Latest news with #MeazureLearning
Reuters
16-07-2025
- Business
- Reuters
Too many changes at once led to California bar exam mess, ex-director says
July 10 (Reuters) - The State Bar of California pursued too many changes at once, setting the stage for the problem-plagued February attorney licensing exam, the agency's former executive director said. Many of the February exam's problems stemmed from the decision to change both the content and delivery system of the bar exam simultaneously, Leah Wilson told Reuters on Wednesday in an interview two days after stepping down as the state bar's executive director. The state bar initially failed to grasp the magnitude of those two changes and should have tackled one at a time, she said. 'Did I think it was going to go off without a hitch? No, I would not say that,' Wilson said on Wednesday. 'Did I think it was going to implode? No.' Deans of California law schools warned the state bar that rushing out a new bar exam was a bad idea, and bar takers raised technology concerns in the weeks leading up to the test. 'Every red flag that could have shown up did, and they did nothing to stop it," said February bar examinee Harshita Ganesh of Wilson and the state bar. Wilson announced on May 2 that she would step down as executive director of the state bar—a position she held since 2017—citing the botched February exam. She said she has retired from the state and will take several months to determine her next move. Wilson on Wednesday pointed to the 'unprecedented meltdown' of the testing platform provided by vendor Meazure Learning as derailing the two-day test—an outcome Wilson said she never expected. She also said it was a "series of shortcomings" and not "any single smoking gun" that led to the test's failure. The state bar sued Meazure Learning in May, accusing the company of not living up to its promises that its systems could handle thousands of bar examinees. A Meazure spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment on Thursday and the state bar declined to comment on Wilson's explanation. In August 2024, the state bar decided to fast-track a new exam that did not use any components of the national bar exam and gave examinees the option of testing in person or remotely—a change projected to save as much as $3.8 million annually by eliminating the need to rent out large event spaces. But examinees faced issues ranging from disruptive proctors and computer freezes to an inability to log into the test at all. The fallout was swift. The California Supreme Court ordered a return to the previous exam and in-person testing for the upcoming July exam and the state bar adopted a series of scoring adjustments for February examinees. Standardized test development takes time, said National Conference of Bar Examiners President Judith Gundersen. Her group, which puts together the national bar exam used by nearly all states, will have spent five years developing its NextGen bar exam when it debuts next July, she said. That development timeline has included about three years for drafting, pretesting, and statistical validation of each question, Gundersen said. By contrast, California had allowed less than a year to develop its February exam. Wilson said the NextGen exam timeline was "not a relevant comparison" because California, unlike the national bar exam developers, was not designing an entirely new exam. Read more: California Bar leader to step down amid exam debacle California bar exam meltdown on Tuesday prompts offer of March retakes
Reuters
24-06-2025
- Business
- Reuters
Test vendor moves to toss California's lawsuit over botched bar exam, says fraud claims fail
June 23 (Reuters) - The testing company that delivered California's disastrous February bar exam asked a judge on Friday to throw out the bulk of The State Bar of California's lawsuit against it, claiming that the state bar cannot rely on the company's early statements about its online testing capacity to demonstrate fraud. In a court document, opens new tab filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court, defendant Meazure Learning sought dismissal of five of the state bar's six alleged counts, including fraud and negligent misrepresentation. The company's filing, which is called a demurrer, did not address the state bar's breach of contract claim. The state bar on Monday declined to comment on the filing, and attorneys for Meazure did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The state bar sued Meazure in May, accusing, opens new tab the company of failing to live up to its promises that its systems could handle thousands of bar examinees. The state bar signed a $4.1 million contract with the company in September 2024 to administer the February and future exams, to be given both remotely and in person. The new format was meant to reduce the state bar's cost of administering the attorney licensing exam. However, the February test was marred with widespread technical and logistical problems. 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. In the new filing, Meazure argues that any comments made by the company about the number of online test takers it could handle outside of its actual contract with the state bar do not meet the standard to prove fraud of negligent misrepresentation because they are not binding. 'The court should reject plaintiff's attempt to turn Meazure's alleged breaches of contract into an intentional tort,' Meazure's demurrer reads. Meazure is already facing two proposed federal class actions from people who took the February test. State Bar Executive Director Leah Wilson said she will step down from her post in July, citing the bungled rollout of the new bar exam. Meazure, based in Birmingham, Alabama, bills itself on its website 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. Read more: California Bar sues vendor over exam meltdown California bar exam test takers sue over 'disaster' rollout this week
