Thursday, October 19, 2017
California Keeps Bar Exam Cut Score At 144, Second Highest In Nation
California Courts News Release:
In view of the rising costs of legal education and the financial hardship potentially resulting from non-admission to the California bar, the court determined last February to assess whether the current pass score (cut score) of 1440 for the California bar exam is appropriate for evaluating the minimum competence necessary for entering attorneys to practice law in this state.
Because the pass score has remained constant for three decades as overall bar exam pass rates have fluctuated, the court directed the State Bar to conduct a thorough and expedited study of the exam that would include, among other things, a meaningful analysis to determine whether protection of potential clients and the public is served by maintaining 1440 as the pass score. The court also directed that experts and stakeholders participate in the study process, including psychometricians and law school faculty or deans. The court indicated it would consider the application of any recommended adjustments to administration of the July 2017 bar exam if the recommendations are timely and found appropriate.
The current pass score was set in 1987. In the 30 years since then, the pass rate has risen and fallen over time without any change in the pass score. In contrast to the 56.1 percent pass rate in 2016 for first-time takers of the July general bar exam, there were periods of high first-time pass rates ranging from the upper 60s to the middle 70s from 1989 to 1997, 2001, and 2006 to 2013. The pass score did not appear a matter of controversy during these periods. Although the lower pass rates associated with the recent administrations of the California bar exam have generated concerns, the downward trend in pass rates appears to be consistent with a broader national pattern: statistics published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners disclose that the decline of California’s overall pass rate from 2007 to 2016 mirrors the average nine percent decline of overall pass rates observed nationally over the same period. (2016 Statistics (Mar. 2017) 86 The Bar Examiner 1, 30-33.)
The court acknowledges that California’s pass score of 1440 is the second highest in the nation and that this score was not established through a standard setting study. At the same time, there is no information indicating that many or most states selected their lower pass scores for their respective bar exams based on a standard setting analysis.
On September 13, the court received the State Bar’s “Final Report on the 2017 California Bar Exam Standard Setting Study.” The report addressed a standard setting study that was designed and conducted by independent psychometrician Chad Buckendahl, Ph.D. That study utilized a modified version of the Analytic Judgment Method, a method used in the field of licensure, and involved the participation of twenty court-selected subject matter experts (SMEs). The study required the panel of SMEs to evaluate and rate a collection of bar exam essay and performance test answers from the July 2016 exam using a baseline definition of minimum competence. After the SMEs analyzed bar exam written responses and were trained to sort them by distinguishing those reflecting at least minimal competence from those that did not reflect minimal competence, Dr. Buckendahl separately analyzed the actual scores given to such responses during the July 2016 exam scoring process to assess exam responses that were deemed minimally competent. Dr. Buckendahl then derived estimated overall bar exam scores based on the actual scores associated with written responses deemed minimally competent, and concluded that the median score associated with the SMEs’ determination of minimal competence was 1439. Opinions of the study were mixed: two independent psychometricians identified flaws in the study but ultimately found its process and conclusions sound, while a number of legal educators and others concluded the flaws of the study were so significant as to render it unreliable.
The court has reviewed the standard setting study, the State Bar’s Final Report, the amicus letters submitted pursuant to the court’s order of September 14, 2017, and the policy concerns raised in submissions on this issue. Based on that review and balancing all considerations, the court is not persuaded that the relevant information and data developed at this time weigh in favor of departing from the longstanding pass score of 1440. In making this determination, the court expects the State Bar to complete its other bar exam studies and to continue analyzing whether the exam or any of its components might warrant modification. The court also encourages the State Bar and all California law schools to work cooperatively together and with others in examining (1) whether student metrics, law school curricula and teaching techniques, and other factors might account for the recent decline in bar exam pass rates; (2) how such data might inform efforts to improve academic instruction for the benefit of law students preparing for licensure and practice; and (3) whether and to what extent changes implemented for the first time during administration of the July 2017 exam — that is, adoption of a two-day exam and equal weighting of the written and multiple choice portions of the exam — might bear on possible adjustment of the pass score. Examination of these matters could shed light on whether potential improvements in law school admission, education, and graduation standards and in State Bar testing for licensure, combined with effective regulatory oversight of legal education, could raise bar exam pass rates and thereby reduce financial hardship for exam takers, and boost the availability of competent and effective attorneys across all demographics and for all Californians.
Although the current pass score of 1440 will not be adjusted at this time, the court will consider any appropriate recommendation to revisit the pass score in the next review cycle, or sooner if the court so directs. (See Cal. Rules of Ct., rule 9.6(b), eff. Jan. 1, 2018.)
