An influential California lawmaker is urging the State Bar of California to abandon its recent multiple-choice exam format and return to the traditional bar exam style by July. This push comes after a chaotic rollout of the new exam in February, which left many test takers frustrated and confused.
Senator Thomas J. Umberg, who chairs the state Senate Judiciary Committee, expressed his concerns, stating, “Given the catastrophe of the February bar, I think that going back to the methods that have been used for the last 50 years is the appropriate way to go.” Thousands of aspiring lawyers typically take the two-day bar exam in July, and reverting to the previous format would mark a significant step back for the State Bar, which had introduced the new exam as a cost-saving measure.
The National Conference of Bar Examiners (NCBE) has provided the exam format that California has used since 1972. The State Bar’s recent changes aimed to cut costs and allow remote testing options. However, many applicants have voiced their desire to retain the remote option, which the NCBE does not support due to security concerns.
Despite the turmoil, Alex Chan, chair of the Committee of Bar Examiners, indicated that the State Bar is unlikely to revert to the NCBE’s exam format in the near future. He noted that surveys showed nearly half of California bar applicants preferred the remote testing option.
The February exam faced numerous issues, including technical glitches and confusing questions, leading to complaints from test takers. Some reported that the new multiple-choice questions contained errors and lacked critical information. The California Supreme Court, which oversees the State Bar, has directed the agency to plan for an in-person exam in July, but has not yet mandated a return to the NCBE format.
The situation worsened when the State Bar revealed that it had hired a vendor to assist in developing exam questions using artificial intelligence, which sparked outrage among test takers and legal experts. Critics argue that using AI in this way, especially when developed by non-lawyers, raises serious questions about the fairness and reliability of the exam.
Umberg, along with other legal experts, believes that the State Bar’s leadership needs to be scrutinized. He has proposed legislation to launch an independent review of the exam process. This review aims to uncover what went wrong during the February exam and to ensure accountability moving forward.
As the July exam approaches, Umberg emphasized the importance of getting it right. He remarked, “Taking the bar exam is really a test that people prepare for for three or more years. The fact that the test takers were guinea pigs for the February bar is absolutely unacceptable.” He hopes the State Bar will take the necessary steps to prevent a repeat of the earlier debacle.