6 ms·

A lot of recent "ditch the exam" efforts across a wide variety of professions seem to be centered around post-2020 diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initia

by s0kr8s 3y ago

A lot of recent "ditch the exam" efforts across a wide variety of professions seem to be centered around post-2020 diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives (evidence: https://www.opb.org/article/2022/01/17/oregon-advances-alternative-routes-to-becoming-a-licensed-lawyer/ https://www.opb.org/article/2022/01/17/oregon-advances-alter...). This is not always stated explicitly, but will turn up in board minutes if you have access to them. Many professional boards have added a DEI committee or incorporated language into their mission statement in recent years as well (Oregon bar statement: https://www.osbar.org/diversity/programs.html https://www.osbar.org/diversity/programs.html). I'm never clear whether the hypothesis is "more DEI = more efficacy && competency," or whether the hypothesis is "benefits of (DEI) > benefits of (efficacy && competency)." The former hypothesis at least seems more testable, but I'm not sure whether anyone is trying very hard (meta-analysis: https://academic.oup.com/tbm/advance-article/doi/10.1093/tbm/ibad061/7324745 https://academic.oup.com/tbm/advance-article/doi/10.1093/tbm...).

rayiner 3y ago
It’s based on the absurd idea that multiple choice tests are racist and so what you need is subjective human grading.
vineyardmike 3y ago
Not sure if the ditch the exam here is related to that, since there’s a lot of pre-existing discourse around exam practices anyways, but > I'm never clear whether the hypothesis is … or … It’s possibly both. I’ve seen a lot of arguments (poorly cited usually) to the affect of * diverse organizations tend to perform better. The general claim is that providing psychological safety enables people to work better. And diverse groups of people have more different experiences, and can contribute increasingly different ideas and perspectives. * DEI initiatives are beneficial people and society at large. This claim is obvious. So it can be true that the benefits of these initiatives are important AND they lead to better performing organizations.
- narrator 3y ago
  People who are granted access to opportunities based on DEI and not on merit will be forever indebted to the DEI power structure and will aid them in their long march through the institutions by loyally doing whatever it takes to increase and ensure their political power. They claim that their is a conspiracy against DEI and they are just rebalancing the scale and this is why there are different scores on standardized tests, etc. They say the only way for you to get justice is to give political power to the DEI hierarchy and ignore their crimes and corruption and prosecute to the maximum extent those who want to do things based on merit.
  - gopher_space 3y ago
    You need a definition of merit and an understanding of when it matters and to whom.
    - rayiner 3y ago
      Your score on a multiple-choice exam, testing basic concepts about the law seems like a pretty good definition of merit here.
      - jimz 3y ago
        If only that was the bar exam. Now it's all UBE so what you end up with is 2/3 multiple choice questions that bear little relationship to actual law you'll be practicing, and 1/3 are answers to absurd hypotheticals that you'd answer in a formulaic fashion, situations that you will pretty much never see IRL and certainly will never be in a position where you can't look up the law, except this one time. Oh, and the software that's used to conduct the test is practically malware in the way it operates. At the NY State Bar exam I took there were about 100 people who didn't finish because the crappy software crashed and you had to handwrite the whole thing from the first question on. If it crashes your computer, you might as well leave since you won't have time to finish. Really, the bar exam has virtually nothing in common with the actual practice of law. It's a separate skill, like taking the SATs. Although, there are so many legal niches that it's unlikely that testing real law would really resemble how legal practicecs work today anyway. It's pretty much an arbitrary test that might fry your computer. Hopefully they at least they should have released a newer version of the software in the intervening years.
ClarityJones 3y ago
Oregon's move is exactly backwards. If anything, they should cancel the law school requirement and allow the public to sit for the bar exam. Schools are notorious for graduating incompetent students who's only ability was to take out loans to pay the tuition. Allowing the public to sit for the bar exam without going to law school would be a much better DEI initiative because it would directly address disparities in the ability to finance a law school education.
- edgyquant 3y ago
  Also law school is ridiculous. My sister is studying to be a lawyer but may not be able to attend despite passing the initial test (the name I forget.) basically she needs a couple of existing lawyers recommendation, but we’re from a small town and she only knows one. Also the work requirements are ridiculous, she’s not allowed to work for a law office at all while attending a law school which seems so backwards compared to most schools where they actively encourage getting a job working in the field. So she’ll have to quit her current law secretary job if she wants to go to law school.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - sanrafa 3y ago
    Are you in the US? Created an account to address this misconception in case it’ll help your sister out: Assuming she hasn’t attended yet (and therefore just took the LSAT, not the bar exam), most schools will accept letters of recommendation from anybody that can speak to your sister’s ability to succeed in law school. That can be her current employer, past employers, colleagues, past professors, community members she’s volunteered with, etc. If she can’t find literally anybody, she might be able to network with local attorneys to get a basic letter to help her meet requirements. And law students complete internships whilst they’re in school, not sure who told her she couldn’t work for a firm during her studies. However, many schools do have a rule against allowing 1L (first-year) students to work as it could interfere with their studies. I agree that it sucks when you’re not already wealthy, though. She could see if the firm she currently works at would allow her to go on leave, coming back as an intern after her first year. Alternatively, she could do a part-time program. Disclaimer: I’m also applying to law school this cycle, so actual lawyers may have better info.
comte7092 3y ago
I read the OPB article and it mentions DEI at the end, in a way that suggests that this change did not come as a result of DEI.
tuatoru 3y ago
The reason for DEI does not matter. The practical outcome is perhaps perverse. A potential client will see a "diverse" lawyer and think "this person was hired because of DEI rather than competence." Prudent clients will insist on white male lawyers because they must be competent to have jobs in a DEI environment. So actually competent lawyers from minorities suffer because of DEI policies and laws.
- jimz 3y ago
  The ordinary client does not know how to properly evaluate the competency of an attorney anyway, DEI or not DEI. And no, the jingle is not correlated to performance either in motion or trial practice. Hell, Cellino and Barnes literally had a new Barnes and kept the jingle and nobody even seemed to notice.
catlover76 3y ago
Yeah, DEI considerations abolishing bar exams is an example of a good result for the wrong reason, IMO.

