Document Type
Article
Publication Date
2023
Abstract
Despite its ugly history and persistent disparate impact on racial and minority groups, the Bar Exam is still a required step for (nearly) every jurisdiction in a law school graduate’s quest to become an attorney. Deficiencies abound in the exam’s inability to effectively evaluate the minimum competency of what newly minted attorneys should possess. It is left to the local jurisdiction to collect, analyze, and determine what mode to release and calculate results. There has been a recent shift in focus, and change of scope, in the American Bar Association Ultimate Bar Passage, Standard 316. Nevertheless, the local authorities provide pass rate data via public reports that are often not in line, or are even in definitional conflict, with the ABA standard.
A lack of standardized public disclosure for statistics on bar results has exacerbated inequities. The meteoric rise of the Uniform Bar Exam and its widespread adoption is impacting how results are compiled and reported. Solutions are straightforward, if not simple, to implement. Reporting agencies must assess and update their individualized calculation and publication methods to ensure accuracy and conformity to set standards. The American Bar Association must update its questionnaire and, at the very least, clarify its definition of first-time takers. Finally, the National Conference of Bar Examiners must proactively assist and provide data to law schools on examinees who transfer Uniform Bar Exam scores between jurisdictions, particularly within the first two years of graduation.
Publication Citation
21 Seattle J. Soc. Just. 589 (2023).
Recommended Citation
Gutowski, Nachman, "STOP THE COUNT; The Historically Discriminatory Nature of the Bar Exam Requires Adjustments in How Bar Passage Rates are Reported, If at All" (2023). Scholarly Works. 1460.
https://scholars.law.unlv.edu/facpub/1460