Sunday, December 18, 2011

跨过新2012门槛

跨过新门槛/
曾任毛泽东、周恩来翻译的中国社会科学院美国研究所前所长、研究员资中筠

环顾全球，大部分国家和地区都面临新的转折点。
就全人类而言，一个很大的问题是人与自然的关系。自有文明史以来，人以他的智慧进行科学创新，不断改造自然，征服自然以服务于自己的福祉。与此同时 却制造出高效的毁灭自己的手段，同时破坏自己的生存环境。现在面临的问题是：科学发展与人类命运的关系——如同永动机一样无法停止的科技新发明是继续造福 人类还是带来祸害，直至走向毁灭。这取决于人类的良知、智慧、远见和对自己的掌控能力。这个问题太大，需要自然科学家与社会科学家以及政治家们的共同探 讨，我去年在一次会上曾经就这个题目作过探讨，现在不可能在这里展开。
另一个领域是每天媒体都在追踪报道、我们日常关注的，世界各个地区的危机和动荡。这一轮的危机不同于以往，而是带有本质性的新的拐点。由于发展的不 平衡，不同国家和不同地区所面临的问题也各不相同。相同的是，原来有效的内部体制和现存的国际格局已不能应付新的社会诉求和层出不穷的新问题。实际上，这 一新拐点可以从上世纪80年代末东欧剧变和苏联解体算起。那一次变化可以说是新的一波民主化浪潮，是苏东向美欧靠拢，彻底打破二战后的雅尔塔格局。现在 美、欧又面临新的转折，但是在不同的起点上，好像波浪一样，那一波在后面，这一波是在前面。当前可以列出的重要的热点有：欧洲、中东、非洲、美国和中国， 还有全球化模式的本身。我认为中东、非洲的动荡可以说是上个世纪东欧民主化那一波的延续，不过还要经过曲折而漫长甚至痛苦的道路，不过方向是一致的。至于 欧洲，欧盟的出现是一个伟大的创新，如果这一关危机能成功地化解，那么一百年后回头看，欧洲又对制度创新做出了新的贡献。原来民族国家的形成就是从欧洲开 始的，现在民族国家发展的一定程度，又可以联合起来。如果成功，是带有划时代意义的。但是如果这次危机过不去，可以算是一次失败的尝试，但是仍然留下了可 供参考的宝贵经验。所有这些问题当然不可能在今天有限的时间中穷尽。我现在只能重点探讨中国和美国各自所面临的门槛，以及如何跨过这一门槛对今后的中美关 系的影响。
中美自一个多世纪以来有冲突也有合作，实际上合作多于冲突。真正兵戎相见只有两次，一次是八国联军；一次是朝鲜战争。第一次美国不是主角，是被裹进 来的；第二次双方都不是发动者。冷战期间的敌对，是两个阵营的敌对，阵营解体了，就有了关系正常化的条件。迄今为止，两国没有不可调和的根本利害冲突，也 没有领土争端。但是摩擦不断。这还在正常范围。但是今后这种格局就面临新的变化。今后中美关系在具体事件上的外交运作固然重要，而决定性的、长远的因素在 于各自国内如何迈过这道坎。
1. 美国
根据我对美国历史的解读，美国从立国到如今二百年中，除了南北战争之外，一直在进行渐进的改革，其制度的活力就在于有效的纠错机制，可以避免在不少 其他国家引起社会动荡和暴力革命的、不可补救的社会危机。在某些历史拐点，当社会矛盾尖锐化到一定程度，代议制框架内政治钟摆的左右摇摆的调整机制显示乏 力时，就有体制外的全社会各种力量直接参与，表现为群众运动或强大的舆论力量，推动更加根本性的改革。这也是在美国民主政体框架之内的，并非反常之事。
第一个拐点：20世纪初的“进步时代”。（多数人都把三十年代小罗斯福“新政”作为转折点，我倾向于更早，老罗斯福执政的“进步时代”）。这是一场 全社会各种力量参与而促成的全面改革：解决对资本和市场的规范问题、遏制社会达尔文主义的弱肉强食、净化吏治，遏制腐败、健全民主法治，进一步落实宪法精 神，并改进宪法的不足。这场改革对以后整个二十世纪美国繁荣富强的意义再强调也不为过。如果没有它，小罗斯福的“新政”也不可能实现。特别值得提出的是， 进步主义时代的吏治改革有效地遏制了腐败。以后从“新政”开始，美国行政部门的职能不断加强，条件就是政府有公信力，如果人们怀疑政府部门可以以权谋私的 话是绝不会同意这样扩大职权的。
第二个拐点：六十年代的群众运动。其重大意义是实现进一步向平等方向的、深入的社会改革：促进种族、性别平等，落实了黑人的权利，大面积扩大社会保障，奠定美国式的福利国家，缩小贫富差距（到七十年代中期贫富差距最小，以后又逐步扩大）。
当然，还有结束越战，对外缩短战线，缓和在冷战中的军备竞赛，间接促成了中美关系正常化。
现在面临第三个拐点：这是在新的全球化背景下发生的，我姑且举三点新的因素，再加以阐释：
1）所谓“世界领袖”的负担沉重不堪。
2）出现了“虚拟经济”，离实体经济越来越远。
3）全球化带来的利益在国内分配严重不均，加剧社会不平等。
当然，这几点不足以囊括所有的新因素，限于时间不能尽述。以下对这几点略加阐释。