Sincerely,
Hon. Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye, Chief Justice
Hon. Ming W. Chin, Associate Justice
Hon. Carol A. Corrigan, Associate Justice
Hon. Goodwin Liu, Associate Justice
Hon. Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar, Associate Justice
Hon. Leondra R. Kruger, Associate Justice
- ABA Journal, Cut Score For California State Bar Exam to Stay at 1440 — For Now
- Los Angeles Times, Passing the California Bar Exam Shouldn't Be Made Easier, Court Says
- The Recorder, California Supreme Court Won't Lower Bar Exam Passing Score
Prior TaxProf Blog coverage:
- July 2016 California Bar Exam (Nov. 22, 2016)
- More On The California Bar Exam (Dec. 5, 2016)
- Who Is To Blame For UC-Hastings 'Horrific' 51% Bar Pass Rate? (Dec. 7, 2016)
- Anderson On The California Bar Exam Carnage: Law Schools Need To 'Cull The Herd Of Bloated Tenured Faculties' (Dec. 8, 2016)
- July 2016 California Bar Exam Results: Nine Law Schools (Including UC-Hastings) Are At Risk Of Failing ABA's Proposed New Bar Passage Accreditation Standard (Dec. 13, 2016)
- Anderson: The Top Ten Myths About the Bar Exam (Dec. 15, 2016)
- California Law School Deans Blast State Bar's Historically Low Pass Rate On July 2016 Exam (Dec. 16, 2016)
- Muller: The Complete Collapse Of Bar Passage Rates In California (Dec. 16, 2016)
- Boise & Morriss: The Shameful Truth Is That Many Law Schools Have Admitted Students With Low LSAT Scores To Prop Up Tuition Revenue And Now Seek To Avoid Accountability For The Ensuing Poor Bar Passage Results(Dec. 19, 2016)
- Anderson: Deans, Denial, And The California Bar Exam (Dec. 20, 2016)
- Despite 'Horrific' 51% Bar Passage Rate, New UC-Hastings Dean Says School Is Poised To 'Catapult Into National Preeminence' Using NYU As A Model (Dec. 21, 2016)
- California Law School Bar Pass Rates Recalculated For New York: Stanford, UCB, USC > NYU; UCI, UCLA > Columbia; Chapman, Loyola, McGeorge, Pepperdine, Santa Clara, UCD, USD > Fordham (Dec. 22, 2016)
- More On The July 2016 California Bar Exam (Dec. 26, 2016)
- California’s New Bar Exam Format And ABA’s Proposed 75% Bar Passage Requirement Will Adversely Impact Diversity, Women, And Access To The Legal Profession (Jan. 30, 2017)
- Deans Of 20 Of California's 21 ABA-Accredited Law Schools Ask State Supreme Court To Lower Bar Exam Pass Score (Feb. 2, 2017)
- ABA 'Overwhelmingly' Rejects 75% Bar Passage Requirement (Feb. 7, 2017)
- California Law Deans Take Bar Exam Complaints To Lawmakers; State Bar Director Admits There Is 'No Good Answer' For High MBE Pass Score (Feb. 15, 2017)
- Beyond The Cut Score: Piercing The Veil Of The California Bar Exam's Validity (Mar. 2, 2017)
- Lawmakers Ask Calif. Chief Justice To Cut State Bar Exam Score (Mar. 9, 2017)
- UC-Hastings Dean: The California Bar Exam Flunks Too Many Law School Graduates (Mar. 27, 2017)
- Anderson, Merritt & Muller Debate: Is The Bar Exam Broken? (May 30, 2017)
- Deans Push To Lower California Bar Pass Score, But Lawyers With Lower Scores Are More Likely To Be Disciplined Or Disbarred (May 31, 2017)
- Anderson, Merritt & Muller On The Push To Lower California's Bar Pass Score (June 4, 2017)
- California Supreme Court Strips Authority Of Bar Examiners To Set Cut Score; Lower Cut Score May Apply Retroactively To July Test-Takers (July 12, 2017)
- NY Times: California Supreme Court Moves To Make Bar Exam Easier To Pass (July 14, 2017)
- Allard: The California Bar Exam Is The Tip Of The Lawyer Licensing Iceberg (July 20, 2017)
- California Bar Cut Score, Lawyer Salaries Are Second Highest In Country: Anti-Competitive Or Pro-Consumer Protectionism? (July 24, 2017)
- Anderson, Faigman Debate: Should California Lower Its Bar Exam Cut Score? (July 31, 2017)
- California Considers Lowering Passing Score On July Bar Exam (Aug. 1, 2017)
- More Law School Deans Call For Lowering California Bar Exam Cut Score (Aug. 21, 2017)
- 19 Of 21 California Law School Deans Urge State Bar To Reduce Cut Score From 144 To 133-139 (Aug. 28, 2017)
- California Bar Law School Council Recommends Lowering Cut Score to 135-139; Bar Examiners Recommend Keeping It At 144 (Sept. 1, 2017)
- State Bar Releases California Bar Exam Cut Score Study (Sept. 14, 2017)
- Muller: Projected School-By-School Improvement If California Drops Bar Exam Cut Score From 144 To 139 (Sept. 25, 2017)
- Governor Brown Signs Bill Authorizing Release Of Names Of Those Who Pass California Bar Exam (Oct. 3, 2017)
- 20 Of 21 California Law School Deans Urge Supreme Court To Lower Bar Exam Cut Score On Interim Basis Pending Further Study (Oct. 4, 2017)
- L.A. Times Editorial: Lower The Cut Score To Increase Diversity Of The Bar (Oct. 9, 2017)
https://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2017/10/california-keeps-bar-exam-cut-score-at-144-second-highest-in-nation.html
Comments
"Examination of these matters could shed light on whether potential improvements in law school admission, education, and graduation standards and in State Bar testing for licensure, combined with effective regulatory oversight of legal education, could raise bar exam pass rates and thereby reduce financial hardship for exam takers, and boost the availability of competent and effective attorneys across all demographics and for all Californians."
Translation: clean your own house, law schools.
Posted by: Unemployed Northeastern | Oct 19, 2017 9:24:41 AM
Is the message clear enough law schools?: enroll students capable of passing the bar at rates you did a decade ago. Get smaller or close. No bail out. No smoke and mirrors explanations for the "crisis." You alone hold the answer to solving the bar passage "crisis."
Posted by: Anon | Oct 19, 2017 10:07:02 AM