LESSONS LEARNED

For the February 2025 exam, we fell short of our commitment, and lessons have been learned. The combination of a new testing platform and a new method for developing multiple-choice questions (MCQs) contributed to a poor experience for many test takers. Applicants deserved better, and we apologize for the difficulties many experienced.

We have taken a number of steps to try to make things right for February exam takers, plan for a smooth July exam administration, and enact structural reforms to ensure something like this never happens again:

Reduced the financial burden on February applicants, including reimbursing fees and unanticipated travel costs, enabling free retakes, and offering flexibility to cancel in advance of the test.
Worked to implement scoring adjustments with the Committee of Bar Examiners and California Supreme Court, and non-scoring remedies recommended by the Board of Trustees, some of which still require additional approval, including by the California Supreme Court.
Restructured the Office of Admissions, with new leadership directly reporting to the Executive Director and a new team structure to strengthen accountability and effectiveness.
Filed a lawsuit against Meazure Learning. Despite assurances and contractual requirements to the contrary, the platform and support were woefully inadequate and unreliable, which resulted in an unacceptable experience for many test-takers.
Evaluated and assessed the performance of the exam questions and instituted additional layers of review going forward. Though the Supreme Court directed the State Bar to use the National Conference of Bar Examiners’ Multistate Bar Exam (MBE) questions for the July exam, performance data suggests the MCQs demonstrated strong reliability.
Released performance data, including on the three different sources for MCQs and the reliability of those questions by source.