Latest news with #CaliforniaBarExam
Reuters
12-06-2025
- Politics
- Reuters
Thousands who did not pass California bar exam get a chance to practice, for now
June 11 (Reuters) - More than 3,300 people who failed or withdrew from taking California's troubled February bar exam will have the option to work under the supervision of an experienced attorney while they wait to take the attorney licensing exam, the Supreme Court of California ruled on Wednesday. The court approved, opens new tab a request by the State Bar of California to extend an existing provisional licensure program enacted in 2020 when the bar exam was disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic, which allows examinees to work under supervision for two years as they prepare to retake the test. An estimated 3,340 would be eligible for provisional licensure, according to the petition submitted by the state bar. The court on Wednesday also granted the state bar permission to 'impute' performance test scores for those unable to complete that test section due to technical problems—a process that involves using submitted answers to project their performance on sections that were missing. The state bar estimates that imputing performance test scores will result in 79 more people going from failing to passing and bump up the overall pass rate from the current 63% to 65%—which is nearly double the average 35% rate in recent years. More than 200 people moved from failing to passing earlier this month when the state bar signed off on a separate grading change, which moved the overall pass rate from 56% to 63%. Some state bar trustees have expressed concern about some of the exam's proposed remedies and the higher pass rate, citing the bar's duty to protect the public from unqualified lawyers. At the state bar's request, the California Supreme Court already lowered the raw score needed to pass the exam and imputed scores for both the multiple-choice and essay portions of the February exam. The state bar did not immediately respond on Wednesday to a request for comment on the Supreme Court's latest rulings but has previously said it "would never take any steps to detract from its public protection mission.' California's February bar exam—the first not to use any components of the national test—was plagued with technical and logistical problems, including software crashes and interruptions from proctors. That exam has sparked several lawsuits, including at least two filed by test takers and one filed by the state bar against the testing company that administered it. State Bar Executive Director Leah Wilson said she will step down in July, citing the bungled rollout of the new exam. While it approved the bulk of the state bar's petitions, the California Supreme Court denied a request to explore proposals for admitting attorneys licensed in other states without requiring them to take and pass the state's bar exam. That would require a change in state law, which requires bar passage for admission, the court noted. Read more: Hundreds of California bar exam-takers move from fail to pass with new scoring California's February bar exam mess is costing millions to clean up
Reuters
03-06-2025
- Business
- Reuters
California bar exam lawsuits against vendor consolidated
June 3 (Reuters) - A California federal judge on Tuesday consolidated three lawsuits against exam vendor Meazure Learning over California's problem-plagued February bar exam. U.S. District Judge Jon Tigar in Oakland in his order, opens new tab also appointed attorneys from law firms Tycko & Zavareei and Sauder Schelkopf as lead lawyers for the test takers pursuing the proposed class action. The judge said combining the lawsuits into a single case will promote efficiency and preserve judicial resources. A Meazure Learning spokesperson said that the company stands behind its "track record" of administering millions of exams. The lawsuits accuse Meazure Learning of failing to properly administer California's February bar exam, which experienced technical and logistical problems. The company is also facing a separate lawsuit filed last month by the State Bar of California. The state bar signed a $4.1 million contract with the company in September 2024 to administer the exam. The company did not oppose the request by plaintiffs' lawyers to consolidate the lawsuits by test takers but urged the judge in an April filing to name only one of the firms as interim lead counsel for the combined case, arguing that the plaintiffs did not show the appointment of two firms "is necessary or would be efficient." The judge on Tuesday named Annick Persinger of Tycko & Zavareei and Joseph Sauder of Sauder Schelkopf as co-lead counsel. "These software failures during the February 2025 bar exam disrupted a critical moment in the careers of thousands of test-takers," Persinger and Sauder said in a Tuesday statement. The judge's leadership appointment "will allow us to move the litigation forward and seek relief on behalf of those impacted." The February exam was the debut of California's hybrid remote and in-person test without the components of the national bar exam the state has used for decades — a change that was intended to save as much as $3.8 million annually. But addressing all its problems for the July exam is now expected to add nearly $6 million in costs.
Newsweek
03-06-2025
- Politics
- Newsweek
California Bar Exam Changes Hundreds of Scores From 'Fail' to 'Pass'
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.
