for
knowledge of statutory law, Baird found that his subjects emphasized the usefulness of
general skills over the usefulness of specific areas of legal knowledge. Id. at 292. Six
skills emerged as important from the Baird survey: 1) counseling, 2) interviewing clients,
3) directing work of others, 4) organizing flow of work (Baird referred to skills 3 & 4 as
"office practice"), 5) interviewing witnesses, and 6) negotiating. Id. at 293. Those sur-
veyed felt that their legal educations had left them ill-prepared to use these skills. Id. The
results of the Baird study imply that a mechanism intended to test minimum competency
to practice law which emphasizes substantive knowledge, and to a lesser extent legal
reasoning and communication, may miss the mark, because legally trained professionals
have identified those areas of their legal training to be less useful in their roles as legal
professionals than the areas the bar exam does not test. Id.
97. See AMERicAN BAR ASSOCIATION, LEGAL EDUCATION AND PROFESSIONAL DEVEL-
OPMENT-AN EDUCATIONAL CONTINUUM: REPORT OF THE TASK FORCE ON LAW SCHOOLS
AND THE PROFESSION: NARROWING THE GAP 278 (1992) [hereinafter MACCRATE REPORT].
This report is named for the chairperson of the Task Force, Robert MacCrate. The Task
Force endeavored to research and describe the "breadth and complexities of the legal
profession," and performed an "in-depth study of the full range of skills and values nec-
essary for a lawyer." Id. at xi.
98. Id. at 3-8, 123.
99. Id. at 123-222. The Task Force noted that it would be impossible for any group to
write a comprehensive statement of the skills and values necessary for a lawyer with
which all members of the profession would agree. Id. at 123-24. However, in endeavoring
to compile such a statement, the Task Force hoped to challenge the profession to study
what skills are central to the role and functioning of lawyers in our society. Id. at 124.
claim the bar exam evaluates: legal analysis and communica-

tion."°° However, the Task Force identified and analyzed a host
of additional lawyering skills necessary for lawyers to provide
minimum competent legal advice. Those skills included problem
solving, legal research, factual investigation, counseling, negotiation,
litigation and alternative dispute-resolution procedures, organization
and management of legal work, and recognizing and resolving
ethical dilemmas.' Although the Task Force found that the pre-
ceding list of lawyering skills, together with substantive legal
knowledge, legal analysis, and communication, are the fundamental
lawyering skills necessary to provide competent legal advice," a
bar applicant need not master the Task Force's list of lawyering
skills to be admitted to practice. 3 However, if an attorney lacks
familiarity with an identified skill, the attorney should render legal
advice only if other attorneys who are familiar with the skill lend
assistance."
Despite the presumption that competent legal advice depends
on familiarity with all of the Task Force's identified skills, the
Task Force recognized that bar exams cannot be employed to eval-
uate applicants' familiarity with those skills. 5 Because students
and attorneys attain skills in a holistic way, usually through a
combination of formal legal education and practical experience, a
bar exam cannot possibly test for all the skills necessary to be a
lawyer."° Indeed, most supporters of the bar exam recognize that
the bar exam cannot test for all potentially useful lawyering skills.
However, to the extent that the bar exam is supposed to test for
minimum competency, the MacCrateReport suggests that minimum
competency cannot be tested on a bar examination, because mini-
mum competency is comprised of a host of skills learned in both
100. Id. at 151-57, 172-76. The Task Force noted also that substantive knowledge of
legal rules and principles, is also necessary to be a competent lawyer. Id. at 125. Howev-
er, the Task Force does not consider legal knowledge to be a skill, rather it is something
all attorneys must possess before giving legal advice. Id. The lawyering skills analyzed by
the Task Force are means to acquire legal knowledge.
101. Id. at 141-51, 157-72, 176-207.
102. See MACCRATE REPORT, supra note 97, at 124-25 (stating that a range of both
knowledge and skill is necessary to adequately represent a client).
103. Id. at 125.
104. Id. Thus, minimum competency will often be provided by a "team" of lawyers, all
of whom maintain different, yet complementary, fundamental lawyering skills.
105. Id. at 132-33.
106. See id.; see also id. at 278 (explaining the wide array of lawyering skills that are
not tested by the bar exam).
educational and practical environments.

In addition, rather than testing legal skills or competence, the
bar exam tests examinees' memories and asks them merely to
disgorge what they recall."°7 The mere form of the exam asks
examinees to replicate the knowledge they have retained from their
bar review courses. No lawyer must rely solely on "the law" kept
in his or her head, yet such reliance is exactly what the bar exam
tests.' Indeed, if attorneys based all of their legal arguments on
only the information in their heads, they would probably be liable
for malpractice." ° Attorneys usually have many days, weeks, or
months to prepare their legal arguments. Even if they have an
emergency motion or brief to file, it is unlikely that they are ex-
pected to give a legal dissertation based on an analysis of facts in
thirty minutes as the bar exam requires. Therefore, an exam which
tests memory seems absurd given the context of what attorneys
actually do."0
107. Bell, supra note 3, at 1216; see also Seligman, supra note 3, at 49 (claiming that
the bar exam demands only that examinees pinpoint issues they've been taught to spot by
"cram courses"). The worst offender in terms of testing memory is the Multistate Bar
Examination (MBE) portion of the exam which consists entirely of multiple-choice ques-
tions. The MBE requires no legal reasoning, but rather requires only rote memorization of
bar review outlines. Id. at 50. Thus, the MBE may not be a true test of lawyering ability
because lawyering involves
the assimilation of facts, research of the law, development of legal issues and
strategies, segregating relevant from irrelevant, and helpful from unhelpful mate-
rials, and the exercise of judgment in drawing a conclusion. Few of these pro-
cesses [are] thought to be well-tested by . . . the MBE, which depends for the
most part on recognition of accurate or inaccurate discrete statements of law.
Jeffrey M. Feldman & Margie M. Neille, Certifying Professional Competence: The Alaska
Experiment, 52 B. EXAMINER 4, 6 (1983) (quoting Armando M. Menocal HlI, explaining
why performance testing of actual lawyering skills should be part of the bar exam). In
addition, the high value bar exams place on memorization of legal rules or principles may
have serious consequences for legal education in general. See infra notes 146-49 and
accompanying text.
108. Bell, supra note 3, at 1216. Judge Edward F. Bell stated that no attorney "will go
into a trial depending on his memory to carry him through." Id.
109. In analyzing his experience with the Massachusetts bar exam, Joel Seligman argues
that the bar exam emphasizes only simple, mechanized rules "that any competent attorney
could-and would, if necessary-look up in a library in a matter of minutes." Seligman,
supra note 3, at 50.
110. In addition, regardless of what "skills" the bar exam actually tests, "non-academic"
skills are undervalued by the bar exam. Research by the ABA Task Force on Professional
Competence found that many applicants who are strong in "non-academic" lawyering
skills, such as courtroom advocacy or negotiation, fail bar exams. Graeme Browning, Fail
the Bar, Sue the Examiners, 69 A.B.A. J. 1656, 1660 (1983). Also, the bar exam does
nothing to foster "lawyering skills" such as those identified in the MacCrate Report.
B. Justification: The Bar Motivates Students to Work Hard

and Law Schools to Maintain High Standards
Many supporters of the bar exam believe it is justified by its
effect of stimulating students to pay attention and work hard during
law school."' This justification makes the questionable assump-
tion that other stimulants are inadequate, such as law school exami-
nations, pressure to maintain high grades for prestige, pride, and
employability, pressure to be prepared when called on in class, and
pressure to maintain a minimum grade point average to either stay
in school or in some cases to maintain a scholarship. In other
words, there are other means to motivate lazy students short of a
bar exam. In a similar vein, supporters argue that the bar exam
forces law schools to maintain high standards."' Presumably, if a
high percentage of a law school's students fail to pass the rigorous
standards of the bar examiners, the law school will improve its
program to boost its bar passage rate and thereby keep its program
attractive to prospective students.
A unique version of the "bar exam as law school stimulant"
argument is that if the bar exam is eliminated, law schools will
rapidly deteriorate under Gresham's Law."' Gresham's Law is an
economic law that says other things being equal cheap currency
will drive out strong currency." 4 In ordinary discourse, Gresham's
MACCRATE REPORT, supra note 97, at 277-78 (finding that bar examiners intend to test
applicants' legal analysis and communication skills, but in reality test primarily for knowl-
edge of legal rules); see also id. at 135-222 (explaining and analyzing fundamental law-
yering skills and values). To be sure, the answer to correcting the undervaluation of non-
academic lawyering skills is not necessarily the elimination of the bar exam. After all, the
bar exam might simply be changed to test non-academic skills. However, due to the bar
exam's poor job in evaluating students' "academic" skills and the existence of better
means to test both academic and non-academic lawyering skills, the bar exam is an infe-
rior means of determining competency. For a proposed alternative to the bar exam, see
discussion infra part V.
111. See, e.g., Stevens, supra note 3, at 27-28 (stating that many supporters of the bar
exam believe it keeps students "on their toes"); Thomas, supra note 3, at 70 (claiming
that the bar exam is a "healthy educational stimulant" for law students).
112. See, e.g., Bard & Bamford, supra note 2, at 408 (stating that the most important
effect of the bar exam has been the improvement or extermination of low-quality law
schools); Griswold, supra note 3, at 81 (stating that bar exams encourage schools to do
the best job they can); Stevens, supra note 3, at 23-24 (stating that the bar exam is the
only fair way to check the adequacy of legal education); Thomas, supra note 3, at 70
(arguing that the bar exam stimulates law school faculty to maintain high standards).
113. Griswold, supra note 3, at 83.
114. See JAMES P. QUIRK, INTERMEDIATE MICROECONOMICS 4 (3d ed. 1987) (explaining
the history and application of Gresham's Law).
Law means that other things being equal, a cheaper or inferior