1）自冷战结束以来，美国成为唯一的超级大国。它以“世界领袖”自居，世界任何角落发生的任何事件，它都以之为己任，要加以干涉，不论正当还是不正 当。美国一贯致力于维护它的“世界领导”地位，现在更是特别要确保其唯一的超级大国地位，警惕任何潜在的挑战。“领导”一词本身是中性的。几年以前，在一 次中美学者对话会上，我曾提出过“良性领导”和“恶性领导”之说。前者引起尊重，后者引起恐惧和反感。例如20世纪绝大部分划时代的科技发明创造都发生在 美国。这样，客观上美国引领了人类社会的进步。它也曾以它的经济繁荣和超强国力对二战后很多国家的重建带头做出了贡献。这就是“良性领导”。另一方面，当 “领导”意味着把自己的意志强加于人，以牺牲别国人民的利益来追求自己的自私利益，特别是持续不断地扩大已经压倒全球的军火库，从而带头加速全球军备竞 赛，这个词含义就是负面的。今天的问题是，美国越来越诉诸军事手段和武力干涉而不是经济和文化手段来确保它的“领导”。这与二战后的早期很不相同。那时美 国的影响主要来自它内部的榜样效应和对外的经济援助。当然，那时已经开始进行军事扩张。1955年艾森豪威尔总统离任前的演说中就提出了著名的关于“军工 复合体（military-industrial complex）”对美国政治影响的警告。今天，这一力量已经发展到如此规模，全世界看着美国在对外事务中行事更无忌惮，更倾向于用高压和武力，自己陷入 一个又一个泥沼。不论这一躯体有多强壮，它能负担这样的重担多久？
另一个问题是美欧联盟还能维持多久？显然，北约的主力是美国。美国国防部长批评欧洲不承担应有的义务的讲话，说明美国担负“北约”的“领导”责任也日益艰难。对于欧元面临的危机，美国是否有能力或是有意愿给予帮助，或者更愿意看到它失败？
总之，美国需要在不断扩张的霸权思维轨道上刹车，停下来进行反思，使自己适应变化了的世界，学习做一个正常的国家。但是现在似乎还看不到美国决策者有这样的迹象。
2）金融危机和经济萧条本不是新事。在美国二百多年的历史中已经发生过多次循环：金融泡沫引起经济危机然后又走向复苏、繁荣。每次复苏都与新的发明 和创立新的产业相联系。这样，美国经济和社会在一轮又一轮循环中螺旋上升。当前的新现象是出现了所谓“虚拟经济”，这是华尔街的那些智力超群的人士玩的游 戏，他们发明了各种令普通人眼花缭乱的金融创新和复杂的衍生品，离实体经济越来越远。现在的问题是，下一个能触发经济复苏的新实体产业是什么？
我们能否期待清洁能源以及与环保相关联的产业起到这一作用？
3）过去几十年中全球化促进了全世界经济的发展。发达国家和发展中国家，包括中国和美国，都从中获益。但是由于资本可以自由流动到廉价劳动力市场， 大量的利润进入了资本的口袋，牺牲的是劳工的利益。像美国这样发达国家，工薪阶层通过多年斗争争取来的谈判权大大削弱了。因此，自上世纪七十年代后期以来 一个相当长的时期内，收入差距持续扩大，即使在繁荣的年代也不例外。这当然引起社会严重不满，导致我们看到的“占领华尔街”运动。这场运动虽然表面上声势 浩大，遍及全国，但是远不如上世纪六十年代深入而广泛，主流媒体没有给予足够的关注，对权势集团的威胁似乎也不那么大。目前政府财政赤字如此高，又面临严 重经济衰退，外加各种政治因素，政府周旋的余地也很狭窄。例如在上世纪60年代肯尼迪—约翰逊政府借群众运动之势推动了一些改革的立法，而到目前为止， “占领”运动尚未起到足以推动实质性改革的作用。
上述诸多问题反过来足以腐蚀美国的民主。美国人民引以自豪、如此珍视的民主制度似乎有异化的危险。资本大亨的贪婪，加上“军工复合体”，加上权势的 傲慢，再加上短视的党派争斗和狭隘的集团利益可能绑架美国人民的真正利益。本人一直对美国有一个论点：对内行民主，对外行霸权可以并行不悖。但是现在，霸 权正在发展而民主有异化的危险。美国的军事开支2010年达7500亿，而对最贫困国家的援助只有150亿。美国独家占领阿富汗，一手扶植起现政权，而每 年用于军费开支是1000亿，而用于发展的援助只有10-20亿。这是很说明问题的。
所以说，美国面临新拐点，需要对自己在世界作用中的定位进行反思，美国制度中的纠错机制是否还能发挥作用，尚待观察。
（二）中国方面
中国处于不同的发展阶段。美国和欧洲面临的问题带有后现代性质，而中国尚未完成全面现代化。欧美发生了危机，制度表现出种种缺陷，不能因此说明中国 制度完美，不需要改革。中华民族自十九世纪中叶以来就开始转型，经历了曲折而痛苦的历程，有时甚至倒退。且不说早期的历史。最近的一次拐点在上世纪七十年 代末，开启了我们称之为“改革开放”的时期。近三十年的经济快速发展和显著成就有目共睹，所累积的严重问题也不容回避。现在中国也面临了新的拐点。我也姑 且举三点重要的因素：
1）当前发展模式不可持续。
2）腐败丛生难以遏制。
3）两极分化日益严重，社会矛盾尖锐化。
以下简单加以解释：
这几点在很多国家都存在，但是在中国目前的转型期，有其特殊的严重性。
1）方今人们谈论很多的促成经济快速增长的“中国模式”是不可持续的。它是基于高能耗（最新数据，中国已超过美国成为第一能源消耗国）、资源浪费、严重污染环境，加上低工资和人权保障的缺失。在经济结构方面，一大部分GDP是来自房地产投机而不是高科技创新。地方政府的主要财政来源是卖地。再者，有利于出口导向产业的国际环境正在急剧发生变化。所有这些问题呼唤对现有的发展模式进行实质性的改革。
2）腐败哪个国家都有。不过当前中国的腐败是弥漫性的，几乎覆盖所有领域，特别是本应是净土的文化、教育和其他精神领域。
现存的法律和政治机制不足以有效地遏制它的蔓延。此外，有一种“中国特色”的腐败是其他国家所没有的，就是基于等级制的特权，各级掌权者合法地、不 受监督地大量消费“公款”按“级别”提供各种享受。这种现象不但没有随着全社会经济增长而减少，反而更加剧。具有讽刺意义的是，中国国有大企业的CEO从 他们的美国同行那里学习到给自己付高得惊人的收入，却没有引进对普通工薪收入者的基本社会保障（尽管美国人对此还不满意）。所有这些造成严重的财富分配不 公，高度的社会不公正和普遍的道德下降。另外，与美国不同的是，美国的大企业是私人资本，而中国最大的企业都是国有垄断。土地都是国有。美国人抱怨，美国 的大财团绑架了政府和全民的利益，那么中国各级政府本身就是大财团，是最大的利益集团，一身而二任，既是资方，又是仲裁方，其悖谬是可想而知的。政治体制 之所以非改不可，而又难以起步，都源于此。
