ILNews

Chinn: Examining the IndyBar Review

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

iba-chinn-scottIf you are a person who finds things to like about winter—the pristine beauty of snow, skiing, ice fishing—bully for you. For the rest of us, we gut through it, hoping that it will build character and cause a deeper appreciation of spring. Now think about preparing for and taking the Indiana Bar’s winter examination on February 28-29! Brutal.

For 12 years, the IndyBar has been adding warmth and inspiration to bar exam study through its IndyBar Review Course. In 2001, Professor Larry Jegen of the Robert H. McKinney School of Law sold his bar review course to the IndyBar for $1. Today, more than 200 students per year take the IndyBar Review Course, which is offered in preparation for both the winter and summer bar exams.

The IndyBar Review is a point of pride for the IndyBar. We are the only bar in the country to sponsor a bar review course. We get asked about it a lot by our peers at bar meetings. Some are considering following the IndyBar’s lead and are considering developing courses in their states. We have encouraged them to consider it—and at the same time cautioned about the scope of the undertaking. The IndyBar Review has 27 faculty members who lecture or instruct on 22 substantive subjects as well as 6 studying and exam-taking workshops covering the Multistate Bar Exam, the Multistate Performance Test, and the Indiana Essay Exam.

The cost of the IndyBar Review course is a little less than the competition, but that represents value, not less service. There are several reasons why. First, you can’t argue with results. The passage rate for exam takers that complete the IndyBar Review Course is higher than the average of all persons who sit for the exam. Second, all the lecturers are local practitioners who are experienced, established and well known in their fields of lecture. And the IndyBar’s staff and Steering Committee pay close attention to quality control through surveys and feedback as well as engaging in constant vetting of best practices to improve the course. Third, because the lecturers are local and aren’t traveling the country on the “bar review lecture circuit”, they are available to answer students’ post-lecture questions quickly. Finally, especially for students who intend to stay and practice law in Indiana after the bar exam, it is a real opportunity to get to know some of the leadings lawyers in our community and to be part of this additional bar-sponsored network before they are even sworn in.

I have taught the IndyBar Review lecture on Indiana Constitutional Law for five years now. I concede it is sometimes daunting to prepare for a 3 ½ hour lecture on the subject (especially in February). But when it is over, it is a great feeling to have connected with scores of students as they prepare to take the exam. The basic premises of our sponsorship of the course, after all, is that the IndyBar has a stake in the success of these bar applicants with respect to the exam and their budding careers, and we want to do something for them that earns their support for the IndyBar over the long term.

So, if you are a lawyer that has any sway over what bar review course a student takes, please consider sending them our way. We will take good care of them.•

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  2. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

  3. I will agree with that as soon as law schools stop lying to prospective students about salaries and employment opportunities in the legal profession. There is no defense to the fraudulent numbers first year salaries they post to mislead people into going to law school.

  4. The sad thing is that no fish were thrown overboard The "greenhorn" who had never fished before those 5 days was interrogated for over 4 hours by 5 officers until his statement was illicited, "I don't want to go to prison....." The truth is that these fish were measured frozen off shore and thawed on shore. The FWC (state) officer did not know fish shrink, so the only reason that these fish could be bigger was a swap. There is no difference between a 19 1/2 fish or 19 3/4 fish, short fish is short fish, the ticket was written. In addition the FWC officer testified at trial, he does not measure fish in accordance with federal law. There was a document prepared by the FWC expert that said yes, fish shrink and if these had been measured correctly they averaged over 20 inches (offshore frozen). This was a smoke and mirror prosecution.

  5. I love this, Dave! Many congrats to you! We've come a long way from studying for the bar together! :)

ADVERTISEMENT