good will replace a superior good. Thus, one who relies on
Gresham's Law fears that inferior law schools will replace superior
law schools if the bar exam is no longer available to push all law
schools toward high standards. Thus, the "bar exam as stimulant"
argument implies that without a bar exam a disparity in price and
academic rigor will develop among law schools. The argument's
hidden assumption is that students will then patronize the cheaper
and easier law schools, and avoid the more expensive and difficult
law schools. This argument might be persuasive if in real life other
things truly were equal; but they are not. That is to say, the bar
exam is not the only mechanism to maintain high law school stan-
dards. The legal market for high quality lawyers and the practical
necessity of ABA accreditation are major influences that will con-
tinue to keep law school standards high if there is no bar exam.
Finally, the argument that the bar exam must remain to encour-
age law schools is anachronistic. Historically, fostering law schools
was a primary purpose for the modem bar exam as the two institu-
tions developed simultaneously." 5 When the modem written bar
exam developed, law schools were just beginning." 6 Most law
schools were unaccredited, thus posing a real danger of graduating
unqualified students." 7 Today, virtually all law schools are ac-
credited according to the high standards of the ABA, and in the
vast majority of states, only graduates from ABA-accredited law
schools may enter the bar."8 Therefore, a primary justification for
19
bar exams rings less true today.
C. Justification: Studying for the Bar Exam Provides Applicants
With a Beneficial Comprehensive Review of the Law
Not only does the bar exam test for minimum legal competen-
cy, but according to its supporters, the exam also provides students
with a beneficial comprehensive review of the law. In other words,
the bar exam is the first opportunity for law students to combine

116. See supra text accompanying notes 38-51.
117. See supra notes 47-50 and accompanying text (discussing development of law
schools and written bar exams).
118. See MACCRATE REPORT, supra note 97, at 113 (stating that for most states admis-
sion to an accredited law school is a prerequisite for admission to the bar).
119. At this point it is important to remind the reader that bar exams may undermine
rather than improve the quality of law schools. See infra notes 146-49 and accompanying
text (discussing the bar exam's negative impact on legal education).
their knowledge of various areas of law (such as torts, contracts,

and tax) all at once. 2 ° However, it is not clear that the bar exam
can provide any kind of meaningful review or opportunity for
students to synthesize their knowledge of the law. The reason is
that the bar exam primarily tests an applicant's ability to recall and
recite appropriate legal rules.' As a result, applicants prepare for
bar exams by attending cram courses which teach students how to
pass tests and do not provide a review of the law for them to
retain after they take the exam. Moreover, at best the bar exam
calls for examinees to recount what they learned in their bar re-
view courses, and does not require the implied higher order cog-
nitive skill of synthesis."
Furthermore, supporters of the bar exam have not shown that a
comprehensive review is particularly valuable, at least so much as
to justify the expense, aggravation, and delay a bar exam causes
applicants. As mentioned earlier, if lawyers were required only to
120. Presumably, this comprehensive review takes place both while the applicant studies
for the bar exam and while taking it. For authors who support the bar exam on grounds
of providing a comprehensive review, see, for example, Bard & Bamford, supra note 2,
at 408; Griswold, supra note 3, at 81 (stating that the diploma privilege allows students
to graduate and practice law without ever showing, in a comprehensive way, that he or
she is qualified); Hamilton, supra note 78, at 37; Stevens, supra note 3, at 24, 27 (argu-
ing that this comprehensive review is also an opportunity for students to demonstrate a
"synthesis" of law, and that testing for the ability to synthesize the law alone justifies the
bar exam); Thomas, supra note 3, at 70 (stating that the bar provides a comprehensive
exam combining various areas of law, whereas law school exams deal with specific areas
of law).
121. See MACCRATE REPORT, supra note 97, at 279 (discussing the false premise that
one can, and should, know the law in all the many subject areas tested by the bar ex-
am); see also supra notes 107-10 and accompanying text.
122. See generally TAXONOMY OF EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIvE HANDBOOK Ik COGNITIVE
DoMAIN (Benjamin S. Bloom ed., 1956). By "synthesis", supporters of the bar exam are
probably referring to what Benjamin Bloom considered one of the highest cognitive skills.
Id. at 185 (explaining what has become known as "Bloom's Taxonomy of Cognitive
Skills"). Only "evaluation" is a higher cognitive skill. Id. Evaluation means being able to
assess the worth or value of an argument. Id. Synthesis means being able to see how
concepts relate. lId at 162. If the principle cognitive skill required to conquer the bar
exam is memorization, applicants will primarily demonstrate their recollection of legal
rules and principles. For example, bar review courses teach applicants that whenever the
facts are X, rle Y applies. All the applicant must do is plug rule Y into the facts X and
the answer presents itself. Thus, there is no opportunity for the applicant to show, for
example, how procedural issues will affect the substantive outcome, or how the procedural
issues present constitutional questions, or how policies and politics might influence "the
answer" just as much as the legal rule. Because the bar exam is usually a series of thir-
ty-minute questions which the applicant is to identify as a "torts question," a "contracts
question," or "administrative law problem," the bar exam cannot permit applicants to dem-
onstrate a "synthesis" of the law.
rely on information they retained in their heads to counsel clients,

then some sort of comprehensive review might be worthwhile. But
since sole reliance on what attorneys know off the top of their
heads is usually not normal or wise, supporters of the bar exam
have failed to adequately explain the need for such a review."2
D. Justification: The Bar Exam Should Remain Because There
is Nothing Wrong with the Competition for Licensure Inherent
in the Examination
Dean Griswold advances the argument that the bar exam should
remain because the competition it spawns is beneficial. 24 Dean
Griswold appears to lash out at those educators who feel that com-
petition in class is "bad, inhumane, debilitating, or un-
American"Y In defending competition, the dean argues that the
bar exam instills a healthy competition between the 26
examinee and
himself, driving the examinee to high achievement.
Although few authorities cite competition as a reason to sup-
port the bar exam, 27 Dean Griswold is probably correct that
some kind of public good can come from competition. However,
this justification does not carry much weight because there is al-
ready plenty of competition in a law student's career motivating
him or her toward high achievement. For example, achieving a
high score on the LSAT, getting into law school, performing well
while there, and getting a job are all highly competitive endeavors
123. Bar supporters often respond to criticisms such as this with the interesting retort
that lawyers sometimes must rely solely on the information in their heads, as in respond-
ing to an opponent's evidence objection or answering a judge's courtroom challenge.
However, such challenges are typically anticipated far in advance of a court proceeding
when the attorney has a chance to carefully research and prepare the case. In addition,
maneuvering through courtroom procedure and responding to judges and opponents are
skills that the bar exam is probably not best suited to test. Indeed, the bar exam presents
the examinee with time pressures, but it remains a written exercise, whereas responding to
judges or opponents is an oral exercise. Skills in oral argument, trial advocacy, and gen-
eral people skills are better taught through on-the-job legal experience and not a memory
test. See MACCRATE REPORT, supra note 97, at 299-301 (reporting that more and more
law firms have on-the-job in-house training programs for their new lawyers to teach them
practical lawyering skills, like trial advocacy, because firms have concluded that these
skills are best taught when new attorneys begin practice).
124. Griswold, supra note 3, at 82.
125. See id. (asking what is wrong with competition).
126. Id.
127. The fact that most people will probably agree with the general benefits of competi-
tion makes Griswold's argument seem like a red herring. The issue is not whether com-
petition is good, but rather whether the bar exam is a good mechanism to invite compe-
tition.
which will push law students to achieve their best.