3）中国也是全球化的受益者，因而这些年来全社会财富大幅度增长。由于外资比例很高，高额利润实际上落入跨国资本的口袋。也就是说，养肥了华尔街大 亨的不仅有美国劳动者，还有中国劳动者的血汗。留在中国的那一块蛋糕，绝大部分为占中国人口极少数的权钱结合的暴富集团所吞食，广大普通劳动者只分到极小 的一块。但是与美国不同的是，中国由于过去的物资极度匮乏造成极端贫困，即使那极小的一块，也足以显著地改善多数工薪阶层的生活。到目前为止，情况还能过 得去。既然既得利益者不准备让出一些份额来，那么只有不断加速把蛋糕做大才能使那一小块分给老百姓的蛋糕也有所增长，此所以明知需要放慢脚步，做些调整， 也不敢这样做，于是造成一味保GDP的增长模式。但是不可能长期如此。大家都看到，国际市场正在缩水，中国急需转变外向型经济，而中国人的普遍购买力不足 以填补足够的内需。另外，年轻一代进入就业市场的大军，包括大学毕业生，不可能接受他们的前辈所忍受的艰苦条件，而机会却没有那么幸运。
不言而喻，两极分化和社会不公加剧会导致不满情绪的蔓延，从而威胁社会的稳定。问题是如何应对各种不平之鸣，防止社会动荡？是进一步加紧对各个领域 的控制，牺牲国民基本的自由权利，从而制造更大的冤屈，还是向法治和民主的方向改革治理方式？体制内外多数正直和明智的中国人都意识到目前的形势呼唤早已 滞后的结构性的、政治和社会改革。但是阻力还相当大，现在主要不是源于意识形态因素，而是来自既得利益。十三亿中国人的命运取决于如何跨过这道坎，变恶性 循环为良性循环。
那么，中美各自面临的十字路口与今后的两国关系有什么关联？
总的说来，如果中美两国各自能够直面新的问题和挑战，成功地跨过新门槛，进入一个良性循环的新阶段，当然对两国自身有好处，同时也有助于两国之间建 立较好的关系。一般说来，美国作为唯一的超级大国，在自身繁荣而有自信的时候，可望比较理性、慷慨和包容地对待外部世界。如果目前的困境延续下去，以下的 情况就会发生，或者正在发生：
由于中美之间经济相互依赖已经很深，美国经济衰退肯定对中国经济有伤害，而且已经造成伤害。在目前的社会矛盾中，美国的特权精英阶层不与国内的弱势 群体协商妥协，做出合理的让步，从而达到美国社会的改良，却倾向于以邻为壑，把困难转嫁到别的国家，中国首当其冲。保护主义——特别是专门针对中国的，我 称之为“选择性保护主义”正在抬头，其后果将是双输的局面。在美国的国内政治中，中国是最方便的替罪羊，所谓“中国威胁”之说甚嚣尘上。
这样，反过来刺激中国广大阶层的极端国族主义情绪和对美国的反感。再者，一个缺乏自信的美国更倾向于通过军事手段来确保它在国际上的霸权地位，其恶果是可以想见的。
在中方，国族主义，或称之为“爱国主义”，在目前似乎是填补精神真空的唯一的共同价值。把这一意识推向极致，也可以成为那些否认普世价值和拒绝政治 改革的人的一个方便的借口。在社会不稳定的危险日益上升时，所谓“境外敌对势力”搞“和平演变”，企图颠覆政权的老调又将重弹，不论其含义如何。加之目前 美国的政党政治民主模式暴露出来缺陷，使它不再像过去那样对中国人有吸引力。尽管民主有缺陷不等于专制更好，但是从一般舆论来说，肯定会增加对民主改革的 疑虑。因此，美国的民主制度的退化或改进，对中国的民主改革会相应产生负面或正面的影响。
最坏的图景是：中美之间对抗性关系升级，中国被拖入与美国的军备竞赛，挥霍尽自己有限的经济资源，同时发出错误的信号，在国际上助长所谓“中国威 胁”之说。这样，中国就会不知不觉间被拖入一个恶性循环，指向危险莫测的终点。中美两个核大国之间发生武装冲突是不可想象的，任何一个头脑清醒的人不会愿 意看到这样一种图景的实现。
我们能够希望的最好的情况是：两国在不太长的时间内都能找到办法跨过当前的坎，实现对各自人民都有利的改革，同时创造两国积极合作的条件。在我看 来，不论“中国崛起”被怎样宣扬，有一点是客观事实：不论美国目前遇到多大的困难，相对于其他国家和地区的深刻危机，它还是比较容易克服的。在相当长的时 间内，美国还将是远超过其他任何国家国力的最强大的国家——无论是硬实力或软实力都是如此。它也仍占据世界财富的最大份额——不论是虚拟还是实体经济，不 论是军用还是民用资源。因此，对全球发展起决定性影响的还要看美国如何使用它的超强力量。也就是扮演“良性领导”还是“恶性领导”的角色。不论怎样，在方 今的世界上，各国之间的利害关系错综复杂，互相依赖性日益加深。今后几十年间，中美关系更将是世界最重要的双边关系，至少是最重要的之一，任何以邻为壑、 幸灾乐祸的政策都是短视的，终将自伤。不过政治家们往往为利益所左右，所谓“肉食者鄙，未能远谋”，就是这个缘故。我们只能祝愿他们不至于“利令智昏”， 造成不可挽回的生灵涂炭的恶果。
我从来不认为书生之论能对决策起多大影响。我们能做的是面向公众，促进理性的理解，消除偏见，从而营造一个多少是良性的舆论环境，转而对决策集团产生些微积极影响。我称之为“涟漪效应”。
Posted by at No comments:

