"Perfect Your Skill Level.
That's How You Make it Happen."

In order to pass the California bar exam, you first need to understand what exactly is being tested. Contrary to popular belief, how much law you know is not what is being tested. Actually, your skill level in using the law you know is what is being tested. And that is why so many candidates who know the law cannot get "passed" the nation's toughest bar exam -- they bring a poor set of skills to the bar exam.

Armed with legal knowledge galore, failing candidates, typically, are poor analytical thinkers and/or poor analytical writers. (Usually, the latter is the case.) Their blue books are full of rule statements and factual summaries - but no analysis.

Below is an extreme example of the kind of writing that will never be given a passing grade by a California bar grader:

INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS RESULTS WHEN THE DEFENDANT ENGAGES IN EXTREME AND OUTRAGEOUS CONDUCT THAT TRANSCENDS ALL BOUNDS OF DECENCY AND CAUSES PLAINTIFF TO SUFFER SEVERE EMOTIONAL DISTRESS.

HERE, JOHN KNEW THAT KATHY ADORED HER PET CAT, SHEBA, AND JOHN CUT SHEBA'S HEAD OFF IN FRONT OF KATHY, WHO SUBSEQUENTLY SUFFERED HORRIFYING NIGHTMARES WHICH REQUIRED PSYCHIATRIC CARE. THUS, JOHN IS LIABLE FOR INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS.

In the above example, the failing candidate identified the correct issue, provided a good rule statement, identified the pertinent facts, and provided the proper conclusion. However, the candidate's thought process is not apparent, nowhere to be found. Merely identifying pertinent facts does not equal legal analysis, and the above example is a failing effort, even though it is apparent that the candidate knew the law. Hmm?

The California bar exam is not a legal-knowledge exam - it is, first and foremost, a thought-process exam. And, that is why knowing the law is not enough.

If the essays were designed to simply find out how much black-letter law you know, then you would probably be asked questions like: "Explain Felony Murder in 500 words or less?" "Explain the concept of Proximate Cause in 500 words or less?" "Explain the concept of Standing in 75 words or less?"

Think for a moment. "Could it actually be that the Bar Examiners want to see if I know how to think?" "Could it be that I need to do more than simply demonstrate an ability to memorize?" "Is that why so many people who know the law keep failing?" Yes, to all three questions. And, for many, that is what makes the California bar exam difficult.

Until you perfect your thought process and your skill at transcribing your thought process (i.e., analytical writing), hours spent learning law, making flash cards will have little effect on your chances of passing. ("I can't believe I failed! I knew the law! I was in the library studying from 10 AM to 10 PM everyday!" You should have been in the library perfecting your skill level, and that is why Barperfect is an activity-oriented review.)

When writing an essay response, you need to understand that what you write underneath your rule statement(s) is what passes or fails the exam. Your rule statements, no matter how good or how bad, have little impact on your chances of passing or failing. In a superior essay answer, the rule statement can be completely covered (or eliminated) and the candidate's legal knowledge still shines through. Most failing essays are "law rich" and "analysis poor".

("But they don't even read your essays. All you need are the right head notes and the right buzz words underlined. Your exam books aren't even read." Is that so? Did the California Committee of Bar Examiners issue a Press Release that said, "We do not even read your exam books."? Well, we have former bar graders on our staff. And we know that your books are read. Word for word. Quickly, the graders are looking for issues spotted . . . and . . . an analytical thought process.)

Take the Performance Test. All candidates are given the law. A Performance Test is certainly not a legal-knowledge test - it is, first and foremost, a thought-process test. What additional facts are needed? Can you determine what discovery devices will best help you find these facts? Can you determine if a jury trial or a bench trial is best for your client? Can you determine if your client's goals are unethical? Can you sufficiently use case law? Can you distinguish, compare and contrast cases? Can you skillfully compare the facts of your file to the facts of the cases in the library? Can you skillfully distinguish a case that looks like it has absolutely nothing to do with this particular Performance Test? Can you do more than pull facts and a holding from a case? And so forth.