E. Justification: The Bar Exam Should Remain Because It Is a
Test, and Lawyers are Tested Throughout Their Careers
Some supporters of the bar exam maintain that the exam has
value merely because it is a test and lawyers must get used to
tests." If these supporters are correct, then the profession and
society in general would be better served by two or three bar ex-
ams. To prepare neophytes in any endeavor, it is beneficial to test
them in order to prepare them for the stress of testing which oc-
curs in real life. However, imposing difficult situations on students
merely because they will encounter difficult situations in their
careers may have a negative effect on students and demoralize
them before they begin their careers. Moreover, if we adopt
Griswold's logic, a bar exam seems to be no special test, but sim-
ply a test. If we want to test students because their careers will be
full of tests, then why not impose some other kind of test after
graduation?
Therefore, if a purpose of the bar exam is simply to impose a
stringent test, the bar exam seems little more than an unpleasant
rite of passage for all bar applicants. That is to say, the bar exam
is an unpleasant task that applicants must endure because all prior
applicants have had to endure it. However, justifying something as
a rite of passage is really an appeal to tradition and says nothing
about the merits of the rite.'29 Therefore, if a justification for the
bar exam is that the exam is a "test" or "rite of passage," the
justification is circular and is no support indeed. Consequently, bar
exam supporters must still explain why their chosen rite of passage
deserves retention.
In addition, Dean Griswold advances another similar argument
supporting the bar exam because it is a "test." Dean Griswold ar-
gues that the bar exam may be a student's only serious hurdle to
128. Griswold, supra note 3, at 82 (paraphrasing Justice Benjamin Cardozo). Dean

Griswold boldly states that "the life of the lawyer is inevitably one of constant testing."
Id. Therefore, the dean continues, the bar exam (a test) must remain. Id.; see also HAND-
BOOK 2d ed., supra note 1, at 192 (pointing out adoption by the National Conference of
Bar Examiners of Griswold's reasoning that the bar exam is valuable because a lawyer's
life is full of "constant testing").
129. An appeal to tradition is when someone says a thing is good because it is part of
our history, culture, or tradition, or because people feel reverence or respect for it. For an
explanation of the appeal to tradition reasoning fallacy, see T. EDWARD DAMER, ATtACK-
ING FAULTY REASONING 92-93 (1980).
beginning a law career. 3 ° The implication of Griswold's argu-

ment is that law schools have low standards and are unable to
sufficiently challenge students. This would appear to be a serious
indictment of law schools which Dean Griswold offers without
support. Regardless of whether Griswold's assessment that law
school does not sufficiently challenge law students is correct, his
argument may simply be outdated. When Dean Griswold wrote his
famous defense of bar exams twenty years ago, there were not as
many law students competing with one another.'3 ' Very likely the
increased competition for places in law school has raised standards
across the board.'
130. Griswold, supra note 3, at 82-83. Essentially, Dean Griswold argues that law
school has become easy: "There is reason to fear that standards in law schools have
declined in recent years, and they might have declined further but for the sanction of the
bar examinations. Bar examinations may be the only serious hurdle that the student has to
overcome." Id. at 82.
131. In 1965, there were 136 ABA-approved law schools, but by 1990 there were 175.
MACCRATE REPORT, supra note 97, at 18. However, in 1965-66 there were 56,510 J.D.
enrollments, while in 1990-91 there were 129,580. Id. Thus, J.D. enrollments more than
doubled while the number of law schools to handle the massive influx of students in-
creased by only about 29%. See id. at 13-18 (discussing expansion in the legal profes-
sion). In addition, law school applications have reached record highs in the past several
years. Ken Myers, Applicants Declined Slightly From Past Record High Levels, NAT'L
LJ., Oct. 12, 1992, at 4, 4 [hereinafter Meyers, Applicants Declined] (reporting that al-
though the number of applicants declined "'a tiny fraction"' for the first time in the pre-
vious several years, the number of applications to law schools increased). Despite the
slight drop in applicants, there were still 92,500 applicants, more than two for every
opening at America's ABA-approved law schools. Id.; see also Ken Myers, Job Squeeze
Seems to Take Toll on Number of 1992 Applicants, NAT'L LJ., Apr. 6, 1992, at 4, 4
[hereinafter Meyers, Job Squeeze] (indicating the number of law school openings in ABA-
approved law schools as 44,000). The deputy corporate counsel for the Law School Ad-
mission Service reports that "[c]ompetition is fiercer than it has been and that may dis-
courage some people from applying." Myers, Applicants Declined, supra, at 4. The stiff
competition to get into law school and recent recession are the most likely reasons why
the 1992 application figures did not match the record 94,000 applications in 1991-92. Id.
132. As mentioned earlier, there are many hurdles students must pass over before being
admitted to practice. They include the LSAT, acceptance to law school during a time of
unprecedented competition, law school assignments and examinations, and in many law
schools a substantial writing requirement. These are all serious hurdles facing law stu-
dents. See also supra note 131 (discussing fierce competition to get into law school).
In a related argument, Dean Griswold asserts that because law practice is tough the
admissions process should be tough. See Griswold, supra note 3, at 83. Presumably, the
admissions process would be easy if there were no bar exam. For argument's sake, as-
sume Dean Griswold is correct. Why not have two bar exams, then? Perhaps there should
also be a bar exam after one and a half years of law school to keep the admissions
process tough throughout the applicant's training years. The dean's argument is similar to
the "rite of passage" argument. Evaluation of the "rite of passage" argument, discussed
supra note 129 and accompanying text, is equally applicable to Dean Griswold's tough
F. Justification:If There is No Bar Exam, Academics Will Be

the Only Ones Determining Admission to Practice
Bar exam supporters offer many versions of the argument that
without a bar exam only academics will determine who becomes a
lawyer. Supporters contend that the bar exam ensures that state
authorities outside of law schools will test the applicants.' Also,
George Neff Stevens, in reporting responses from bar exam sup-
porters, writes that the state bar "must retain a voice in the qual-
ification process, either through a bar examination or by insisting
upon a direct voice in compulsory curriculum planning and...
since the latter alternative [is] 1impractical,
34
the bar examination re-
main[s] as the better solution."'
Hidden in the bar exam supporters' argument is a fear of "ivo-
ry tower" types and the assumption that academics are incapable of
appropriately determining who may practice law. 3 A large por-
admissions process justification.