Friday, December 16, 2011

US Bar exam

United States

 It has been suggested that National Conference of Bar Examiners, Multistate Bar Examination, Multistate Essay Examination and Multistate Performance Test be merged into this article or section. (Discuss) Proposed since November 2010.
See also: Admission to the bar in the United States
Bar examinations in the United States are administered by agencies of individual states. In 1763, Delaware created the first bar exam with other American colonies soon following suit.[1] A state bar licensing agency is invariably associated with the judicial branch of government, because American attorneys are all officers of the court of the bar(s) to which they belong.
Sometimes the agency is an office or committee of the state's highest court or intermediate appellate court. In some states which have a unified or integrated bar association (meaning that formal membership in a public corporation controlled by the judiciary is required to practice law therein), the agency is either the state bar association or a subunit thereof. Other states split the integrated bar membership and the admissions agency into different bodies within the judiciary; in Texas, the Board of Law Examiners is appointed by the Texas Supreme Court and is independent from the integrated State Bar of Texas.
The bar examination in most U.S. states and territories is at least two days long (a few states have three-day exams)[2] and usually consists of:
  • Essay questions:
    • Essentially all jurisdictions administer several such questions that test knowledge of general legal principles, and may also test knowledge of the state's own law (usually subjects such as wills, trusts and community property, which always vary from one state to another). Some jurisdictions choose to use the Multistate Essay Examination (MEE), drafted by the NCBE since 1988, for this purpose. Others may draft their own questions with this goal in mind, while some states both draft their own questions and use the MEE.
    • Some jurisdictions administer complicated questions that specifically test knowledge of that state's law.
  • Multistate standardized examinations (below)

When exams occur

Each state controls when it administers its bar exam. Because the MBE (below) is a standardized test, it must be administered on the same day across the country. That day occurs twice a year as the last Wednesday in July and the last Wednesday in February. Two states, Delaware and North Dakota, may administer their bar exams only once, in July, if they do not have enough applicants to merit a second sitting. North Dakota requires ten applicants in order to administer the February exam. Most bar exams are administered on consecutive days. Louisiana is the exception, with the Louisiana Bar Exam being a three-day examination on Monday, Wednesday and Friday. Also, Louisiana's examination is the longest in the country in terms of examination time, with seven hours on Monday and Wednesday and seven and one half hours on Friday for a total of 21.5 hours of testing. Montana's bar examination also occurs over a three-day period, with a total of 18 hours of testing. The bar exams in Alabama, California, Nevada, South Carolina, and Texas are also three days long.
The MEE and MPT, as uniform though not standardized tests, also must be administered on the same day across the country—specifically the day before the MBE.

Preparation for the exam

Most law schools teach students common law and how to analyze hypothetical fact patterns like a lawyer, but do not specifically prepare law students for any particular bar exam. Only a minority of law schools offer bar preparation courses.
To refresh their memory on "black-letter rules" tested on the bar, most students engage in a regimen of study (called "bar review") between graduating from law school and sitting for the bar.[3] For bar review, most students in the United States attend a private bar exam review course which is provided by a third-party company and not their law school.[4]

Multistate standardized examinations

The National Conference of Bar Examiners (NCBE) is a U.S. based non-profit organization that develops national ("multistate") standardized tests for admission to the bar in individual states. The organization was founded in 1931.[5] The best known exams developed by NCBE are the Multistate Bar Examination (1972), the Multistate Essay Examination (1988), the Multistate Performance Test (1997), and the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination (1980).[6]

Uniform Bar Exam (UBE)

NCBE has developed a Uniform Bar Examination (UBE), which consists solely of the MBE, MEE, and MPT, and offers portability of scores across state lines. Missouri became the first state to adopt the UBE, administering the first examination of its kind in February 2011.[7] Following Missouri's lead, several other jurisdictions, all of which were among the 22 that already were using all three components of the UBE, are expected to adopt that examination. However, many of the largest legal markets— California, the District of Columbia, Florida, Illinois, New York and Texas—have so far chosen not to adopt the UBE, although New York is presently giving a conversion to the UBE serious consideration[8]. Also, given Illinois' proximity to Missouri and shared market for St. Louis lawyers, the state is currently pondering adopting the UBE, as well, and could become the first of the "big market" states to adopt the test.[9] Among the concerns cited with the adoption of the UBE were its absence of questions on state law and the fact that it would give the NCBE much greater power in the bar credentialing process.[10]
As of November 2011, the Uniform Bar Examination Jurisdictions are[11]:
  • Alabama (July 2011)
  • Colorado (February 2012)
  • Idaho (February 2012)
  • Missouri (February 2011)
  • North Dakota (February 2011)
  • Washington (July 2013)

Multistate Bar Examination (MBE)

