Only 38 Percent Pass Connecticut Bar Exam as Success Rate Hits 18-Year Low
That's a decline of 12 percentage points from February 2017, when 82 of 163 students, or roughly 50 percent, passed the exam.
May 22, 2018 at 04:22 PM
4 minute read
For the first time since 2000, the percentage of law students passing the February Connecticut bar exam fell to under 50 percent, the latest sign of a downward trend as numbers for those taking the exam in both February and July have dropped precipitously in the past few years.
Educators and legal experts say it's not clear why those numbers have dropped, but they say the trend is not promising. The latest results, released this month, show that only 38 percent, 74 of 195 students, who sat for the bar exam in February passed.
That's a decline of 12 percentage points from February 2017, when 82 of 163 students, or roughly 50 percent, passed the exam. One year earlier, nearly 63 percent had succeeded, down from the nearly 68 percent in February 2015.
“We were all surprised to see such a fairly big drop. We just don't know why this is happening,” said Connecticut Bar Examining Committee administrative director Jessica Kallipolites. “I do not have a crystal ball, but hopefully it will be higher next time.”
Since 2000, the average pass rate for those sitting for the exam in February has been 65 percent, compared with the 75 percent average for students taking the July exam.
Justin Dion, director of the Bar Admissions Program and a professor of legal skills at Western New England, told the Connecticut Law Tribune Tuesday that February pass rates tend to be lower than July's.
“Most people who graduate in May will study for the July bar,” Dion said. “Folks who are taking the February bar may have graduated a little later in the cycle. Statistically speaking, the February bar has a lot more folks taking the bar for the second or third time. There are multiple test-takers who did not pass the bar in July and are taking it in February.”
Connecticut has no limit on how often one can take the two-day bar exam, which opens the door to repeated attempts by some candidates. Kallipolites said one candidate took the exam in February for the 27th time. That student did not pass again, she said.
Then there is the other end of the spectrum: Connecticut Bar Association President Karen DeMeola, who passed the bar on her first try in 1996. In her role as assistant dean for enrollment and students at the University of Connecticut, DeMeola now gives students advice on preparing for the exam. One of her biggest tips: self-care plays a huge role in the time leading up to the grueling exam.
“I always tell people to study and dedicate the time for this exam. It is not an easy exam, but you also must give yourself time for self-care,” DeMeola said. “My self-care was watching reruns of 'I Love Lucy.' Everyone has a different way of preparing. Some people might take an hour a day to connect with family and friends. Others might have a structured work schedule that includes yoga or meditation.”
DeMeola said she doesn't know why the pass rate numbers have dropped so much, but speculated that several factors account for the decline.
“There are often circumstances that can affect people, such as a death in the family or elder care or child care issues,” she said. “There are many things that can impact someone's ability to study and perform at an optimal level.”
Among those sitting in February, many came from outside Connecticut. For instance, 34 of the total 195 students taking the exam were from Western New England University in Springfield, Massachusetts. Of those Massachusetts students, only nine, or 26 percent, succeeded.
Another interesting point: No one from Yale University Law School took the Connecticut bar exam in February. Five Yale students had taken the bar exam in July 2017, while only two sat in February 2017.
Jan Conroy, a Yale spokeswoman, said Tuesday she believes other factors account for Yale students not taking the Connecticut bar exam.
“We have a small class and only graduate about 200 students a year,” she said. “Other schools have larger programs. … We have students from all over the country and even the world. Our students take the exams in other states, perhaps their home states, or they might gravitate to other states.”
Here are the school-by-school results:
See the latest statistics:
|This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllCoalition of AGs Support Updates to ABA's Legal Education Diversity Standard
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.