133. See, e.g., Griswold, supra note 3, at 81.
134. Stevens, supra note 3, at 25 (emphasis added). See also id. at 29 (opining that the
state bar authorities must retain a voice in admitting applicants via the bar exam). Notice
how Stevens uses the word "or" in the cited quote. Stevens makes use of a clever rhetor-"
ical device called DeMorgan's Law, whereby the writer states his case by presenting two
or more choices as the "only" choices. Usually one choice is "clearly" objectionable, mak-
ing the writer's preferred option seem correct. For a discussion of DeMorgan's Law in
legal reasoning, see M. Neil Browne & Daniel R. Hansen, The Hasty Embrace of Critical
Thinking by Business Law Educators, 9 J. LEGAL STUD. EDUC. 515, 524-25 (1991). A bar
exam or a direct voice in law school curriculum are not the only two ways practitioners
may have a voice in the admissions process. For example, the practicing bar already has
a substantial voice in the accreditation process. In addition, Members can have a voice if
some form of mandatory clerkship or apprenticeship is adopted to replace the bar exam,
as in Canada. Also, it is not clear that having a voice over law school curriculum is
impractical, for that is exactly what has happened in Wisconsin, where the diploma privi-
lege operates for graduates of its two approved law schools. See HANDBOOK 2d ed., su-
pra note 1, at 195 (discussing the practicing bar's influence over curriculum in Wiscon-
sin). In fact, the Wisconsin Supreme Court's curriculum requirements are not intrusive.
Walter B. Rushenbush, Do We Need the Bar Exam? Maybe Not-Diploma Privilege
Works (in Wisconsin), SYLLABUS, Mar. 1986, at 1, 8 (noting that the only requirements
are the receipt of a law degree and that two-thirds of a law student's degree credits must
come from a "very broad list of 'core' courses").
135. In reporting responses from the practicing profession as to why it must remain in
control of the admissions process, George Neff Stevens received and reported one re-
sponse which stated that, "since legal educators are extremely subject to faddism, there is
need for some means of bringing law schools up short, and that the check by way of the
bar examination on ivory tower people is an uneasy but reasonably workable arrange-
ment." Stevens, supra note 3, at 29. Another stated that "bar examiners are much closer
to the realities of practice [than legal educators], and that the bar examination represents a
basic fear on the part of the organized Bar of entrusting the entire determination of readi-
tion of the practicing bar's fear is a belief that legal educators are
too isolated from law practice to know what it takes to practice
law. ' 6 To be sure, the admissions process should involve the
practicing bar, because they are in a better position than academics
to observe and evaluate an applicant's day-to-day practice skills.
The reason to involve practicing attorneys is not because academics
are too isolated or incapable of judging quality, but because law
school training is too short and does little to bridge the gap be-
tween law theory and law practice. In essence, spending a semester
lecturing law students and interacting minimally with them is insuf-
ficient contact to evaluate prospective lawyers. However, the three-
day memory test that is the bar exam is also insufficient and does
little or nothing to add to the admissions process.'3 7
G. Justification: The Bar Exam is Necessary to Ensure that
Applicants Are Familiarwith Local Law
Bar exam supporters fear that applicants do not learn local law
in law school, because local law is not taught, or students attend
school out of state. Therefore, they must be tested on it during the
bar exam. 3 Once again, if lawyers were not allowed to use the
library and had to rely on knowledge solely in their heads, this
justification might have merit. Any practicing attorney, even an old
hand who has been practicing in a particular state for a generation
ness for the practice of law to law teachers, many of whom have had little or no experi-
ence in law practice. Id. These comments help indicate why legal educators should
...
not have complete control over the admissions process, but they also offer little insight as
to why legal practitioners should retain complete control over the ultimate admissions
obstacle, namely the bar exam. If the practitioners' fears are essentially that legal acade-
mia is too isolated from everyday practice to assess applicants' lawyering skills, then one
might expect the bar exam to assess skills with which legal academics have little experi-
ence. However, since the bar exam primarily tests knowledge of legal rules, and to a
lesser extent "legal reasoning" and communication skills, there seems no compelling rea-
son to fear academics, for they are well-equipped to test exactly what the bar exam tests.
If, however, the bar exam tested more practical lawyering skills, such as those identified
in the MacCrate Report, there would be greater justification for the practitioners' com-
ments quoted above.
136. See supra note 134 and accompanying text. This is a curious argument because it
is at best questionable whether the bar exam tests what it takes to be a lawyer. There-
fore, it may not matter whether the admitting authority is or is not isolated from law
practice.
137. Indeed, if the bar exam is the best that non-academics can offer the admissions
process, then they have a responsibility to better explain why they must have the ultimate
voice in deciding who becomes an attorney.
138. See, e.g., Stevens, supra note 3, at 28 (presenting views of many bar supporters
who feel that the bar exam is a necessary vehicle to test applicants on local law).
will reacquaint him or herself with the local law before arguing a
case or rendering an opinion.'39 In addition, other incentives be-
sides a bar exam exist to encourage knowledge of local law. For
example, an applicant's own interest to succeed in his or her prac-
tice would motivate the applicant to learn local law."4
In deciding the merits of justifying bar exams because they
encourage knowledge of local law, it is important to ask why
many states admit practicing attorneys to their bars from other
states, without requiring them to pass exams on local law. 4'
Typically, the only states which do not offer such reciprocity for
attorneys seeking admission from out-of-state are retirement states,
such as Florida. 42 This may suggest that the retirement states are
more interested in restricting competition than ensuring knowledge
of local law.
H. General Objections to the Bar Exam
The bar exam may be objectionable on grounds that are not
related to the justifications for it. For years, both legal educators
and practitioners have opined that the bar exam discriminates
against minorities. Evidence of such discrimination usually comes
from the fact that a disproportionately high number of African and
Latin American applicants fail the bar exam. 43 However, if in-
deed the bar exam does discriminate against minorities, the natural
139. See supra notes 108-09 and accompanying text (indicating that attorneys do not
rely solely on their accumulated knowledge).
140. Blackmar, supra note 3, at 1244.
141. See HANDBOOK 3d ed., supra note 5, at 74:101. "In the great majority of states, a
migrant attorney [a practicing attorney from another state] may be admitted on his foreign
license without taking an examination provided that he has fulfilled certain requirements
of the admitting state which pertain to the length of time the foreign attorney has 'prac-
ticed law' in the state of his prior licensure." Id.
142. See BAR/BRI DIG., supra note 5, at 9-47 (listing requirements for admission into
each state's bar).
143. See Bell, supra note 3, at 1216-18 (opposing bar exams because of discrimination,
noting that a disproportionate number of blacks fail each exam); Maurice Emsellem, Ra-
cial and Ethnic Barriers to the Legal Profession: The Case Against the Bar Examination,
N.Y. ST. BJ., Apr. 1989, at 42 (objecting to the bar exam because it imposes yet anoth-
er barrier to the legal profession to minorities); Dannye Holley & Thomas Kleven, Mi-
norities and the Legal Profession: Current Platitudes, Current Barriers, 12 T. MARSHALL
L. REV. 299, 333 (1987) (noting that "the bar exam is a substantial barrier to minority
entry into the legal profession"); Rogers, supra note 4, at 570 (noting that tests which
"disproportionately exclude Blacks in a significantly discriminatory pattern" are forbidden
under Title VII). Contra Stephen P. Klein, Bar Examinations: Ignoring the Thermometer
Does Not Change the Temperature, 'N.Y. ST. BJ., Oct 1989, at 28, 30 (arguing that a
disparity in passage along racial lines does not mean that the bar exam is discriminatory).
conclusion is not necessarily to eliminate the bar exam, but rather,

the examiners should reform the bar exam so that it no longer
discriminates.'"
In addition to the discrimination problem, the bar exam may be
harmful to legal education. The bar exam places a premium on
cramming and rote memorization at the expense of true learning
and other higher intellectual activity. Presumably, a legal education
should teach students to engage in higher order cognitive skills,
such as integration (or synthesis), analysis, and evaluation. 45
However, the bar exam requires little of these higher thinking skills
and rewards applicants who can memorize legal formulae and
apply them on the exam."
Furthermore, the bar exam may fail to "check" law schools and
instead damage law school quality. 47 Recall that the bar exam
was initially developed to ensure that law schools produced quality
education programs."4 Presumably, if a high percentage of stu-
dents failed the bar exam, that law school was performing poorly
and needed to upgrade its program. Unfortunately, such reasoning
pervades legal education. Therefore, law schools that appear weak
due to poor bar exam passage rates have little incentive to intro-
144. Despite years of efforts to reform the bar exam, some argue that discrimination
persists. See Bell, supra note 3, at 1216-18 (arguing, in 1971, that the bar exam discrimi-
nated against black applicants, because the only explanation for disproportionate eventual
bar passage rates is race); see also Emsellem, supra note 144, at 43 (positing that after
years of discriminating against minority applicants, the bar exam continues to discrimi-
nate); Holley & Kleven, supra note 144, at 335-36 (pointing out continuing discrimination
despite efforts to reform the test). The alleged discriminatory effects of the bar exam are
beyond the scope of this Note. Since the bar exam continues its reign as the ultimate
obstacle to bar admission, the reader may have interest in exploring whether the bar exam
unfairly prevents minorities from entering legal practice. For that exploration the reader
may wish to consult the titles referenced supra notes 143-45.
145. See supra note 122 and accompanying text.
146. In addition, success on the bar exam depends on understanding the particular for-
mat, grading standards, and difficulty of the bar exam in the applicant's jurisdiction. SMH
BAR REVIEW, BAR ExAM JOURNAL 1994 BAR EXAM AND COURSE INFORMATION 1 (1993)
[hereinafter SMH BAR REvIEw]. Consequently, bar review courses teach bar applicants
how to answer exam questions. Joanne C. Naiman, Spending Money to Relieve Bar Exam
Jitters, N.J. L., Thursday, June 26, 1986, at 7, 7. The operator of a New Jersey bar
review course, Joseph L. Marino, explains that the bar reviewers can "second-guess" the
bar examiners. Id. Because each question is made up by bar examiners with particular
personalities and grading biases, the review course administrators study the bar examiners
to learn how bar applicants should write essay answers to please the bar examiners. Id. at
7, 31.
147. See supra notes 112-19 and accompanying text (arguing that the bar exam serves
no practical use as a check on law schools).
duce additional intensive theory courses that demand students to