The Multistate Bar Examination (MBE) is a standardized, multiple-choice examination created and sold to participating state bar examiners.[12]
Description
It is administered on a single day of the bar examination in 48 states and the District of Columbia, as well as in Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the Republic of Palau. The only states that do not administer the MBE are Louisiana, which follows a civil law system and thus differs significantly from the vast majority of states, and Washington, which plans to begin administering the exam in July 2013[13]. The MBE is also not administered in Puerto Rico, which, like Louisiana, has a civil law system.[14] The MBE is given twice a year: on the last Wednesday of July in all jurisdictions that require that examination, and on the last Wednesday of February in the same jurisdictions, except for Delaware and North Dakota.
The 200 MBE questions test six subjects based upon principles of common law and Article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code (covering sales of goods) that apply throughout the United States. The questions are not broken down into sections and the six topics are distributed more or less evenly throughout the course of the exam. Exam-takers generally receive three hours during the morning session to complete the first 100 questions, and another three hours during the afternoon session to complete the second 100 questions.
At the January 2009 conference of the Association of American Law Schools, NCBE president Erica Moeser indicated that her organization was considering adding a seventh topic, civil procedure, to the examination.[15]
Average scores
The average raw score from the summer exam historically has been about 128 (64% correct), while the average scaled score was about 140. [16] In summer 2007, the average scaled score was 143.7 with a standard deviation of 15.9. Over 50,000 applicants took the test; less than half that number took it in the winter.
Transfer of MBE scores
Taking the MBE in one jurisdiction may allow an applicant to use their MBE score to waive into another jurisdiction or to use their MBE score with another state's bar examination.[17]

Multistate Essay Examination (MEE)

The Multistate Essay Examination (MEE) is a collection of essay questions largely concerning the common law administered as a part of the bar examination in 26 jurisdictions of the United States.[18]
The MEE can cover any of the following areas:[19][20]
MEE questions are actually drafted by the NCBE Drafting Committee, with the assistance of outside academics and practitioners who are experts in the fields being tested. After initial drafting, the questions are pretested, analyzed by outside experts and a separate NCBE committee, reviewed by boards of bar examiners in the jurisdictions that use the test, and then revised by the Drafting Committee in accordance with the results of this process. Each MEE question is accompanied by a grading guide, and the NCBE sponsors a grading workshop on the weekend following the bar exam whose results are provided to bar examiners.[21]
The examination is always administered on a single day of the bar examination, specifically the day before the Multistate Bar Examination (MBE). Through February 2007, the NCBE consisted of seven questions, with most jurisdictions selecting six of the seven questions to administer. Unlike the MBE, which is graded and scored by the NCBE, the MEE is graded exclusively by the jurisdiction that administers the bar examination. Each jurisdiction has the choice of grading MEE questions according to general U.S. common law or the jurisdiction's own law.[19]
The MEE is generally partnered with the Multistate Performance Test (MPT), a written performance test developed by the NCBE and used in 33 U.S. jurisdictions.[22] The MEE also contains al large portion of algebraic and computational math problems. These math problems account for about 45% of the total exam.

Multistate Performance Test (MPT)

The Multistate Performance Test (MPT) is a written examination administered as a part of the bar examination in 33 jurisdictions of the United States. Generally, a performance test is intended to mimic a real-life legal task that future lawyers may face.[22][23] The test was first created in 1997.[6] The NCBE summarizes the goal of the MPT as follows:[21]
"The MPT is not a test of substantive knowledge. Rather, it is designed to examine six fundamental skills lawyers are expected to demonstrate regardless of the area of law in which the skills arise. The MPT requires applicants to (1) sort detailed factual materials and separate relevant from irrelevant facts; (2) analyze statutory, case, and administrative materials for principles of law; (3) apply the law to the relevant facts in a manner likely to resolve a client's problem; (4) identify and resolve ethical dilemmas, when present; (5) communicate effectively in writing; (6) complete a lawyering task within time constraints."
The required tasks may include writing a legal memorandum, drafting an affidavit, or drafting a settlement offer letter to opposing counsel. Each test includes what NCBE calls a "File" and a "Library". The File contains source documents detailing all facts of the case, plus a memorandum from a supervising attorney detailing the task required. The File will include relevant and irrelevant facts, and often facts may be ambiguous, incomplete, or contradictory. The Library includes cases, statutes, regulations, and rules, which may or may not be relevant, but are sufficient to complete the required task.[24]
The tests are actually drafted by an NCBE committee with expertise in developing performance tests. After initial drafting, the questions are pretested, analyzed by outside experts, reviewed by boards of bar examiners in the jurisdictions that use the test, and then revised by the drafting committee in accordance with the results of this process. Each individual test is accompanied by a grading guide, and the NCBE sponsors a grading workshop on the weekend following the bar exam whose results are provided to bar examiners.[21]
The MPT is always administered on a single day of the bar examination, specifically the day before the MBE. This means that it is administered on the same day as the MEE. Jurisdictions are provided two separate MPT tests, each designed to require 90 minutes in all, and may choose to require examinees to work one or both tests.[23]
Because of this scheduling fact, the MPT is more often than not administered alongside the MEE.[25]

Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination (MPRE)

Main article: Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination
In almost all jurisdictions, the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination (MPRE), an ethics exam, is also administered by the NCBE, which creates it and grades it. The MPRE is offered three times a year, in March, August and November.

Non-standardized examinations

A majority of U.S. jurisdictions also require a performance test, which is intended to be a more realistic measure of actual lawyering skill. The candidate is presented with a stack of documents representing a fictional case and is asked to draft a memorandum, motion, or opinion document. Many jurisdictions use the Multistate Performance Test (MPT), while California and Pennsylvania draft and administer their own performance tests.

