Latest news with #Meazure
Yahoo
06-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
California State Bar files lawsuit against exam vendor after botched tests
The State Bar of California is suing the vendor that administered its February bar exam, a disastrous rollout of a new testing platform that shook confidence in the organization's leadership, prompted lawmakers to call for an audit and the state Supreme Court to order the agency to revert to the traditional exam format in July. The complaint , filed in Los Angeles Superior Court on Monday, alleges Meazure Learning committed fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and breach of contract by claiming it could administer a remote and in-person exam in a two-day window. 'Over months, Meazure made representation after representation to convince the State Bar that it would offer a seamless remote and in-person exam experience worthy of the California Bar Exam,' the complaint said. 'But it is now clear that Meazure could not deliver." For many aspiring attorneys, the rollout of the new exam in February was a debacle. Test takers seeking to practice law in California complained of a litany of technical glitches and irregularities. Online testing platforms repeatedly crashed before some even started the exam. Others experienced screen lags and error messages, struggled to finish and save essays, and could not copy and paste text from test questions into the exam's response field. But Meazure Learning pushed back Tuesday on the idea that it was responsible for the fiasco. In a statement responding to the suit, Meazure said it was proud of its "track record of reliably administering over 4 million exams annually" and supporting more than 1,000 organizations over two decades. It suggested the State Bar was trying to pass the buck for its own failures. "We recognize the importance of a smooth exam experience, and we regret that some test takers had issues during the February 2025 California Bar Exam," a spokesman for Meazure Learning said. "This lawsuit is an attempt by the State Bar to shift the blame for its flawed development process for the February exam. We will defend ourselves vigorously in court.' Read more: 'Utterly Botched': Glitchy rollout of new California bar exam prompts lawsuit and legislative review When Meazure was being tapped to administer February's exam, the lawsuit claims, the company reassured the State Bar that it had experience in administering 25,000 exams over a two-day period and had 'no concerns' about meeting the State Bar's remote testing needs. It also promoted its experience with 2,200 customers over two decades, described itself as the 'most secure and accessible' in the 'techenabled assessment solutions' industry and touted its short chat and phone support wait times of a minute or less. 'Meazure promised that it had no remote exam capacity limits concerning administration of the Bar Exam, knowing full well that it did,' the lawsuit states. 'The State Bar, reasonably and in good faith, relied on Meazure's continuing statements and conduct indicating that it could scale up as needed to handle the volume for remote exams.' But since the exam, the lawsuit said, Meazure has impeded the State Bar's attempts to investigate its failures and "employed delay and deny tactics to prevent the State Bar from obtaining full and critical information." 'In light of the significant hardships endured by the February 2025 applicants and breach of specific contractual obligations outlined in our agreement, the State Bar has taken decisive action to hold Meazure Learning accountable for its failures," Brandon Stallings, the chair of the State Bar Board of Trustees, said in a statement. The State Bar, represented by attorneys from Hueston Hennigan, seeks compensatory and punitive damages for the "unacceptable February Bar Exam experience," and is also seeking an independent audit of the company. Read more: California Supreme Court orders state bar to revert to national exams after testing debacle Prior to February's test, the State Bar promoted the new exam as a cost-cutting initiative that would offer test takers the choice of remote testing. After deciding to break away from the national tests it had used for more than 50 years, the agency signed a $4.1-million deal last year with Meazure Learning to administer a new exam. It also announced an additional $8.25-million five-year deal authorizing test prep company Kaplan Exam Services to create multiple-choice, essays and performance test questions. In the months leading up to the exams, the deans of many of California's top law schools flagged concerns to the State Bar. During a November exam study, some test takers had problems logging in to Meazure's exam platform, the complaint said, and in a January mock exam, technical glitches prevented test takers from entering the exam, submitting responses and using basic word processing functions. "Meazure again assured the State Bar and prospective test takers that it would [and did] fix these issues before the February exam," the complaint said. "But it did not." News of the lawsuit came just hours after the State Bar released exam results for the February exam. The agency reported that 55.9% of test takers passed — the highest spring pass rate since 1965. The California Supreme Court, which oversees the State Bar, delivered a ruling Friday that allowed the agency to lower scoring for the February exam because of the debacle. The State Bar's IT and admission staff then worked through the weekend to adjust scoring so they could inform test takers if they passed or failed. The state's highest court also ordered the State Bar to abandon its new system of multiple-choice questions and revert to the traditional Multistate Bar Examination for multiple-choice questions for its July bar exam. Leah T. Wilson, the embattled executive director of the State Bar who announced she plans to step down in July, congratulated test takers. 'Given the technical and other issues this cohort faced, the perseverance applicants showed is commendable and impressive," Wilson said in a statement. Test takers who did not pass the exam will receive letters later this week detailing their results. They can retake the exam in July. Some February test takers have urged the State Bar to provide equitable remediation after the debacle, such as immediately adopting a provisional licensing program and granting full law licenses in California without requiring additional examination. Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Los Angeles Times