work harder analyzing and evaluating legal arguments. Instead, the
schools have incentive to "teach the bar exam." Law professors
may emphasize knowledge of local legal rules instead of legal
reasoning and higher order cognitive thinking. Consequently, course
offerings may be restricted to subjects taught on the bar exam.
Even if a school has broad offerings, the students may select their
courses with an eye toward the bar exam, taking only courses
which they perceive will help them on the bar exam instead of
courses they perceive will help them in their careers. Therefore,
law schools that were once supposed to be "pulled up" by the bar
exam, may instead be "pulled down" intellectually as a conse-
quence of the bar exam.
Finally, the bar exam causes students unnecessary anxiety, ex-
pense, and delay. 49
Taken alone, the possible discrimination against minorities, the
149. See Blackmar, supra note 3, at 1241; Seligman, supra note 3, at 55 (noting the
high costs of the bar exam, bar review courses, and the cost of foregoing two months'
salary). Paul Reidinger, in reporting that about half of practicing attorneys think that the
bar exam does not measure legal competence, sympathizes with law students preparing for
the bar exam by musing that, "[i]t's summertime, and the living is easy--except for re-
cent law school graduates who will be taking their bar exams before the end of July.
They face weeks of grueling preparatory courses before undergoing a test whose relevance
to the practice of law is arguable." Paul Reidinger, Bar Exam Blues, A.B.A. J., July 1,
1987, at 34, 34. Bar applicants endure a variety of costs and anxieties while taking the
bar exam. Most recent law graduates maintain a sense that the bar examination is harder
to pass these days, and many graduates understand that the path to becoming a lawyer is
a costly investment. Naiman, supra note 146, at 7. As a result, bar applicants feel that
they must pass the bar exam, and they are willing to spend great sums to do it. Id. A
typical bar review course costs over $1000. See, e.g., SMH BAR RBviEw, supra note 146,
at 9-31 (providing cost information for bar review courses for several states). In addition,
more and more students purchase specialized "supplemental review courses" which inten-
sively train students in such areas as the Multistate Bar Examination (MBE) or essay
writing techniques. Id. In 1986, the supplemental review courses cost as much as $295.
Id. Of course, the bar exam itself presents applicants with an additional expense. For
example, in California, law students applying before deadlines for the 1994 bar exam will
pay a total of $645 ($55 student registration fee, $325 examination fee for general appli-
cants, and $265 fee for an Application for Determination of Moral Character). BAR/BRI
DIG., supra note 5, at 12. In Ohio, timely applicants will pay a total of $155 ($30 stu-
dent registration fee, if exam applied for by "December 1st following completion of one
third of the credit hours required for law school graduation," and $125 general exam fee).
Id.at 37. In most states there is a late fee if applications arrive after a certain date
which usually falls in the applicant's second year of law school. See id. at 9-47 (provid-
ing cost information for bar exams in all 50 states and Washington, D.C.). In Ohio, for
instance, the late fee is $100. Id. at 37. Therefore, if law students have not decided
where they will practice by their third semester of law school, they will probably be
assessed a late fee.
negative effect on legal education, and harm to applicants may not

be compelling reasons to eliminate the bar exam. However, once
the efficacy and need for the bar exam has been seriously called
into question, these arguments take on strength. Each of these
harms must be outweighed for the bar exam to be justified.
IV. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

An evaluation of the American bar examination and proposals
for alternatives would not be complete without a comparative anal-
ysis of bar admissions processes in other common law countries.
Comparing and contrasting bar admissions processes in England,
Wales, Canada, and Australia provides Americans with an addition-
al perspective upon which to base admissions reform.
A. England and Wales'5 °
To understand legal education in England, it helps to under-
stand the barrister/solicitor distinction. In general, barristers argue
cases before a court while solicitors do all other legal work except
appearing in court.' Although the barrister/solicitor distinction
may be breaking down a bit (i.e., solicitors may in some cases
appear in court), the paths to becoming either a solicitor or a bar-
rister remain different.
The path toward admission as a solicitor has four stages: 1)
academic stage, 2) vocational stage, 3) professional stage, and 4)
continuing education.'52 These days, most bar applicants in Eng-
land fulfill the academic stage by obtaining a law degree from a
university.'53 The degree is really an undergraduate degree, typi-
cally begun when the student is eighteen or nineteen years old." 4
A student need not study law, but if a student obtains a university
degree in something other than law, the student must take an inten-
sive one year course called the Common Professional Examination
150. England and Wales share a common admissions process. G.S.A. Wheatcroft, The
Education and Training of the Practising Lawyer in England, 30 B. EXAMINER 3, 3
(1961).
151. Id. at 5-7; see also Gary Scanlan, A Brief History of the Legal Profession, in THE
IVANHOE/BLACKSTONE GUIDE TO THE LEGAL PROFESSION 1990 3-6 (Jonathan Grosvenor
ed., 1990) (explaining basic concepts of the British legal profession).
152. Richard Ramsay, Routes into the Profession, in THE IVANHOE/BLACKSTONE GUIDE
TO THE LEGAL PROFESSION, supra note 151, at 45.
153. Id. at 45-46.
154. Wheatcroft, supra note 150, at 10-11.
or CPE.'5 Mature students, those who come to law some time

after 56
obtaining a non-law degree, must spend two years in the
CPE.'
Following their university degree, either in law or in some
other field combined with successful completion of the CPE, the
bar applicant enters the vocational stage.'57 This stage consists of
an intensive course called the Solicitor's Finals. The course is a
series of intensive lectures and exams that primarily require stu-
dents to commit an array of legal information to memory.'58
After passing the final exams in the Solicitor's Finals course,
the applicant moves on to the professional stage.'59 In this stage,
the applicants complete a period of "articles" or a clerkship with a
practicing solicitor or law firm." ° Applicants arrange these arti-
cles themselves, perhaps through notices posted at the Finals
school, but they also often receive help from the Law Society (a
group which functions like an American bar association).' 6 There
is no requirement that these positions be paid; however, most of
these articles or clerkships are in fact paid positions. The law firms
want to entice students to clerk with them in hopes of hiring them
full-time later. 62
After completing the articles, a bar applicant is called to the
bar as a solicitor, but then enters the fourth stage, known as con-
tinuing legal education. For the first three years of a solicitor's
practice, he or she must attend continuing legal education courses
to ensure ongoing development as a practitioner.
Similarly, the route toward admission as a barrister exists in
several stages: 1) academic stage, 2) vocational stage, 3) bar exam-
ination, and 4) pupillage and practical training." Two common
paths comprise the academic stage. Some students graduate from a
university with a law degree, while others obtain some other de-
gree and then complete the Common Professional Examination
155. Ramsay, supra note 152, at 46.

156. Id.
157. Id. at 47.
158. Id.
159. Id.
160. Ramsay, supra note 152, at 47.
161. Id.
162. Id. at 47-48.
163. Many larger law firms arrange these continuing legal education courses for their
new associates. Id. at 48.
164. Ann Halpern, Routes into the Profession, in THE IVANHOEIBLACKSToE GUIDE TO
THE LEGAL PROFESSION, supra note 151, at 159.
course. 65 To move on to the vocational stage, the university de-

gree must be "qualifying," meaning it must be ranked sufficiently
high by the Council of Legal Education. In other words, someone
who barely passes and gets his law degree will not have a "quali-
fying" degree.'" Therefore, not everyone who obtains a law de-
gree or some other degree in combination with the CPE may quali-
fy to become a barrister.
Students with qualifying degrees enter the vocational stage. 67
The vocational stage consists of training at the Inns of Court
School of Law.'65 The training lasts three academic terms and
consists of intensive teaching of the skills necessary to be a barris-
ter. 69 The focus of the training is to prepare the student for
practice, not to expand the student's knowledge for its own
170
sake.
Students who pass the vocational courses go on to sit for the
bar examination. Students taking the bar exam must write six "pa-
pers," each on a specific subject chosen by the bar examiners, and
then the students must write two optional papers on their choice of
topics from among a list of several alternatives.' The goal of
both the bar exam and the vocational training is to teach and as-
sess minimum skills. 72 Students who pass vocational training and
the bar exam are supposed to have the skills to survive the next
period, because during the second six months of pupillage would-
be barristers practice independently.
Students passing the bar exam move on to pupillage to work
7
under a certified pupil master, who is a practicing barrister. 1
The bar applicant, now called a pupil, will argue real cases in
court, just as if the pupil were a barrister. After six months of
pupillage, the master must sign a certificate indicating the pupil has
performed satisfactorily. 75 In return, the pupil gets a practicing
165. See supra notes 155-57 and accompanying text (discussing the CPE).
166. See Halpem, supra note 164, at 159-61.
167. Id. at 159.
168. Id. at 159-60.
169. Id.
170. Id. at 165-67.
171. Halpern, supra note 164, at 169-70.
172. Id. at 169.
173. Id. at 166-67.
174. See generally David Latham, Pupillage and the Practical Training, in THE
IVANHOE/BLACKSTONE GUIDE TO THE LEGAL PROFESSION, supra note 151, at 171 (ex-
plaining the pupillage stage of barrister training).
175. Id. at 172.
certificate. Now the student may advocate on his or her own behalf
without the need for the Master's close supervision. After this
second six months, if the pupil has performed adequately, he or
she 7gets
6
a full practicing certificate and is now officially a barris-
ter.
B. Canada
In Canada there is no barrister/solicitor distinction. A Canadian
lawyer is both a barrister and solicitor."7 Despite Canada's histor-
ic ties to Britain and France, Canada's pattern of legal education
closely follows America's, with a significant departure following
law school. 7 Canadian legal education philosophy has been de-
scribed as follows:
The [law school] curriculum was designed to give students
three years of thorough academic grounding in the law.
The guiding spirit was a wish to impart a critical under-
standing of legal institutions, and the scope and purpose of
legal rules, rather than simply a training for day-to-day
practice. The university did not claim to teach everything
the law student would need to know. Many pieces of prac-
tical knowledge, it was considered, could best be imparted
outside the university, and this duty was left to the pro-
fession. 79
When Canadian lawyers are eligible to practice law they are
"called to the bar" or said to be part of the Law Society of a
particular province.' Thus, for example, a Toronto applicant
called to the bar would become a member of the Ontario Legal
Society. To be called to the bar, a student must earn a Bachelor's
Degree at a Canadian college.'' Usually this is a four-year de-
gree, but some law schools will admit a student with two years or
less of undergraduate training.' Then an applicant must graduate
176. Id.
177. See FREDERICK B. SUSSMAN, THE LAW IN CANADA 45 (1976) (explaining the bar
admissions process in Canada).
178. See S.M. WADDAMS, INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF LAW 26 (1983) (noting
that while Canada has modeled its law school after America's schools, it has added a
practical training component to legal education).
179. Id. at 26.
180. GERALD L. GALL, THE CANADIAN LEGAL SYSTEM 186-87 (1977).
181. Id.
182. Id. at 186.
from a Canadian law school. Like their American counterparts,

