This article originally appeared in The Bar Examiner print edition, Spring 2026 (Vol. 95, No. 1), pp. 60–61. By Faye McCray, JD
Across jurisdictions, the pace and shape of change look different. Some are preparing for upcoming NextGen UBE administrations; others are evaluating timelines and related policy decisions within their own frameworks. In every case, however, change at this scale carries an additional responsibility: it must be explained in ways that allow institutions to act with confidence. In periods of institutional transition, communication is not merely descriptive; it becomes part of how the system operates.
In conversations with colleagues across jurisdictions, I have already seen how quickly a single unanswered question can ripple outward. A dean wants to know how curricula might need to evolve. A board member asks what oversight responsibilities might shift. A staff member seeks to determine what operational timelines need adjustment. Each question is reasonable, and each reflects the same underlying need: clear, reliable understanding.
It is an auspicious time to join NCBE as Chief Communications Officer. As the organization approaches its 100th year, it also stands on the precipice of significant change—not just as an institution, but as a vital part of how the legal profession prepares and assesses new lawyers with the launch of the NextGen UBE. I see our task as twofold: maintaining the integrity and mission that have guided this work for decades while also innovating to meet the needs of an evolving profession. For more than two decades, my career has sat at the intersection of law, media, and public communication. I practiced law for more than a decade before moving into communications leadership, and in both roles I learned the same lesson: when the stakes are high, precision is not optional.
There is a phrase my teams have probably heard me repeat more times than they could count: be flexible in the details, but stubborn in the vision. I first encountered the idea while leading communications and content strategy for a mental health organization that had served its community for more than 50 years. The staff was deeply committed to the mission, but we quickly realized that how we talked about that mission had to evolve. Cultural expectations had shifted. The language people used to discuss mental health had changed. Reaching the next generation of patients and families required adapting how we communicated while remaining clear about the purpose that had always guided the work.
This lesson stayed with me. Institutions that endure do so not because they resist change, but because they approach such shifts with discipline. They protect the values that define their mission while remaining open to new ways of advancing it. As NCBE enters this next phase, the work surrounding the NextGen UBE reflects that same balance of continuity and thoughtful innovation.
Few developments in my career have been as consequential, or as energizing, as the change the NextGen UBE represents for legal licensure. NCBE’s work on the new exam reflects something important about the organization itself: a willingness to maintain deep interest in how the profession evolves and what future lawyers will need to serve the public well. That interest has led to meaningful innovation. But innovation rarely arrives without some discomfort. Change asks institutions, educators, and candidates alike to reconsider long-held assumptions about how things have been done.
In moments like this, communication must move beyond explanation and toward practical understanding. Stakeholders need to understand how decisions were reached, what evidence supports them, and what those decisions require in practice. Without that shared understanding, even well-designed systems can feel unsettled.
That dynamic extends across the legal community.
In bar admissions, the way information is shared becomes part of how the system functions. Careful explanation shortens the distance between development and implementation, enabling jurisdictions to anticipate implications rather than respond to them after the fact. It supports steadier administration, more informed policy deliberation, and more consistent experiences across institutions. Just as importantly, it reinforces public trust in a licensure process that carries significant professional and societal consequences.
When information is incomplete or unevenly understood, uncertainty tends to fill the gaps. Time and attention are diverted to resolving misunderstandings. Routine operational questions can take on outsized weight. In high-stakes settings such as ours, ambiguity carries tangible costs, slowing decision-making and placing strain on professional relationships. Thoughtful communication reduces that strain and allows leaders to focus on substantive judgment, not reactive clarification.
There is also an inherent tension between urgency and understanding. Policy timelines continue to move forward even as implementation details are refined, and jurisdictions must often make consequential decisions within that reality. Moving efficiently is sometimes necessary, but moving with clarity is always necessary. Careful explanation does not impede progress; it strengthens the foundation on which progress rests.
Work on the bar exam itself is rigorous and research-driven, and translating that rigor responsibly requires intention. It means outlining timelines with specificity, describing operational impacts candidly, and ensuring that resources are accessible to those who depend on them. It also requires sustained dialogue. Implementation generates insight, and feedback from jurisdictions helps ensure that national development reflects practical realities and strengthens future refinements.
Gaining and maintaining trust in high-stakes licensure rests not only on sound assessment design, but on the integrity of the systems and shared understanding that surround it. My focus is to support jurisdictions in leading through change with steadiness and confidence, and to ensure that NCBE’s communications reflect both a commitment to our mission and the respect we have for the institutions carrying it forward.
We are all stewards of this process. I look forward to navigating this transitional period together and to strengthening the understanding that sustains our work.
Faye McCray is Chief Communications Officer for the National Conference of Bar Examiners.
Contact us to request a pdf file of the original article as it appeared in the print edition.
