Page 1
State Bar to Request Reduced Pass Score for February Exam
By Kimber Cooley, associate editor
The State Bar will ask the California Supreme Court to adjust test scores for attorney-hopefuls who took the problem-riddled February examination by lowering the raw passing score and “imputing” scores for test takers who were unable to complete significant portions of the test due to technological and other issues.
In an announcement released Monday afternoon, the Committee of Bar Examiners (“CBE”) said that it recommends that the raw passing score for the exam be set at 534, representing a 26-point reduction from the 560-threshold set by the standardized testing expert responsible for analyzing the fairness and reliability of the test. Passing scores fluctuate year-to-year according to psychometric analysis by such professionals.
Monday’s release provided that the committee will also recommend that scores be “imputed” for test-takers who were unable to complete significant portions of the exam. Under the recommended procedure, an examinee’s submitted answers would be used to project their performance on unanswered questions.
CBE suggests that “scores be psychometrically imputed” for missing multiple-choice answers if “the test taker has answered at least 114 out of the 171 scored questions. For missing essays or performance tests, the score imputation would apply if the applicant answered at least four out of the six written sections.
Widespread Issues Reported
In a report accompanying the announcement, the State Bar noted that applicants responding to a survey described “widespread issues” with the test, with over 80% of respondents saying they encountered “at least one issue related to technology, administration, or proctoring during the exam” and “79% experienced typing delays and 75% reported problems with the cut and paste function during the essay/performance test.”
Based on these and other concerns highlighted by test-takers, CBE Chair Alex Chan said:
“After thoughtful deliberation and hearing directly from many applicants, we believe our recommendations to the Supreme Court mark the beginning of a fair and meaningful path forward for all February bar exam test takers.”
Chan remarked that the lack of uniformity in the difficulties experienced during the botched roll-out of what was to be the first hybrid bar examination—in which applicants were given the option of sitting for the examination in person or taking the test remotely—made the task of determining a fair solution difficult.
The recommendation to lower the raw passing score represented CBE’s attempt to find a remedy that would address the myriad of issues faced by examinees.
Later this week, the State Bar will file a petition with the California Supreme Court, requesting that the high court respond to the request to adopt the recommendations by April 28. Once the court rules on the petition, the bar exam results will be released.
Results are currently slated for publication on May 2.
Other Remedies
On May 5, CBE will meet again to consider other remedies for February bar examinees, including whether or not to recommend provisional licensure, under the supervision of an attorney, for those who fail to secure a passing score. Recommended pathways will then be considered by the Board of Trustees at a meeting planned for May 9.
State Bar Board Chair Brandon Stallings commented:
“The bottom line is February bar exam test takers deserved better, and we apologize for the difficulties many experienced. We will continue discussing appropriate remedies and building a stronger foundation for future exams—one rooted in fairness, consistency, and improved accessibility for all test takers.”
The July bar exam will be in person, but Stallings said the state regulatory agency recognizes the need for reliable remote-testing options in the future.
CBE also discussed, at Friday’s meeting, the performance of the multiple-choice questions after some examinees complained that the test covered legal rules they did not anticipate.
A majority of the multiple-choice questions were developed by Kaplan Test Prep, a subset came from the First-Year Law Students’ Exam, and others were developed by ACS Ventures, the State Bar’s independent psychometrician. The ACS questions were developed with the assistance of AI and subsequently reviewed by a subject matter expert in advance of the exam.
Performed Above Target
The committee averred that the test was evaluated for reliability, and questions from all sources performed above target. CBE also determined that most of the topics covered were encompassed within the subject matter outlines prepared by the National Conference of Bar Examiners and pointed out that the “content maps” explicitly state that they are not an exhaustive list of issues that will be covered during the bar exam.
State Bar Executive Director Leah Wilson said:
“We have confidence in the validity of the MCQs to accurately and fairly assess the legal competence of test-takers.”
However, she acknowledged that the State Bar will continue to examine the content maps for possible future refinement.
Copyright 2025, Metropolitan News Company