Time of India
10-06-2025
- Business
- Time of India
How a cost-cutting move led to the biggest bar exam failure in US history
Why California's bar exam disaster threatens US legal integrity. (AI Image) California's legal system is grappling with a public crisis after what is being called the worst bar exam failure in US history. The collapse occurred during the administration of a new bar exam, built by a private contractor and meant to cut costs — a decision that has backfired spectacularly and drawn national attention. As reported by the San Francisco Chronicle, the February rollout of the new exam left thousands of test takers facing technical chaos, delays, and emotional distress. The State Bar of California, in an effort to erase an $8 million deficit in its admissions fund, contracted the test's development and administration to Kaplan Exam Services and Meazure Learning. But instead of efficiency, the result was described as a complete system breakdown. Warnings ignored, and consequences followed Law school graduate Tonya Saheli was among the first to experience the disaster. Months before the official test, she participated in a November experimental version of the exam and immediately reported alarming issues. She faced repeated login failures, unexplained delays, and an unstable platform that crashed mid-exam. "If I'm having this many problems with this experiment, what's going to happen in February?" she recalled, as quoted by the San Francisco Chronicle. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 5 Books Warren Buffett Wants You to Read In 2025 Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List Undo Saheli's warnings were ignored. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, test takers during the February exam faced freezing screens, login errors, and proctors clashing with examinees out of sheer frustration. One legislative analysis stated the failures caused "screaming out of frustration by examinees and proctors arguing with each other." A system built to fail Unlike most states that use a standardized bar exam created by the National Committee of Bar Examiners, California crafts its own. In this case, the test was partially generated using artificial intelligence, leading to sloppy questions and increased confusion. Despite promises from Meazure Learning that their system had "99.982 percent uptime availability" and could support 25,000 test takers at once, performance fell drastically short, as reported by the San Francisco Chronicle. Rick Coca, spokesperson for the State Bar, stated in an email that Meazure's assurances were "contradicted by actual performance," as quoted by the San Francisco Chronicle. The fallout has been swift: the State Bar is now suing Meazure Learning, while test takers have also filed lawsuits claiming trauma and career disruption. Political and legal ramifications California's ability to produce competent legal professionals is now under scrutiny, even as the state participates in at least 22 legal challenges against US President Donald Trump's administration. The San Francisco Chronicle noted that these cases, along with those filed by nonprofit workers and private citizens, require a steady influx of qualified lawyers — something now in jeopardy. Amid growing pressure, lawmakers have proposed new legislation mandating a formal audit of the exam disaster. Yet, many feel the damage is already done. As reported by the San Francisco Chronicle, the State Bar's executive director Leah Wilson appeared defiant, quoting James Baldwin and saying, "Those who say it can't be done are usually interrupted by those who are doing it." But for thousands of aspiring attorneys, the system did not do it — it failed. Is your child ready for the careers of tomorrow? Enroll now and take advantage of our early bird offer! Spaces are limited.
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.
Reuters
23-05-2025
- Business
- Reuters
More California bar examinees wrongly told they failed, state bar says
May 23 (Reuters) - Nine more people who were initially told they failed California's troubled February bar exam actually passed, the State Bar of California said in an email, opens new tab sent to test takers on Thursday, which Reuters reviewed. Those errors were in addition to the four test takers whose status changed from fail to pass last week after scoring and grading problems were identified. The mounting number of scoring mistakes is the latest problem to arise from the February test, which was marred by widespread technical and logistical problems including computer crashes and distracting proctors. 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. The February exam had a 56% overall pass rate — far higher than the historical average of 35% — after the California Supreme Court allowed the state bar to implement a lower raw passing score because of all the exam's problems. But many examinees have raised concerns over how their exams were graded and scored. The state bar has sued testing platform Meazure Learning over the many tech problems, as have at least two groups of test takers. Meazure has said the state bar is trying to "shift the blame" for the flawed rollout of the test. State Bar Executive Director Leah Wilson has said she will step down in July, citing the botched rollout of the new exam. During a state bar board of trustees meeting on Friday, Wilson said criticism of her handling of the bar exam is "appropriate and deserved" and that she will continue to address the problems through her last day on the job. Read more: California bar exam-takers were told they failed. Oops, they passed. California scraps new bar exam for July, adjusts scores on botched February test