by s0kr8s 3y ago

rayiner 3y ago

It’s based on the absurd idea that multiple choice tests are racist and so what you need is subjective human grading.

vineyardmike 3y ago

Not sure if the ditch the exam here is related to that, since there’s a lot of pre-existing discourse around exam practices anyways, but > I'm never clear whether the hypothesis is … or … It’s possibly both. I’ve seen a lot of arguments (poorly cited usually) to the affect of * diverse organizations tend to perform better. The general claim is that providing psychological safety enables people to work better. And diverse groups of people have more different experiences, and can contribute increasingly different ideas and perspectives. * DEI initiatives are beneficial people and society at large. This claim is obvious. So it can be true that the benefits of these initiatives are important AND they lead to better performing organizations.

narrator 3y ago
People who are granted access to opportunities based on DEI and not on merit will be forever indebted to the DEI power structure and will aid them in their long march through the institutions by loyally doing whatever it takes to increase and ensure their political power. They claim that their is a conspiracy against DEI and they are just rebalancing the scale and this is why there are different scores on standardized tests, etc. They say the only way for you to get justice is to give political power to the DEI hierarchy and ignore their crimes and corruption and prosecute to the maximum extent those who want to do things based on merit.
- gopher_space 3y ago
  You need a definition of merit and an understanding of when it matters and to whom.
  - rayiner 3y ago
    Your score on a multiple-choice exam, testing basic concepts about the law seems like a pretty good definition of merit here.
    - jimz 3y ago
      If only that was the bar exam. Now it's all UBE so what you end up with is 2/3 multiple choice questions that bear little relationship to actual law you'll be practicing, and 1/3 are answers to absurd hypotheticals that you'd answer in a formulaic fashion, situations that you will pretty much never see IRL and certainly will never be in a position where you can't look up the law, except this one time. Oh, and the software that's used to conduct the test is practically malware in the way it operates. At the NY State Bar exam I took there were about 100 people who didn't finish because the crappy software crashed and you had to handwrite the whole thing from the first question on. If it crashes your computer, you might as well leave since you won't have time to finish. Really, the bar exam has virtually nothing in common with the actual practice of law. It's a separate skill, like taking the SATs. Although, there are so many legal niches that it's unlikely that testing real law would really resemble how legal practicecs work today anyway. It's pretty much an arbitrary test that might fry your computer. Hopefully they at least they should have released a newer version of the software in the intervening years.

ClarityJones 3y ago

Oregon's move is exactly backwards. If anything, they should cancel the law school requirement and allow the public to sit for the bar exam. Schools are notorious for graduating incompetent students who's only ability was to take out loans to pay the tuition. Allowing the public to sit for the bar exam without going to law school would be a much better DEI initiative because it would directly address disparities in the ability to finance a law school education.

edgyquant 3y ago
Also law school is ridiculous. My sister is studying to be a lawyer but may not be able to attend despite passing the initial test (the name I forget.) basically she needs a couple of existing lawyers recommendation, but we’re from a small town and she only knows one. Also the work requirements are ridiculous, she’s not allowed to work for a law office at all while attending a law school which seems so backwards compared to most schools where they actively encourage getting a job working in the field. So she’ll have to quit her current law secretary job if she wants to go to law school.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- sanrafa 3y ago
  Are you in the US? Created an account to address this misconception in case it’ll help your sister out: Assuming she hasn’t attended yet (and therefore just took the LSAT, not the bar exam), most schools will accept letters of recommendation from anybody that can speak to your sister’s ability to succeed in law school. That can be her current employer, past employers, colleagues, past professors, community members she’s volunteered with, etc. If she can’t find literally anybody, she might be able to network with local attorneys to get a basic letter to help her meet requirements. And law students complete internships whilst they’re in school, not sure who told her she couldn’t work for a firm during her studies. However, many schools do have a rule against allowing 1L (first-year) students to work as it could interfere with their studies. I agree that it sucks when you’re not already wealthy, though. She could see if the firm she currently works at would allow her to go on leave, coming back as an intern after her first year. Alternatively, she could do a part-time program. Disclaimer: I’m also applying to law school this cycle, so actual lawyers may have better info.

comte7092 3y ago

I read the OPB article and it mentions DEI at the end, in a way that suggests that this change did not come as a result of DEI.

tuatoru 3y ago

The reason for DEI does not matter. The practical outcome is perhaps perverse. A potential client will see a "diverse" lawyer and think "this person was hired because of DEI rather than competence." Prudent clients will insist on white male lawyers because they must be competent to have jobs in a DEI environment. So actually competent lawyers from minorities suffer because of DEI policies and laws.

jimz 3y ago
The ordinary client does not know how to properly evaluate the competency of an attorney anyway, DEI or not DEI. And no, the jingle is not correlated to performance either in motion or trial practice. Hell, Cellino and Barnes literally had a new Barnes and kept the jingle and nobody even seemed to notice.

catlover76 3y ago

Yeah, DEI considerations abolishing bar exams is an example of a good result for the wrong reason, IMO.