California Bar Exam Changes Hundreds of Scores From 'Fail' to 'Pass'

Newsweek

3 days ago

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
More than 200 California Bar Exam test takers have had their scores revised after the State Bar of California re-scored tests taken in February.
This decision comes after multiple lawsuits were filed over the February exam, a test that was riddled with technical difficulties, including some test-takers not even being able to access the test online as its platform kept crashing. Now, 230 more test takers have been told they passed the exam.
While the California State Bar has said the exam "was marred by widespread technological, environmental, and proctor issues causing unacceptable disruptions for some test takers," some lawyers have expressed concern that the new scoring from February's test will result in unqualified lawyers practicing in the state.
In this July 14, 2010, file photo, gavels and law books are shown in the office of California Supreme Court Chief Justice Ronald George at his office in San Francisco, California.
In this July 14, 2010, file photo, gavels and law books are shown in the office of California Supreme Court Chief Justice Ronald George at his office in San Francisco, California.
Jeff Chiu, file/AP Photo
Why It Matters
This mass score adjustment potentially alters the trajectory of hundreds of legal careers and places a heightened focus on the credibility of bar licensing in the country's most populous state.
The February test faced technological glitches as it was the first iteration of the bar exam in California to be taken as a hybrid model, not a solely in-person test. The lengthy technological and legal challenges faced following the examination raise questions about how to best modernize the bar exam across the US.
What To Know
February Exam Difficulties
Test takers in February faced several technological and environmental difficulties. At the time of the test, Reuters reported people experiencing internet outages in official examination rooms and proctor disruptions.
The California Bar reported that several test-takers with accommodations for learning difficulties were unable to access their extra time due to the program freezing or due to the start of the test being delayed.
Other accommodation issues reported by the California Bar included the camera monitoring policy, which reduced test takers' bathroom, food, medication, or rest breaks; noise in proctored exam rooms; and people being denied previously approved accommodations, such as semi-private rooms and speech-to-text headphones.
Additionally, the California Bar found that several test takers had been graded on someone else's exam and/or essay responses, and they found that 13 test takers were told they did not pass when they actually did.
Following the exam, two test takers and the California Bar sued the company that administered the faulty exam, Meazure Learning.
Details of the Scoring Change
The Committee of Bar Examiners revised its policy for examinees whose scores were marginally below passing and who qualified for a second review of written responses.
Initially, the bar averaged the first and second-read scores. The new policy assigns the higher of the two scores, Reuters reported. This adjustment affected 230 test takers. The change does not require California Supreme Court approval, Bloomberg Law reported.
The bar stated that examinees impacted by the recalculation would be informed of their updated pass status during the first week of June 2025, based on a Friday email to test takers reviewed by Reuters.
They have also offered test takers the option to retake portions of the exam in July.
This change came after the California Supreme Court already allowed for "scoring remedial measures" to be put in place on May 2 which resulted in lowering the score needed to pass.
What People Are Saying
The State Bar of California said in a statement reviewed by Reuters: "The bar would never take any steps to detract from its public protection mission."
State Bar of California Board Executive Brandon Stallings told the press in March: "We are deeply concerned about the issues and experiences reported by February bar exam test takers. We understand the anger and sense of urgency commenters expressed."
What Happens Next
The state bar has asked the California Supreme Court to extend a provisional licensure program created during the COVID-19 pandemic to allow unsuccessful February applicants to practice law while working under attorney supervision. The California Supreme Court has not ruled on this proposal as of publication.