Canadian law programs last three years.' Finally, an applicant to
the Canadian bar must complete a bar admission course provided
by the practicing legal profession." s4
The bar admission course is unique to Canada and diverges
sharply from the post-graduate path toward admission in America.
The Canadian bar admission course usually consists of an "articles
in clerkship," followed by completion of about six months of class-
room course work. The course work is intended to equip the stu-
dent with practical legal skills and knowledge of the day-to-day
operation of a law practice.' Therefore, the course work in the
bar admissions course includes such mundane affairs as how many
copies of various documents must be filed in particular courts. 6
The articles in clerkship is similarly practical in its purpose and
consists of a one-year clerkship spent under the tutelage of a prac-
ticing attorney. The articles in clerkship "provides the graduating
law student with an opportunity to learn from an experienced prac-
titioner many of the techniques and procedures not included in the
academic courses given at law school."'8 7
C. Australia
In Australia practicing lawyers are generally divided into barris-
ters and solicitors, similar to those in England and Wales.' Bar-
risters are lawyers who concentrate their practice in presenting
cases in court, while solicitors concentrate on doing virtually all
other legal work, including some court representation." 9 Austra-
183. Id.
184. Id. at 187; see also SUSSMAN, supra note 177, at 46 (discussing Canada's bar
admission course).
185. See SUSSMAN, supra note 177, at 46.
186. WADDAMS, supra note 178, at 26-27.
187. GALL, supra note 180, at 187. Recently, The Ontario Law Society has changed its
bar admissions course to include "one month of Law Society instruction prior to the com-
mencement of articles, one year of articles of clerkship, and a further three months of
Law Society instruction thereafter." Id. at 411.
188. See MARK NiCHOLLS Er AL., LEGAL STUDIES FOR SOUTH AUSTRALIA 140-41
(1989) (explaining Australia's barrister/solicitor distinction).
189. Id. In South Australia and a few of the smaller states, there is a "fused profes-
sion," meaning there is no distinction between barristers and solicitors. Id. at 141. In
general, customers seeking legal representation in Australia may not directly contact barris-
ters. Id. Instead, customers must first hire a solicitor, and then if a case requires either
the legal opinion or court case presentation of a barrister, the solicitor, not the customer,
would hire the barrister. Id. In most Australian states, solicitors may present court cases
in the lower courts. Thus, solicitors need not hire barristers each time the former tries a
lian lawyers, whether they choose to practice as barristers or solici-

tors, must be admitted to practice by the Supreme Court of the
state where they practice."9 The only requirements for admission
to practice are that an applicant have "an appropriate legal educa-
tion [and be] of good moral character."'' Therefore, Australian
lawyers gain admission to the bar via the diploma privilege." In
order for an applicant to have an "appropriate legal education," the
applicant must obtain a law degree from an accredited law col-
lege. 93
In Australia, legal educators are concerned about admitting
applicants to practice solely on the basis of obtaining a law de-
gree. 94 Concern primarily arises from the fact that a law degree
is a "generalist's" degree, educating private practitioners, when in
fact most practitioners are specialists and do not remain in private
practice throughout their careers. Thus, an Australian law de-
gree may be insufficient preparation for today's Australian law
graduates."'
Consequently, some Australian states have instituted "bridge-
the-gap" programs to help ease law graduates into their chosen
profession." 9 For example, in Melbourne, Victoria, law graduates
may enroll in a non-mandatory Practical Training Course, which
combines theoretical and practical skills training within a variety of
substantive law formats. 98 Similarly, in New South Wales, the
case. See NICHOLLS, supra note 188, at 141.

190. See id. at 138 (explaining admission to practice in Australia).
191. Id.
192. See Margaret Thornton, Portia Lost in the Groves of Academe Wondering What to
do about Legal Education, in LEGAL EDUCATION AND LEGAL KNOWLEDGE 9, 10 (Ian
Duncanson ed., 1991) (discussing tensions in Australian legal education between providing
a scholarly liberal education and practical training).
193. Id. The Supreme Court of a state or a statutorily constructed group of senior prac-
titioners specifies subjects or particular areas of knowledge that must be included in the
law school's curriculum in order to be accredited. Id. Technically, Australia does not
require applicants to obtain law degrees from accredited law colleges. However, no law
college in Australia has failed to comply with the terms of accreditation. Id.
194. See, e.g., id.at 18; see generally DAVID PEARCE ET AL., AUSTRALIAN LAW
SCHOOLS: A DISCIPLINE ASSESSMENT FOR THE COMMONWEALTH TERTIARY EDUCATION
COMMISSION (1987).
195. Thornton, supra note 192, at 18.
196. See id. (questioning appropriateness of the current Australian law degree to satisfy
heterogeneous demands for legal services).
197. See MACCRATE REPORT, supra note 97, at 408, 410 (describing the Australian
NSW program which teaches practical lawyering skills).
198. kldat 406 (listing the skills taught: legal research, drafting, negotiation, counseling,
communication, and office management).
bridge-the-gap program teaches practical lawyering skills in the

context of substantive and procedural sections.'" Thus, for exam-
ple, while graduates learn about practical topics in property and
commercial law, they also learn and practice "account[ing], profes-
sional responsibility, office management, computer skills, interview-
ing, advising, research, drafting, and negotiation."'
V. PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES
Many opponents of the bar exam do not advocate eliminating

it. Instead they argue that it should be significantly altered.' Af-
ter attacking the bar exam as useless, harmful, or superfluous, it
seems strange for these opponents to then decide to keep the exam,
even though they advocate changing it. The reason such a position
seems strange is that many of the problems associated with the bar
exam are problems that would plague any "competency" test.2
For example, the skills required of a competent attorney may
not be testable in a bar exam format. Lawyer skills take time to
develop, and more importantly, they take time to display. Compli-
cated legal issues which lawyers are hired to resolve take time,
certainly much longer than the two or three days a bar exam
would permit. Therefore, it seems impossible to assess legal com-
petency in the short time allotted for any bar exam, current or re-
formed.'0 s
199. Id. at 408.

