Latest news with #legalEducation
Reuters
06-06-2025
- Business
- Reuters
California's February bar exam mess is costing millions to clean up
June 6 (Reuters) - The State Bar of California said on Thursday that it has hired a consulting firm to review the scoring of its February bar exam, adding to the millions the organization has spent to clean up mess from the botched test rollout. State bar trustees approved a $185,000 contract with the Human Resources Research Organization to look at how the February exam was scored and investigate whether test takers with disabilities received their approved accommodations such as extra time on the exam or a private testing room. While the contract amount is relatively small, it is part of the more than $6 million the organization is spending for February's exam problems and to ensure the upcoming July exam goes smoothly. The state bar did not immediately provide comment on Friday about the growing costs, but it has said that it will do all that it can to address February's problems. The February exam — the debut of California's hybrid remote and in-person exam that did not include any components of the national bar exam the state had used for decades — was marred by technological and logistical problems. The investigation is a 'critical step to independently assess scoring and accommodation concerns raised by applicants,' said State Bar Board of Trustees Chair Brandon Stallings in a prepared statement. The state bar launched the development of its own test in 2024, after its fund for administering the exam was projected to reach insolvency in 2026. Using its own exam was expected to save the state bar up to $3.8 million annually because it would not have to rent out large conference spaces. Instead, the new exam has become a financial drain. The California Supreme Court has ordered the state to return to in-person testing in July and restore use of the Multistate Bar Exam — the 200 multiple-choice section of the national bar exam designed by the National Conference of Bar Examiners. The state bar, which has an $8 million budget this year to cover its costs for administering the exam and the admissions process for lawyers seeking to practice in California, said it will cost about $720,000 to return to the MBE, $1.7 million to rent out July testing locations, and more than $1 million to hire proctors. The state bar has also approved $4.9 million in fee waivers that will enable those who withdrew from or failed the February exam to retake the bar at no additional cost. State Bar Executive Director Leah Wilson said in May that she will step down in July, citing the bungled rollout of the new exam. The state bar has also sued the company that provided the testing platform for the February test over the many tech problems. Human Resources Research Organization is expected to complete its scoring review prior to the July bar exam, according to a state bar memo. The investigation into the delivery of testing accommodations is expected to be completed by September 30. February examinees have repeatedly raised concerns over how the exams were scored and the lack of promised testing accommodations in public comments during state bar meetings. And 13 test takers went from failing to passing after the state bar uncovered scoring mistakes. Another 230 are expected to move to passing after the bar enacted a grading change on May 30. Read more: More California bar examinees wrongly told they failed, state bar says Hundreds of California bar exam-takers move from fail to pass with new scoring
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