Controversy

Arguments against bar exams

A statement by the Society of American Law Teachers (SALT)[26] articulates many criticisms[further explanation needed] of the bar exam.[27][Full citation needed] The SALT statement, however, does propose some alternative methods of bar admission that are partially test-based.[citation needed] A response to the SALT statement was made by Suzanne Darrow-Kleinhau in The Bar Examiner [28][further explanation needed]

Arguments in favor of bar exams

The National Conference of Bar Examiners (NCBE) regularly provides articles relating to the bar examination process.[citation needed]

Arguments for alternatives to the bar exam

The NCBE published an article in 2005 addressing alternatives to the bar exam, including a discussion of the Daniel Webster Scholar Honors Program, an alternate certification program introduced at the University of New Hampshire School of Law (formerly Franklin Pierce Law Center) in that year.[citation needed]
Posted by at No comments:

US Lawyer

United States of America

Main article: Admission to the bar in the United States
Lawyers in the United States must be admitted by each U.S. jurisdiction in which legal advice is rendered (a U.S. state, commonwealth or territory), which generally requires that they complete an undergraduate degree in any discipline (usually 4 years), obtain a Juris Doctor degree (3 years) and pass a bar exam. However, the requirements vary between jurisdictions, and there are exceptions to each of the general requirements in some. In a handful of U.S. states, one may become an attorney (a so-called country lawyer) by simply "reading law" and passing the bar examination, without having to attend law school first (although very few people actually become lawyers that way).
Posted by at No comments:

Legal Writing

Legal Writing at Law School

Learning to write like a lawyer is perhaps the greatest challenge of legal education. The writing faculty support Law students in all of their writing endeavors, helping them to develop and perfect the skills necessary to produce top-quality legal writing.

First-year Legal Analysis, Research, and Writing Program

Law School's first-year Legal Analysis, Research, and Writing Program evidences the Law School's strong commitment to writing and research excellence. The Program, supplemented by the Legal Writing Resources website, emphasizes the integration of legal analysis, writing, and research, and helps students to understand and consider the legal audience for whom they are writing. The research and writing faculty are paired for each section of students, providing opportunities for team-teaching and specialized instruction throughout the yearlong course. (The writing faculty for the first-year course are listed below.) In writing assignments, which range from short office memos to trial and appellate briefs, students master sophisticated research skills, complex analysis, careful construction of legal arguments, and the special requirements of legal prose. The intertwined research and writing tasks additionally enhance the retention of research skills and promote more effective research strategies.
The Legal Analysis, Research and Writing Program is also distinguished by its use of writing faculty with substantial past law practice who have moved into the teaching of writing as their primary professional commitment and research faculty who are part of the Law School's professional reference librarians, all of whom are also lawyers. Duke was one of the first top-tier law schools to employ writing faculty whose first professional commitment is teaching; at a number of other top-tier schools, these courses are still taught by upperclass law students, recent law graduates, or practitioners who serve as adjunct professors. The blend of academic strength and first-rate practical experience in the Duke Law Program results in a rigorous but richly rewarding experience.

Upper-Level, Advanced Legal Writing Courses

Law School's upper-level advanced legal writing courses provide students with opportunities to hone further the legal writing skills taught in the first year. These courses are geared to specific subject-matter or legal writing settings, taught by the first-year writing faculty in small seminars, and include substantial feedback to students on their written products. Some of these courses also involve continued instruction in legal research.

Legal Writing in Civil Practice

Professor teaches this course which helps prepare students for the rigors of legal analysis and writing in general civil practice by providing a variety of writing experiences including opinion and demand letters, pleadings, motions, and trial briefs. It culminates in oral arguments on motions before members of the bench and bar. » more info

Contract Drafting

Professor teaches this two-credit course which introduces the components of contracts, a formal vocabulary for discussing them, and the skill of translating business deals to the page. Contract Drafting features writing exercises that will be done both in and outside of class. In addition, extensive peer and instructor editing will be used. While the skills taught will be basic, they will also apply to more sophisticated contracts, including those that Duke Law students can expect to see and draft in practice. While this writing-intensive course fulfills the upper-level professional skills requirement, because performing significant independent legal research is not a part of it, it does not fulfill the upper-level writing requirement. » more info

Writing for Publication

Professor teaches this course in a collective "workshop" setting where students produce a scholarly paper of publishable length. The course is intended to appeal to students who are interested in pursuing an academic writing opportunity apart from or in addition to those otherwise available through Duke's journals, seminars devoted to particular areas of law, or independent study, and in particular to students considering careers in academia. » more info

Judicial Writing

Professor teaches this two-credit course, which is intended to appeal to any student who is interested in or who’s already been hired for a judicial clerkship. The course offers each student the opportunity to focus on and assess the writing style practiced by the judge for whom each will be clerking (or another whose opinions she or he admires). In addition, the students will practice forms of legal writing that they, as clerks, will be drafting for their judges—a bench memorandum, a majority opinion, and a concurrence or dissent. The focus here is on organized, clear, effective formal writing, which is the focal point of both. » more info

Writing: Electronic Discovery

Professor teaches this advanced writing seminar that helps prepare students for the types of writing that are common to all civil litigation, while introducing them to electronic discovery. Writing assignments will all surround one hypothetical federal lawsuit that raises electronic discovery issues that arise in most civil litigation. Students will be associates in a hypothetical law firm and will handle the electronic discovery aspects of the firm’s defense of the lawsuit. » more info

Writing: Federal Litigation

Professor teaches this introduction to several different types of persuasive writing used in federal litigation. The course will focus on one hypothetical matter involving federal law. » more info

Legal Writing in the Context of a Complex Criminal Trial

Professor teaches this writing intensive exploration of complex criminal litigation. » more info

Workshops

Student Early Stages

This workshop provides students the opportunity to share their scholarship with other students. Students present their writings and receive feedback from peers and guidance from faculty advisors. » more info

Legal Writing for LLM Students

Legal Analysis, Research, and Writing for International Students

Duke Law School recognizes that LLM students will be writing in English for US lawyers and clients during their careers. It therefore requires as part of the LLM curriculum a one-semester legal analysis, research, and writing course. The course trains students in US-style reasoning and analysis, preparing them for law school exams. It teaches them how to locate US law in hard copy and electronic resources. It challenges them to write in the direct, succinct style preferred by US lawyers and business people. Students improve their written English through numerous opportunities to review and revise their work. Taught in small sections by faculty who have practiced law and have extensive experience with international lawyers, the course prepares international LLM students for a transnational career.