Fox News
03-06-2025
- General
- Fox News
More than 200 California bar exam-takers move from fail to pass after new scoring adjustment
More than 200 people who took California's bar exam in February will have their scores changed from "fail" to "pass" after a California Bar committee approved new scoring adjustments. The grading change affected 230 test takers in the State Bar of California's latest attempt to mitigate the fallout of its disastrous February test, which was plagued with technical and logistical problems. That exam prompted several lawsuits, including at least two filed by test takers and one filed by the state bar against the company that administered the exam. With the changes approved on Friday, the exam's overall pass rate jumped from 56% to 63%, nearly double the state's historical average of 35%. Applicants who nearly passed and received a second read on their written questions will be given the higher of two scores for each question, as opposed to the average of the first and second-read scores that the Bar had initially done. Test takers will be notified this week if the adjustments gave them passing scores. This change, unlike many other remedies, does not require approval from the state Supreme Court, the Bar told Bloomberg Law. Applicants for the July exam will automatically be withdrawn if the Bar determines they passed the February test, the Bar said. The scoring changes are the latest in a series of remedies Bar leaders are approving for thousands of applicants whose legal careers were impacted by the exam that crashed on test day. After approval from the state Supreme Court, the state bar has already implemented a lower raw passing score and "imputed" scores for test takers who failed to complete significant portions of the two-day exam. The Committee of Bar Examiners will soon ask the state Supreme Court to also approve a scoring method that could increase some scores on the performance portion of their exams using statistical analysis, according to Bloomberg Law. The state Supreme Court was also asked to consider a proposal to allow all February applicants — including those who withdrew before the exam — to practice law provisionally under an attorney's supervision. The February exam was the debut of California's hybrid remote and in-person test without the components of the national bar exam the state has used for decades. The change aimed to save as much as $3.8 million annually, but resolving all its issues for the July exam is now expected to add nearly $6 million in costs. Some state Bar trustees have expressed discomfort with some of the exam's proposed remedies and the higher pass rate, pointing to the bar's duty to protect the public from unqualified lawyers. The Bar said it faced the difficult task of finding "fair solutions" that maintained the exam's integrity. The Bar "would never take any steps to detract from its public protection mission," it said in a statement. Fox News Digital has reached out to the State Bar of California.
Reuters
02-06-2025
- Politics
- Reuters
Hundreds of California bar exam-takers move from fail to pass with new scoring
June 2 (Reuters) - More than 200 people who took California's disastrous February bar exam will go from failing to passing under a new round of grading changes approved on Friday, boosting the test's overall pass rate from 56% to 63% — nearly double the state's historical average of 35%. The grading change affecting 230 test takers is the State Bar of California's latest attempt to mitigate the fallout of its February test, which was plagued with technical and logistical problems. That exam has sparked several lawsuits, including at least two filed by test takers and one filed by the state bar against the testing company that administered it. The February exam was the debut of California's hybrid remote and in-person test without the components of the national bar exam the state has used for decades — a change that was intended to save as much as $3.8 million annually. But addressing all its problems for the July exam is now expected to add nearly $6 million in costs. With the approval of the California Supreme Court, the state bar already implemented a lower raw passing score and 'imputed' scores for test takers who weren't able to complete significant portions of the two-day exam. Some state bar trustees have expressed discomfort with some of the exam's proposed remedies and the higher pass rate, citing the bar's duty to protect the public from unqualified lawyers. The state bar faced a difficult task in finding "fair solutions" that maintained the exam's integrity, the organization said in a Monday statement. The bar "would never take any steps to detract from its public protection mission," it said. On Friday, the State Bar of California's Committee of Bar Examiners voted to modify how February scores were calculated for examinees who initially fell just shy of passing and qualified for a second read of their essays and performance test. Instead of using an average of the first and second-read scores — as the bar initially did — the new scores will be based solely on the higher of the two reads. The latest scoring change was detailed in a report, opens new tab from the state bar's staff to the committee, and the 230 new passers will be informed by the bar this week, according to a Friday email to test takers reviewed by Reuters. The state bar has also asked the California Supreme Court to extend an existing provisional licensure program, which it had enacted in 2020 when the bar exam was disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic, to give unsuccessful February bar examinees or those who withdrew a period of two years to pass that test while working under supervision. The court has not yet ruled on that proposal. Read more: California bar exam meltdown on Tuesday prompts offer of March retakes California Bar backs provisional licensing after February exam mess