06-05-2025
- Business
- Los Angeles Times
California State Bar files lawsuit after exam fiasco sparks calls for vendor audit
The State Bar of California is suing the vendor that administered its February bar exam, a disastrous rollout of a new testing platform that shook confidence in the organization's leadership, prompted lawmakers to call for an audit and the state Supreme Court to order the agency to revert to the traditional exam format in July. The complaint , filed in Los Angeles Superior Court on Monday, alleges Meazure Learning committed fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and breach of contract by claiming it could administer a remote and in-person exam in a two-day window. 'Over months, Meazure made representation after representation to convince the State Bar that it would offer a seamless remote and in-person exam experience worthy of the California Bar Exam,' the complaint said. 'But it is now clear that Meazure could not deliver.' For many aspiring attorneys, the rollout of the new exam in February was a debacle. Test takers seeking to practice law in California complained of a litany of technical glitches and irregularities. Online testing platforms repeatedly crashed before some even started the exam. Others experienced screen lags and error messages, struggled to finish and save essays, and could not copy and paste text from test questions into the exam's response field. But Meazure Learning pushed back Tuesday on the idea that it was responsible for the fiasco. In a statement responding to the suit, Meazure said it was proud of its 'track record of reliably administering over 4 million exams annually' and supporting more than 1,000 organizations over two decades. It suggested the State Bar was trying to pass the buck for its own failures. 'We recognize the importance of a smooth exam experience, and we regret that some test takers had issues during the February 2025 California Bar Exam,' a spokesman for Meazure Learning said. 'This lawsuit is an attempt by the State Bar to shift the blame for its flawed development process for the February exam. We will defend ourselves vigorously in court.' When Meazure was being tapped to administer February's exam, the lawsuit claims, the company reassured the State Bar that it had experience in administering 25,000 exams over a two-day period and had 'no concerns' about meeting the State Bar's remote testing needs. It also promoted its experience with 2,200 customers over two decades, described itself as the 'most secure and accessible' in the 'techenabled assessment solutions' industry and touted its short chat and phone support wait times of a minute or less. 'Meazure promised that it had no remote exam capacity limits concerning administration of the Bar Exam, knowing full well that it did,' the lawsuit states. 'The State Bar, reasonably and in good faith, relied on Meazure's continuing statements and conduct indicating that it could scale up as needed to handle the volume for remote exams.' But since the exam, the lawsuit said, Meazure has impeded the State Bar's attempts to investigate its failures and 'employed delay and deny tactics to prevent the State Bar from obtaining full and critical information.' 'In light of the significant hardships endured by the February 2025 applicants and breach of specific contractual obligations outlined in our agreement, the State Bar has taken decisive action to hold Meazure Learning accountable for its failures,' Brandon Stallings, the chair of the State Bar Board of Trustees, said in a statement. The State Bar, represented by attorneys from Hueston Hennigan, seeks compensatory and punitive damages for the 'unacceptable February Bar Exam experience,' and is also seeking an independent audit of the company. Prior to February's test, the State Bar promoted the new exam as a cost-cutting initiative that would offer test takers the choice of remote testing. After deciding to break away from the national tests it had used for more than 50 years, the agency signed a $4.1-million deal last year with Meazure Learning to administer a new exam. It also announced an additional $8.25-million five-year deal authorizing test prep company Kaplan Exam Services to create multiple-choice, essays and performance test questions. In the months leading up to the exams, the deans of many of California's top law schools flagged concerns to the State Bar. During a November exam study, some test takers had problems logging in to Meazure's exam platform, the complaint said, and in a January mock exam, technical glitches prevented test takers from entering the exam, submitting responses and using basic word processing functions. 'Meazure again assured the State Bar and prospective test takers that it would [and did] fix these issues before the February exam,' the complaint said. 'But it did not.' News of the lawsuit came just hours after the State Bar released exam results for the February exam. The agency reported that 55.9% of test takers passed — the highest spring pass rate since 1965. The California Supreme Court, which oversees the State Bar, delivered a ruling Friday that allowed the agency to lower scoring for the February exam because of the debacle. The State Bar's IT and admission staff then worked through the weekend to adjust scoring so they could inform test takers if they passed or failed. The state's highest court also ordered the State Bar to abandon its new system of multiple-choice questions and revert to the traditional Multistate Bar Examination for multiple-choice questions for its July bar exam. Leah T. Wilson, the embattled executive director of the State Bar who announced she plans to step down in July, congratulated test takers. 'Given the technical and other issues this cohort faced, the perseverance applicants showed is commendable and impressive,' Wilson said in a statement. Test takers who did not pass the exam will receive letters later this week detailing their results. They can retake the exam in July. Some February test takers have urged the State Bar to provide equitable remediation after the debacle, such as immediately adopting a provisional licensing program and granting full law licenses in California without requiring additional examination.