200. Id. (citing Audrey Blunden & Les Handler, A New Course at the New South
Wales College of Law: The Introduction of the Full Time Course Strategy Plan, J. PROF.
L. EDUC., June 1987, at 42, 45-49).
201. See infra note 207 and accompanying text.
202. Indeed a review of the attacks on the justifications for the bar exam are mostly
attacks on the idea of a final, all-or-nothing, time-pressure test, rather than attacks on the
modem bar exam per se. See supra text accompanying notes 79, 107-10, 120-23, 128-32,
146-49 (discussing drawbacks of time-pressure tests such as the bar exam).
203. I do not mean to say that no mechanism should exist to protect the public from
incompetent lawyers. However, the bar exam should not be that mechanism. Unlike some
authors who agree that the bar exam should be eliminated, I do not place confidence in
the marketplace to protect the public as does W. Sherman Rogers. See Rogers, supra note
4, at 590-91 (quoting Bell, supra note 3, at 1216). A brief look at common market fail-
ures, especially the problem of asymmetrical consumer information, will reveal the danger
of solely letting the market screen incompetent attorneys. Asymmetrical information occurs
when the buyer and seller do not have the same knowledge about the good or service for
which they are contracting. In the case of the provision of legal advice, a service, con-
sumers have little information, while practitioners have a great deal of information. Thus,
there is great potential for consumers of legal advice to hire incompetent attorneys be-
cause they have little way of knowing ahead of time who is and who is not competent.
In addition, many critiques of justifications for the bar exam

indicate that the goals of the bar exam have either already been
achieved by the time applicants graduate from law school, or
simply do not require a bar exam to achieve.' ° Therefore, to take
a position that the bar exam is useless, harmful, or superfluous,
and then to merely advocate its reform, is untenable.
One alternative to the bar exam is the diploma privilege."o
Models of the diploma privilege exist in Wisconsin, Australia, and
in a modified form in Canada.' °c So long as law schools maintain
high admissions standards and quality study programs, there is little
reason to require a bar exam after graduation. Recall that bar ex-
ams developed to ensure that law schools maintained high quality
programs."es Now that competition to enter law school is fierce
and the law schools have other means to check their quality the
bar exam has lost its raison d'tre.'
Another alternative to the bar exam is a mandatory clerkship or
apprenticeship. Americans may have much to learn from the Cana-
dians and British, who both provide extensive clerkships to "bridge
the gap" from course work to practical legal work. Mandatory
clerkships have the added benefit of involving practitioners in the
licensing process. Given the many shortcomings of the bar exam,
practitioner involvement in the form of organizing and supervising
clerkships would be far more valuable than writing and grading bar
exams.
Unfortunately, in America, the concept of mandatory clerkships
is controversial. In George Neff Stevens' study of bar examiners
including judges, deans of law schools, and law school professors,
he found little support for mandatory clerkships."0 Generally,
204. See, e.g., supra notes 84-88, 111 and accompanying text.
205. See, e.g., supra notes 84-110, 112-23, 128-43 and accompanying text.
206. See supra notes 5, 57-62, 134-37 (discussing the history and modem incarnations
of the diploma privilege).
207. Recall that Canadian law students need not take a bar exam. However, upon grad-
uation from a Canadian law school, they are not automatically admitted to the bar. They
must then take a bar admissions course consisting of a period of clerkship and class work
covering practical lawyering skills. See supra notes 185-88 and accompanying text.
209. See supra notes 111-19 and accompanying text (arguing that other means exist to
promote high standards in law schools besides the bar exam). See supra notes 131-32 and
accompanying text (arguing that competition to get into law school is fierce). In addition,
the bar exam may actually lower standards in law schools. See supra notes 146-49 and
accompanying text.
210. See Stevens, supra note 3, at 16, 31-32 (listing a variety of reasons why mandato-
ry clerkships have little support). Stevens notes the following problems with mandatory
there is concern that practitioners will not agree to supervise clerk-

ships, or if they do, they will not provide students with a meaning-
ful experience. In addition, there is a real possibility that the clerk-
ship would amount to slave labor where "the clerk [is] expected to
put in a substantial number of hours per day on law office busi-
ness for which service he receive[s] no compensation on the theory
that the service was payment for the training received.""21
Although many of the criticisms of clerkships are worth in-
vestigating, most of them were offered against clerkships as a
replacement for traditional law school education."' No one realis-
tically suggests a return to Lincoln's day when applicants could
"read law" with a lawyer and gain admission to the bar. Instead, a
mandatory clerkship would simply augment traditional legal educa-
tion and provide a student with an important bridge between law
school and "real" legal practice.
As experience in Canada and Great Britain has shown, there is
little reason to fear that applicants will become slaves to their
preceptors. In Britain, for example, a barrister's clerkship consists
of a one-year pupillage. During the pupillage, the aspiring barrister
must argue real cases in court, and that is the means for evaluating
the applicant. If a pupil performs only "slave labor," such as filing
and proof-reading, then there is no means to evaluate the pupil.
Thus, a clerkship that requires applicants to perform real lawyerly
tasks in order to determine whether the applicant should advance in
the admissions process should prevent the kind of useless clerk-
ships that critics fear." 3
clerkships: no uniformity in clerk training, the preceptor or supervising practitioner will

not have time to devote to his pupil, the clerks will perform menial and repetitious tasks
(slave labor) that will add little to the clerk's skill enhancement, and the preceptor will
more than likely be a specialist, thus limiting the skills he [or she] can impart. Id. at 16.
211. Id.
212. See id. at 15-16; HANDBOOK 2d ed., supra note 1, at 111.
213. In addition, fears that applicants could not afford to "work for free" during their
clerkships may be unrealistic. Competition among law firms will force them to continue
their practice of paying law clerks. See supra note 163 and accompanying text (explaining
that although there is no requirement to pay British law clerks completing their mandatory
clerkships, most are paid). Most likely, law firns will hire clerks either because the fi-ms
need help with their workload or because the firms recruit future lawyers through a
clerkship program. Either way, the firms will still pay their clerks to induce them to work
at a particular firm. If for some reason, applicants could not find paid clerkships, grants
and student loans should be allowed to cover costs of completing a clerkship, just as they
would cover classroom education costs.
A. A New Alternative
It seems that American legal education has come nearly full
circle. In colonial America and through the Civil War, legal educa-
tion consisted almost entirely of practical skills acquired while
studying with a practitioner.214 These days, legal education is
highly theoretical and conducted almost entirely in a classroom.
Although the practicing bar has the ultimate say over who enters
the profession, it has almost no role in legal education. The bar
exam as it exists today does nothing to further a student's educa-
tion or thinking ability.21 Instead, the exam has assumed the role
of rite of passage that gives the profession and the public a false
sense that it performs a valuable function.
Therefore, a proposed alternative that combines the best of the
diploma privilege and a mandatory clerkship may be the best alter-
native to the bar exam. By the best of the diploma privilege, I
mean resurrecting faith in the law schools and providing them with
ample opportunity to evaluate law students, so that graduating from
law school becomes even more of an achievement and preparation
for practice than it is now. With the program I propose, the law
student will be much better prepared when the law school "hands
over" the law student to the practitioners. The practitioners will
then supervise the applicant's continuing education in a practical
setting via a mandatory clerkship.
The proposed alternative would borrow heavily from the idea
of performance tests. Currently, Alaska, California, and Colorado
include performance tests as part of the traditional bar exam.2 6
The performance tests are supposed to transcend "memorization of
legal rules"2 7 and instead test examinees' abilities to perform and
utilize lawyering skills, such as those delineated in the MacCrate
Report."' In Alaska, students must write a legal memorandum in
the time allowed, answering particular legal questions from a set of
facts." 9 To aid the student, the bar examiners provide both rele-
214. See supra Part II (discussing the history of admission to the American bar).
215. See supra notes 107, 121-22, 146-49 and accompanying text.
216. MACCRATE REPORT, supra note 97, at 280.
217. Id.
218. See id.(explaining that bar exam performance tests determine the students' ability
to use analytic skills and practical knowledge, not whether they have memorized legal
rules); see also supra notes 97-106 and accompanying text (discussing the bar exam and
its relation to lawyering skills).
vant and irrelevant cases and statutes." In California, bar appli-