Advanced Legal Writing Workshop for LLM Students

In their second semester, LLM students may attend the Advanced Legal Writing Workshop for LLM Students. The Workshop gives international students additional instruction on US-style writing. Topics of the workshop include standards for academic research papers, letters, and contracts.

Summer Institute for Law, Language and Culture

The Summer Institute for Law, Language and Culture is a four-week intensive course introducing students to legal English, the U.S. legal system, and the law school experience. Through small-group class interaction, encounters with lawyers, judges, and teachers, visits to courtrooms and law firms, and interaction with popular media, students will learn to read and produce good legal writing, to study and understand U.S. law, and to make the best possible use of their U.S. law school experiences. Because the study of law is a language-intensive task, SILLC is designed to increase proficiency in reading and hearing English, to develop confidence and skill in speaking and writing, and to facilitate personal adjustment to the culture of U.S. legal education. Small class size and individual attention from the instructors give students a concentrated and tailored teaching experience. » more info
Posted by at No comments:

LLM Degree

LLM Degree


The Master of Laws (LLM)

The LLM program at Duke Law School is designed to introduce foreign law graduates to the legal system of the United States and to provide the opportunity to take advanced courses in specialized areas of the law. LLM students are welcome to make selections from the large number of courses represented in the curriculum. With the exception of two required courses, Distinctive Aspects of American Law and Legal Analysis, Research and Writing for International Students, all classes are taken with JD students. The number of credits required for the LLM degree is 21, but many students exceed the required number. Students may also take courses in other parts of the university, like the Fuqua School of Business or the Sanford School of Public Policy. The program of study is normally completed in one academic year, which begins for all new students in late August.
Most LLM students at Duke are professionals with two or more years of experience at well-known law firms. They are also judges, prosecutors, academics, members of government ministries, corporations, or financial institutions. The LLM program usually includes a small number of talented, very recent law graduates as well. The 2011-12 LLM class has an enrollment of 96 students from 32 countries.
Applicants must hold a first degree in law from an accredited institution outside the United States. The law degree should be the equivalent of the JD or LLB degree. Correspondence course degrees will not be considered for admission to the LLM program.
All applications will receive very careful scrutiny. Admissions will be based on the following criteria:
  • the applicant's academic promise as revealed by previous academic performance;
  • references (a minimum of 2) that demonstrate the applicant's scholarly ability and professional qualifications;
  • the applicant's professional plans, goals and special interests as reflected on the Personal Statement and resume; and
  • the applicant's English language proficiency.

Civil Procedure
110.01
A consideration of the basic problems of civil procedure, designed to acquaint students with the fundamental stages and concerns of litigation, e.g., jurisdiction, pleading, discovery, trial, choice of law, and multiparty actions. In addition, this course will highlight a number of specialized topics including the role of juries in deciding civil disputes, the ethical responsibilities of the litigation attorney, and the development of alternative dispute resolution systems. At several points, this course will focus on an analysis of the procedural system's operations as revealed through empirical studies. 4.5 credits
Constitutional Law
120.01
An examination of the distribution of and limitations upon governmental authority under the Constitution of the United States. Included are study of the doctrine of judicial review of legislative and executive action, the powers of Congress and the President, the limitations on state governmental powers resulting from the existence or exercise of congressional power, and judicial protection against the exercise of governmental power in violation of rights, liberties, privileges, or immunities conferred by the Constitution. 4.5 credits
Contracts
130.01
An examination of the formation and legal operations of contracts; their assignment, their significance to third parties, and their relationship to restitution and commercial law developments; the variety, scope, and limitations on remedies; and the policies, jurisprudence, and historical development of promissory liability. 4.5 credits
Criminal Law
140.01
An introductory study of the law of crimes and the administration of criminal justice, including analysis of the criminal act and the mental element in crime, consideration of specific offenses as defined by statute and the common law, and discussion of typical defenses in relation to specific crimes. One of the purposes of this course is to introduce the students to the nature of social control mechanisms and the role of law in a civilized society. 4.5 credits
Legal Analysis, Research and Writing
160.01
An introductory study of the various forms of legal writing and modes of legal research. Through an integrated approach to writing and research, the course begins by analyzing the components of judicial opinions, and ends with the students independently researching and writing a sophisticated appellate brief. The principal goal of this course is the mastery of the basic tools of legal analysis, the principles of legal writing, and the techniques of legal research using both print and online resources. 3 credits
Property
170.01
A study of the law of property, its objectives and its institutions. This course investigates how property rights and institutions affect resources, prosperity, fairness, freedom, community, and the sometimes conflicting interests of individuals, groups, and governments, in specific applications such as land, possessions, energy, environmental resources, ideas, music, the family, and the self. The course examines doctrines such as acquisition, exclusion, transfer, estates and future interests, covenants and easements, trespass and nuisance, zoning, landlord-tenant and housing law, and compensation for government takings of property. 4.5 credits
Torts
180.01
An analysis of liability for personal injuries and injuries to property. The law of negligence occupies a central place in the course content, but this course also considers other aspects of tort liability, such as strict liability, liability of producers and sellers of products, nuisance, liability for defamation and invasion of privacy, and commercial torts. The subjects of causation, damages, insurance (including automobile no-fault compensation systems), and workers' compensation are also included. 4.5 credits