(In the real world, do you think a lawyer can simply cite a pertinent holding to a judge? "Your Honor, we respectfully request that you follow the holding of John v. Doe?" "Uhh, counselor, what are the facts of your case and what are the facts of John v. Doe? Please enlighten me, that way I can tell if John v. Doe is pertinent to your set of facts. Actually, counselor, I would rather that you demonstrate this for us . . .")

Because a Performance Test is a thought-process test, there is more to a Performance Test than simply "following directions". Much more.

And take the MBE. That portion of the exam is definitely a thought-process test. There are no fill-in-the-blanks questions designed to simply see how much law you memorized. "Which of the four following rule statements is the correct one for Acceptance?" Wouldn't it be great if it were that easy?

Of course you need to know the law. But, most of all, you need to understand that legal knowledge, in and of itself, does not pass the California bar exam. Candidates who know the law and are skillful at applying the law are the ones who pass. Remember, the bar exam is not a legal-knowledge exam - it is, first and foremost, a thought-process exam. A photographic memory, without application skills, is of little use.

WHAT SEPARATES BARPERFECT FROM ALL OF THE REST?

QUALITY: Professional guidance

We are not a group of lawyers trying to make money in between cases. With Barperfect, you know who you are dealing with. You have seen our ads in the Law Student Journal since 1994, the year our company was founded. Year round, bar review and law school tutorials are all we do.

We are educators who fully understand what the California Committee of Bar Examiners is testing. Our founder and program director, Steve Liosi, Esq., has run the Learning Resource Centers of two prominent southern California law schools. Additionally, he is a former Faculty Tutor at Chapman Law School. A Law Review Invitee, Mr. Liosi passed the California bar exam on his first attempt. Most important, he is skilled at making law students and bar candidates skillful.

[By the way, this unsolicited e-mail from a 1L just found its way into our e-mailbox this very morning (Tuesday, May 22, 2007):

My last Concord quiz was the best score to date in Contracts. You
were "sitting next to me" screaming "you don't need to write a bunch of law to answer that!" Anyway, your tutorial has a prominent place in my notes. Later, Steve. Looking forward to your continued advice. - John Smith]

Jeff Cancilla, Esq., in charge of Barperfect product development, has passed six (6) bar exams on his first attempt, including California's.

Add our staff of former bar graders to the mix, and you know that you will be professionally guided through the process of perfecting your skill level so that you can pass.

INTEGRITY: No unrealistic guarantees

We tell it like it is. Not every Barperfect client passes the California bar exam, and we cannot "guarantee" that you will pass.

In fact, we would avoid any and every course that offers a "guaranteed pass" program. Such an offering implies that the offeror has no insight into the true essence of the California bar exam, nor the inherent differences in bar candidates.

Don't you think there is a significant difference between a Stanford grad who just missed by 10 points and a non-ABA grad who struggled to get Cs in law school and just failed by more than 200 points? Don't you think there is a significant difference between a high-LSAT (>172) and a low-LSAT (<155) candidate? Of course there is.

We can only guarantee that you are enrolling in a high-quality, activity-oriented course that will professionally guide you through the process so that you can sit for the next exam with the highest possible skill level imaginable. After that, it is up to you.

A "guaranteed pass" program? Uhh, no thanks. You get no marketing gimmicks from us.

VALUE: No overcharging, no gouging

Through the years, we have been told that we should charge more. But we know that law school was expensive enough, and many of you already are into the process for thousands of dollars.

You cannot buy a "pass". But some courses want you think otherwise. In fact, you can spend as much as $12,000 for a certain classroom course. (But, hey, it is held at a "luxury" hotel.) And you can pay as much as $10,000 for a one-on-one tutor. (But, hey, you get the tutor's personal cell phone number.)

We think that kind of pricing is simply trying to take advantage of vulnerable bar candidates. We don't play that game. Our prices are competitive and realistic and not intended to gouge.

INTERESTED?: Serious inquiries only, please

"YES! YES! YES! I want to sit for the next bar exam with the highest possible legal knowledge and skill level so that I can pass!"

"I do not want to passively sit in a crowded lecture hall with bothersome, clueless know-it-alls! I want Professor Liosi and Professor Cancilla and a staff of former bar graders to be my study partners!"

Then, call our office (or order) right now so that you can begin preparing and practicing for the California bar exam.