This article originally appeared in The Bar Examiner print edition, Winter 2025-2026 (Vol. 94, No. 4), pp. 31–33.By Hon. Cynthia L. Martin
It was the fall of 2017. Nearly 30 jurisdictions had adopted the Uniform Bar Exam, a score portability compact launched by NCBE in July 2011 that allows examinees to transfer their bar exam score, earned on uniform exam materials, to seek admission in other UBE jurisdictions. The timing of the UBE’s launch was prescient, as it helped simplify the admission process for many during the tumultuous economic times that soon arrived.
That uncertain economic environment affected the legal profession from top to bottom; legal education was not immune. As the number of applicants seeking admission to law school precipitously dropped, so did the performance measures of admitted cohorts as law schools scrambled to fill seats. This led to a decline in bar exam performance that began when the first impacted cohort sat for the July 2014 administration. Though hindsight has shown that forces external to the bar exam affected the lower pass rate, in the moment reactions to notably lower pass rates placed the exam itself in the crosshairs.
In the scramble to assign fault, some stakeholders claimed that the Multistate Bar Examination was too dependent on memorization of technical legal knowledge. Others complained that the overall bar examination placed disproportionate weight on the assessment of knowledge over essential legal skills. Research into underlying data of this administration showed the exam to be on solid footing.1 However, a truth was emerging: the legal profession was in a state of flux. NCBE recognized its obligation to ensure that the bar examination kept pace with a changing legal landscape.
In October 2017, the NCBE Board of Trustees, with the full support of the organization’s president and CEO, Judy Gundersen, approved the formation of the Testing Task Force. Its charge was simply stated: to undertake a three-year study that ensures the bar exam continues to test the knowledge, skills, and abilities required for competent entry-level practice in the 21st century. The method and means to address that charge were left to the TTF.
In January 2018, the TTF began meeting in earnest. The first order of business was to define the parameters of its charge. After an engaged discussion, the TTF concluded that its charge should not be interpreted narrowly to authorize a study that would simply validate the current exam’s design and content. Instead, its charge should be interpreted broadly to authorize a comprehensive, future-focused, collaborative, empirical, and transparent study of the exam, unencumbered by its current form, content, delivery method, and more. Driven by empirical input, this decision reflected a commitment to wholesale reimagining of the next step in the exam’s evolution. At the same time, the TTF recognized that whatever its recommendations, the exam must remain tethered to its purpose—to determine whether examinees seeking a general license to practice law possess the minimum knowledge, skills, and abilities required to safely provide competent legal services to the public.
The TTF divided its research study into three phases. Phase 1 involved listening sessions, where the TTF could learn what stakeholders liked and did not like about the current bar exam, and what their aspirational goals for an update entailed. Phase 2 involved a comprehensive and widely distributed practice analysis2 survey that identified the job activities of newly licensed lawyers and the knowledge, skills, and abilities required to perform those activities. Phase 3 engaged external focus groups to evaluate the data gathered from previous phases and to make recommendations about the content that a bar exam should assess.
The TTF selected two independent research consulting firms to ensure the empirical integrity of its work. ACS Ventures LLC was recruited to facilitate and document the listening sessions conducted in Phase 1 and to do the same for the penultimate synthesizing of data contemplated in Phase 3. American Institutes for Research was recruited to facilitate the development and distribution of the practice analysis survey contemplated in Phase 2. The TTF used a dedicated website, blogs, published reports, webinars, and conference presentations to detail its progress, reflective of the genuine desire to be transparent and build bridges with stakeholders in the bar admissions community.
Empirical data positioned the TTF to formulate comprehensive science-based recommendations that touched on every aspect of the bar exam, including its content, design, and delivery method, while remaining committed to the foundational principles of high-stakes licensure tests—validity, reliability, and fairness.
The TTF’s ambitious three-year research study was completed on schedule, despite onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Empirical data positioned the TTF to formulate comprehensive science-based recommendations that touched on every aspect of the bar exam, including its content, design, and delivery method, while remaining committed to the foundational principles of high-stakes licensure tests—validity, reliability, and fairness. The TTF recommended assessing a narrower range of foundational doctrinal knowledge and a broader range of lawyering skills; using integrated item types that cross-assess doctrinal knowledge and lawyering skills in a manner that approximates real-world practice of law; and administering the exam via computer. The task force also recommended an infrastructure to assist with the anticipated five- to seven-year time frame needed to develop and implement a new bar exam.
The NCBE Board of Trustees adopted the recommendations in January 2021. To oversee the multiyear trajectory of developing and adopting a new bar exam, the board formed an Implementation Steering Committee to work closely with NCBE staff.
Launch of the NextGen UBE in July 2026 is now months away. NCBE and its stakeholders’ work to ensure the successful development and rollout of the NextGen UBE has been staggering, complicated, and weighty. One might wonder whether the same decision to conduct an unencumbered, holistic study of the bar exam would have been made in January 2018 had we known then what we all know now—that building an updated bar exam that remains valid, reliable, and fair is not for the faint of heart.
I can confidently answer that query. The TTF’s work and the subsequent development and implementation of the NextGen UBE join a long line of pursuits that reveal NCBE’s dedication to its mission. At every step, NCBE staff and committee members have shown up and done the hard work required to deliver a valid, reliable, fair, and future-focused bar exam that keeps pace with a changing profession. Everyone responsible for the success of the NextGen UBE project consistently has been motivated to do the right thing, at the right time, in the right way, and for the right reasons.
Notes
- Mark A. Albanese, PhD, “The Testing Column: The July 2014 MBE: Rogue Wave or Storm Surge?” 84(2) The Bar Examiner 35–48 (June 2015). (Go back)
- NCBE has periodically conducted practice and validity analyses throughout the years, which is a best practice for organizations involved in high-stakes licensure testing to ensure continued exam alignment with the relevant job or practice. See Danette Waller McKinley, PhD; and Beth E. Donahue, “The Testing Column: Measuring Competence: Assessment of Knowledge and Skills on the Bar Exam,” 92(3) The Bar Examiner 21–28 (Fall 2023), “New to Bar Admissions? What You Might Like to Know About: Terms Often Used in Reference to the Bar Examination,” 90(2–3) The Bar Examiner 45–48 (Summer/Fall 2021). (Go back)
Hon. Cynthia L. Martin has served on the Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District, since 2009. Judge Martin was a member of the Missouri Board of Law Examiners from 2001 to 2011 and served on the NCBE Board of Trustees from 2011 to 2021 (chair, 2019–2020). From January 2018 through January 2021, Judge Martin served as chair of NCBE’s Testing Task Force; she currently serves on NCBE’s Implementation Steering Committee for the NextGen UBE.
Contact us to request a pdf file of the original article as it appeared in the print edition.
