As law schools receive fewer and fewer applications for admission, is one tactic for their own survival to admit students who are unlikely to ever pass the bar exam?  Results coming out of California for the July 2015 bar exam certainly make one wonder, as the pass rate hits a 30-year low of 46.6% overall, and only 60% for first-time takers.  Among the unfortunate 2,485 repeat-takers, the pass rate was an abysmal 16%.

It certainly does make you wonder if law schools are shirking their standards in favor of filling seats and receiving tuition payments, only to lead students on an extremely expensive three-year educational journey to nowhere.

The Small Firm Scorecard example graphic.

The Small Firm ScorecardTM

Is your law firm structured to succeed in the future?

The practice of law is changing. You need to understand whether your firm is positioned for success in the coming years. Our free Small Firm Scorecard will identify your firm’s strengths and weaknesses in just a few minutes.


  1. Jeff Taylor says:

    Wait… The title’s way too misleading. I thought I would see actual proof that there’s a correlation between passage rates and admissions standards. But all I’m seeing is flimsy analysis.

    There’s no evidence here to show that fewer applications means lower admissions standards, and the students not paying the bar exam had lower admission scores.

    I think it’d probably be easy to scour aa “reliable” source on admissions and show the declining standards, and then circumstantially show the link to the falling bar passage rate.

    Incidentally, the correlative theory also fails if other states have higher pass rates. (Yes, I realize that CA has a harder bar exam.)

Leave a Reply