Reuters
06-05-2025
- Business
- Reuters
California Bar says it has sued vendor over exam meltdown
May 5 (Reuters) - The State Bar of California said on Monday it has sued exam vendor Meazure Learning following the disastrous rollout of its February bar exam, accusing the vendor of failing to live up to its promises that its systems could handle thousands of bar examinees. The state bar, represented by partners from Hueston Hennigan, said it is seeking an unspecified amount of damages from Meazure. The state bar signed a $4.1 million contract with the company in September 2024 to administer the exam. A spokesperson for Meazure did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Reuters could not independently verify a lawsuit was filed. California's February exam was a hybrid, two-day remote and in-person test that did not use any components of the national bar exam, which the state has used for decades. Some test takers were unable to log into the bar exam at all, while many experienced delays, lax exam security, distracting proctors, and a copy-and-paste function that didn't work. The state bar alleged that Meazure disabled its own spell-check feature because it froze the platform. "Test takers reported that copy and paste, highlighting, and annotation functions did not work. Even basic typing exhibited significant lags," according to the lawsuit the state bar said it filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court. State Bar Executive Director Leah Wilson on Friday said she was stepping down from that post in July, citing the botched rollout of the new bar exam. Meazure is already facing two proposed federal class actions from two people who took the February test. Both lawsuits are pending in Oakland, California, federal court. Meazure has not answered the allegations in those lawsuits. California was the first state to break away from the national bar exam developed by the National Conference of Bar Examiners, as part of an effort to cut costs. The California Supreme Court on Monday ordered the state bar to use the Multistate Bar Exam for the upcoming July test. Meazure, based in Birmingham, Alabama, bills itself as the "largest and most experienced remote proctoring operation in the market" with more than 1,500 test centers in 115 countries. Meazure was formed through the 2020 merger of testing companies ProctorU and Yardstick.
Reuters
28-02-2025
- Business
- Reuters
California bar exam test takers sue over ‘disaster' rollout this week
Feb 28 (Reuters) - A trio of test takers on Thursday filed what looks to be the first lawsuit over California's problem-plagued February bar exam, alleging that exam vendor Meazure Learning failed to provide a functioning test platform despite ample warning of technical troubles. The proposed federal class action, opens new tab seeks unspecified damages from Meazure Learning. The State Bar of California is not named as a defendant. 'As a result of the total technical breakdown that Meazure caused, the exam was a disaster for test-takers who were traumatized, who had their career ambitions delayed, and who paid Meazure a fee for a defunct platform,' said the lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. It's unclear how many were impacted by the problems, though examinees reported that Meazure Learning's servers failed more than once on Wednesday in addition to various connectivity and functionality issues Tuesday. About 4,600 were scheduled to take the two-day test this week. A Meazure Learning spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Friday. State bar general counsel Ellin Davtyan said bar examinees are within their rights to sue, and her organization "will evaluate and respond to the merits of any such legal claims and actions, as appropriate.' Katherine Aizpuru, a partner at Washington D.C.-based Tycko & Zavareei Washington, is representing the plaintiffs. Aizpuru declined to comment on why the state bar was not included as a defendant. Courts have generally ruled that as a state government entity, the state bar has immunity from federal lawsuits under the Eleventh Amendment. Meazure Learning, based in Birmingham, Alabama, bills itself as the "largest and most experienced remote proctoring operation in the market" with more than 1,500 test centers in 115 countries. Meazure was formed through the 2020 merger of testing companies ProctorU and Yardstick. The state bar in September signed a $4.1 million contract with Meazure to deliver its February and July bar exam after evaluating several online testing companies. Also on Thursday, the state bar delayed its planned bar exam retake, initially set for March 3 and March 4, to March 18 and 19 for test takers who encountered technological problems this week. The state bar, in a Thursday night email, opens new tab to applicants, attributed that delay to an online leak of an essay question requiring changes to the content of the retake. The state bar said it is investigating those behind the leak and anyone found responsible could be stripped of their previously granted or pending positive moral character determination. The February 25 and 26 test was the debut of California's hybrid, two-day remote and in-person exam without any components of the national bar exam, which the state has used for decades. That change was intended to save the state bar up to $3.8 million annually, but test takers have faced myriad problems, from difficulties in signing up for in-person testing locations to widespread technical issues during the exam. The state bar has said some examinees were unable to log into the test at all, while others encountered non-working functionality or problems with proctors' oversight. The test had about 5,600 registrants, but at least 964 withdrew in the days leading up to the test. The bar offered full refunds to those who withdrew and also said anyone who fails the February exam may retake July at no additional cost. The state bar's Thursday email to test takers said it will take several more days to 'finalize any other remediation plans' such as score adjustments and is meeting with 'other stakeholders.' Numerous law deans on Thursday called on the California Supreme Court—which oversees the state bar's attorney admissions function—to intervene on behalf of February bar examinees. Calif bar exam 'fiasco' this week needs court intervention, law deans say California bar exam meltdown on Tuesday prompts offer of March retakes