cants receive a "case file," containing memos, police reports, cases,
statutes, and letters."2 The applicants then have three hours to
answer two questions seeking the applicant's analysis of the legal
issues. 2 Similarly, in Colorado, in two thirty-minute essays, stu-
dents are asked to explain major differences between certain evi-
dentiary rules, and then review a two-page client statement and
write a memo indicating the important legal issues that would
require research and which of the client's documents might hold
additional useful information.'z
Proponents of performance testing should be praised for their
attempts to transcend superfluous traditional bar exams. Perfor-
mance test advocates correctly recognize that there is more to
competent lawyering than memorization of legal rules. However,
current performance tests represent unrealistic means to evaluate
applicants' abilities to perform fundamental lawyering skills besides
legal reasoning. To be sure, lawyers must complete the kinds of
tasks provided on performance tests. However, few lawyers would
ever draft legislation in thirty minutes, much less review an entire
client file in a similarly short time. Therefore, bar applicants must
be given the opportunity to demonstrate their ability to evaluate an
entire client's case, make all the relevant legal arguments, and draft
all of the necessary documents, but in a more realistic manner.
In order to accomplish the goals of performahce tests, the
admissions procedure should involve drastically changing a law
student's third year curriculum. The law student's third year is
underutilized and characterized by the student methodically plowing
through the year, simply marking time until graduation. This year
could be the vehicle to vastly improving the admissions process in
combination with eliminating the bar exam.
During the third year, a law student would embark on an inten-
sive supervised research project. The project would constitute a
"grand performance test," and would account for most of the
student's credit hours that year. Consequently, law classes would
not take away from project time. A faculty advisor or team of
220. Id.
221. Id. at 280-81.
222. Id. at 281. California applicants also have a drafting exercise on the bar exam
which asks applicants to either outline a deposition, draft legislation, write a brief, write a
closing argument, or some similar task. Id.
advisors would assist the student in the same way a master's com-
mittee would advise a graduate student on a thesis. The project
would consist of a complicated fact pattern or dispute that involves
a variety of legal issues. Thus, in researching how the dispute
might be resolved, the student would be required to integrate the
core elements of a legal education, such as contracts, torts, civil
procedure, property, constitutional law, criminal law, and profes-
sional responsibility. The fact pattern would also raise legal issues
which are important but may not have been covered in classes
taken by the student, such as tax, environmental law, or corporate
law. This will prevent students from choosing all of their elective
courses simply to prepare for the third year research project. Also,
lawyers constantly encounter legal issues about which they know
little or nothing, and they must educate themselves and consult
with experts.
As should become obvious, such an intense project offers the
student an opportunity to work like a lawyer and be evaluated like
a lawyer. As discussed supra, the bar exam cannot test what law-
yers do, nor can it assess legal competency. In addition, a perfor-
mance test cannot adequately test in thirty minutes what in real life
takes most lawyers much longer. Therefore, the research project
would not be encumbered with unrealistic time restraints such as
those imposed during the bar exam. Students would take the entire
year or one semester to work on their projects. As a result, the
project would enable students to engage in thought (instead of
memorization and recital). It would force students to integrate
ideas, analyze facts and legal doctrine, and evaluate proposed reso-
lutions to the disputes while working in a lawyer-like fashion.
Thus, the research project has the appealing quality of closer corre-
spondence with what lawyers actually do than either the traditional
bar exam or performance testing.
In addition, the practicing bar could have meaningful input into
legal education through the third year project instead of providing
a competency test which serves little use. Practitioners could help
draft the fact patterns, thereby ensuring that legal issues currently
facing the practicing bar will be incorporated into the student's
research.
Once the project is completed, the student will have intimate
knowledge of the legal issues involved and the real-life problems
clients. face, instead of only the fleeting acquaintance students
obtain in preparing for the bar exam. Also, they will have demon-
strated an ability to think with the highest order of cognitive skills,
to research efficiently, and to communicate effectively their find-

ings and proposals. Perhaps more importantly, students will show
that they can take charge of a long and arduous task and prove
that they can manage a project of proportions facing real practicing
attorneys. Therefore, law students would be of better use to their
preceptors and would more quickly assimilate themselves into the
legal environment when they begin their clerkship.
A rigorous project such as the one I have outlined would
greatly assist students in preparing for their transition from the
classroom to the law office. To further facilitate such a changeover,
every law student should benefit from a mandatory clerkship fol-
lowing graduation.224 As noted earlier, there are many criticisms
of clerkships, not the least of which is the varied or uncertain
experiences each applicant might encounter. In evaluating
Vermont's clerkship,' the MacCrate Report implies that the sin-
gle most disturbing aspect of clerkships is that there is no guaran-
tee that an applicant will learn, or even be exposed to the funda-
mental lawyering skills necessary for minimum competency.' I
agree. However, the purpose of a clerkship is not to teach all fun-
damental lawyering skills. A formal legal education, and the re-
search project go a long way toward teaching most of the
MacCrate Report's fundamental lawyering skills. However, the
practicing bar must assume responsibility for educating prospective
lawyers and take their roles as preceptors or supervisors seriously.
In so doing, clerkships will accomplish all that they realistically
can accomplish. That is, applicants will learn the subculture of
professional attorneys-how a law firm operates, how a judge
224. Clerkships following formal legal education in other common law jurisdictions typi-
cally range from three months to one year. Students completing an enormous research
project in their third year will have already acquired many of the practical lawyering
skills that they will need to offer minimum competency to clients. Thus, a one year
clerkship is unnecessarily long. In six months, applicants should receive exposure to the
skills and legal environment that will help them develop into practitioners. Consequently,
students would be admitted to practice, assuming all goes well, in October or November
after May graduation. This time frame is identical for a student who takes and passes the
bar exam in the summer after graduation.
225. Recall that in Vermont a portion of an applicant's legal education may be acquired
via a clerkship. The sort of clerkship I intend is not one that could substitute for any
portion of a formal legal education. In contrast, the clerkship I envision is supplementary
to a legal education.
226. See MACCRATE REPORT, supra note 97, at 289 (criticizing clerkship programs in
New Jersey, Vermont, and Delaware because the program is not guaranteed to teach all
necessary tasks and skills).
administers a court, where filings are made. Applicants will interact

with attorneys and clients, with no guarantee of mastering skills
such as interviewing, counseling, and negotiating, but they will at
least have an opportunity for exposure to such lawyering skills. In
addition, a clerkship could be tailored toward an applicant's partic-
ular career path. Thus, if an applicant hopes to practice criminal
law, the applicant could clerk in the prosecutor's office, with a
trial court judge, or in a criminal law firm.
VI. CONCLUSION
Historically, the modem written bar exam was developed to

ensure that law schools provided high quality legal education.
Since that time, other justifications, such as the motivation of stu-
dents to high achievement, has perpetuated the bar exam's domi-
nation as the ultimate determinant of bar admission. However, the
historical and contemporary justifications for the bar exam are no
longer convincing. As a result, the bar exam should be eliminated.
Admissions processes from other common law countries indicate
that a modem bar exam as administered in the United States is not
necessary to ensure competent attorneys. Instead, a special practical
education in the third year, combined with a mandatory postgradu-
ate clerkship, may both produce better attorneys and help "bridge
the gap" between law school and legal practice.
DANIEL R. HANSEN

Do We Need The Bar Examination - A Critical Evaluation of The Justifications For The Bar Examination and Proposed Alternatives ?

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Do We Need The Bar Examination - A Critical Evaluation of The Justifications For The Bar Examination and Proposed Alternatives ?

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Do We Need The Bar Examination - A Critical Evaluation of The Justifications For The Bar Examination and Proposed Alternatives ?

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case Western Reserve Law Review

Do We Need the Bar Examination--A Critical

Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/caselrev

1. See THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF BAR EXAMINERS, THE BAR EXAMINERS'

This Note questions the need for a bar examination as a re-

II. HISTORY OF ADMISSION TO THE BAR IN THE UNITED STATES

A. Bar Admission in Colonial Times through 1800

practice before higher courts without increased training. Therefore,

12. HANDBOOK 2d ed., supra note 1, at 15.

Hampshire was not as "strict" as either Indiana or Ohio. In New

C. Late Nineteenth Century Admissions and the Rise of

War bar examinations is also illustrative:

horde upon horde . . . within its precincts, with scarcely a

cally superior to Dwight's, but because Langdell was from Har-

dards than those imposed on approved law schools.'

dents could enter law practice through clerkship or apprenticeship

elude: 1) lack of uniform standards among law schools, especially

However, graduation from an ABA approved law school is not

72. Id. at 72:2001-72:2003.

pare students for law practice.

ter how one presents the consumer protection justification, the

mance tests, Klein's argument would be severely weakened.

McFadden.9 In Richardson, failing applicants to the South Caroli-

To be sure, Richardson v. McFadden may not represent a

claim the bar exam evaluates: legal analysis and communica-

educational and practical environments.

B. Justification: The Bar Motivates Students to Work Hard

Law means that other things being equal, a cheaper or inferior

115. See supra notes 49-50 and accompanying text.

their knowledge of various areas of law (such as torts, contracts,

rely on information they retained in their heads to counsel clients,

which will push law students to achieve their best.

128. Griswold, supra note 3, at 82 (paraphrasing Justice Benjamin Cardozo). Dean

beginning a law career. 3 ° The implication of Griswold's argu-

F. Justification:If There is No Bar Exam, Academics Will Be

admissions process justification.

conclusion is not necessarily to eliminate the bar exam, but rather,

duce additional intensive theory courses that demand students to

negative effect on legal education, and harm to applicants may not

IV. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

or CPE.'5 Mature students, those who come to law some time

155. Ramsay, supra note 152, at 46.

course. 65 To move on to the vocational stage, the university de-

from a Canadian law school. Like their American counterparts,

lian lawyers, whether they choose to practice as barristers or solici-

case. See NICHOLLS, supra note 188, at 141.

bridge-the-gap program teaches practical lawyering skills in the

Many opponents of the bar exam do not advocate eliminating

199. Id. at 408.

In addition, many critiques of justifications for the bar exam

there is concern that practitioners will not agree to supervise clerk-

clerkships: no uniformity in clerk training, the preceptor or supervising practitioner will

vant and irrelevant cases and statutes." In California, bar appli-

to research efficiently, and to communicate effectively their find-

administers a court, where filings are made. Applicants will interact

Historically, the modem written bar exam was developed to

You might also like