 

343 courses found.
Posted by at No comments:

Friday, December 9, 2011

面试经

一份“最牛面经”在网上热传。作者是今年从北大毕业生的一名女生。她抱着“体验不同公司面试”的态度，用三个月时间给60多家公司投简历，参与70多次笔试、面试。依据面试经历写下近3万字的“面试宝典”。
网上热传三万字“面经”
昨日，在人人网上，一则题为“北大光华女的超强面经”的帖子受网友热捧。
这份“面经”约三万字。以讲故事的形式讲述北大毕业生黄晔3个月来参与数十家公司面试的体验。并总结面试经验。
作者总结三大要点
在“面经”中，作者从向会计师事务所投简历，到参与每家公司笔试、面试，从如何制作成功的简历，到面试时如何自我介绍、如何化妆、着装等，都现身说法。
“第一，写一张美丽的简历；第二，把简历中的每句话都扩展成一个至少可以讲5分钟的故事；第三，准备一个有逻辑的自我介绍，能带领面试官读简历。把这三件事做好并不容易，我琢磨了几个月，也没做到完美……”
招聘高峰到来前传心得
“感动之余，受益匪浅。”“好好学几招”……昨日，网友们对“面经”好评如潮。
昨日，作者黄晔说，她是北大光华管理学院会计专业07级本科生，于今年7月毕业。目前就职于天津一家知名公司。
“一开始，我找的并不是一份工作，而是一份找工作的经历。”黄晔说，去年9月份，北京秋季招聘会举行，她产生了体验不同公司面试，总结“面经”的想法。
在去年年末近3个月时间内，她先后参加70多场面试、笔试，经历近百位面试官，共收到7家公司的录取通知。
从今年年初开始，她将篇篇面试心得连载到网上。“新一年的校园招聘会又要到来，想给学弟学妹们一点参考。”
“超长面经”节选
1、简历放在最好拿到的地方：如果磨磨蹭蹭掏不出简历很影响第一印象。所以进门之前，一定把简历放在马上可以拿到的地方。
2、减少手势：过多地使用手势可能会分散面试官的注意，保险起见，尽量控制手势吧。
3、进门敲门，离开关门：这是很基本的礼貌，但面试时因为紧张很可能会忘记。
4、带走纸杯：很多面试官会在面试时给你倒一杯水，但面试中，你很难停下来喝口水。即便这杯水你从来没碰过，也不要把它留在办公室里就走，礼貌地在临走前喝一口，然后带走纸杯。(摘自黄晔《我的超长综合面经》)
■ 讲述
40分钟电话面试遭遇“查家底”
昨日，黄晔说，她希望借面试机会看看各类公司里的人，体验不同公司的企业文化和面试方式。
在诸多面试中，她讲述了一次40分钟电话面试的遭遇。
“那天晚饭后回宿舍的路上，我接到一个电话面试，我站在寒风中回答了40分钟问题。
她说，前几个问题没有什么特别的，后几个问得相当涉及个人隐私。她说，对方问我父母的工作情况，我和父母的关系如何，之后问我的朋友多不多以及我的交友原则。再之后，对方“八卦”起来，问我有没有最好的朋友，是男是女。
“最后问你一个个人问题，这和面试无关，你有男朋友吗”？黄晔说：“当时我说没有，他说那曾经有吗？我说有，于是对方很开心地说，我觉得在大学没谈过恋爱不太正常。‘口试’持续了40分钟。 ”
感言
“依我的面试心得，一定要找一份喜欢的工作，哪怕刚开始薪水低也没关系。做自己喜欢的事，相信会有更好的发展。面试的时候，不要不自然地“装”，一定要做好自己，哪怕觉得自己很平凡，但敢于表现真正的自己，往往最受面试官欣赏。”——黄晔
Posted by at No comments:

月球岩石 太空總署搞丟五百件

NASA紀錄，1970年至2010年6月間共有517份出借的太空物質樣本消失或遭偷竊。」 這些樣本包括月球岩石和土壤；小行星、火星和月球的隕石；太陽外層離子；彗星和星際間區域的塵埃，以及地球平流層的宇宙塵等。
「我們還發現NASA紀錄有誤。研究人員未交還所有借出樣本，借出時間也超過償還日期，但這段期間內也未進行任何研究或交還樣本。

全文網址: 月球岩石 太空總署搞丟五百件
Posted by at No comments:

Tuesday, December 6, 2011

一個人需要多少朋友

《一個人需要多少朋友》（HowMany Friends Does One Person Need ）作者、演化人類學家羅賓．鄧巴（Robin Dunbar）教授表示，你只應該有大約一百五十位。
鄧巴所指的一百五十人，是熟悉到足以建立「互惠關係」的人，擁有長久交情的友誼。「你凌晨三點身在香港機場的酒吧，也不會覺得去找他們會不好意思，因為他們知道你在他們社交圈裡的地位。你可以閒聊且不必自我介紹。」
Posted by at No comments:

Sunday, December 4, 2011

远古生物-死而复生

日前在西伯利亚的永冻层（permafrost）中挖掘出保存良好的骨髓组织，科学家宣称5年之内可望成功复制绝迹万年的猛玛象（mammoth），让远古生物「死而复生」。

日 本媒体报道，近畿大学研究团队将于明年与俄罗斯萨哈共和国（Sakha Republic）猛玛象博物馆展开深入的联合研究，探索猛玛象复活之道。要复制猛玛象必须经过下列过程：取出化石骨髓中的猛玛象基因，接着对大象的卵细 胞进行「细胞核移植」（nucleus transplantation），最后将胚胎植入母象的子宫，让其孕育猛玛象。
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)