ILNews

Processing issue delays bar exam submissions in multiple states

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Florida-based testing software provider ExamSoft Worldwide Inc. said a processing issue has caused delays for bar exam takers in multiple states who were submitting their answers.

Some test takers experienced slowness or difficulty in returning completed exams Tuesday to company servers using company software, vice president of marketing Kenneth Knotts said early Wednesday.

He said the "processing issue" did not impact the exam takers' answer content, and that all the state bars that had not yet received all exams had extended their deadlines because of the issue.

"This was not at all a system-wide failure. The experience was a delay and some difficulty" in uploading the files, he said. "At no point in time was the integrity of their exam files ever affected."

Knotts said he couldn't say what time the delays began or how many people in total were affected but said by late afternoon on the East Coast, the company was noticing extended wait times on its support line.

Knotts said the company is looking into what caused the delays and hopes to have an answer by later Wednesday morning.

"What happened today is not acceptable," he said.

Knotts said the vast majority of users had uploaded their exam files as of early Wednesday and added that the company is working to resolve the issue completely.

The company's website lists 15 states that extended their deadlines for submitting the exams. The Boca Raton, Florida-based ExamSoft also has offices in Dallas and administers bar exams in 43 U.S. states.

Test takers download the company's application to the computers they use to take the tests. At the end of the exam, the file closes and locks. When the user is able to connect to the Internet, the file uploads. Users cannot make changes to the file after the conclusion of the test.

D.C. Wolf of Seattle took the Washington state bar exam with about 1,000 other people Tuesday at the Tacoma Convention Center, where they had no Internet access.

"I went back to my hotel and tried repeatedly to upload my answers and kept getting error messages," he said. "I wasn't worried in Washington because we have until Friday" to submit test answers, he said. "But some states had deadlines of midnight tonight."

Wolf said Washington bar applicants had to pay $150 to use the ExamSoft program.

In Minnesota, Maggie Watson, 30, took the state bar exam at a convention center in St. Paul that also did not have Internet access. When she got back to her hotel room to upload her results, she said she got repeated messages that the upload had failed.

"Once I did that four, five, six times, I thought, 'What's going on?'" she said.

Watson, who graduated from law school at Indiana University-Bloomington and plans to move to Minneapolis, said she took screenshots of the upload failures and sent copies of fail-to-upload emails to the Minnesota bar examiner.

Minnesota's original deadline had been 9 p.m., and it did not get extended until after the deadline had passed, she said.

"Tomorrow is pencil and paper" for the next part of the test, Watson said. "I'm feeling better about that."

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  2. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

  3. I will agree with that as soon as law schools stop lying to prospective students about salaries and employment opportunities in the legal profession. There is no defense to the fraudulent numbers first year salaries they post to mislead people into going to law school.

  4. The sad thing is that no fish were thrown overboard The "greenhorn" who had never fished before those 5 days was interrogated for over 4 hours by 5 officers until his statement was illicited, "I don't want to go to prison....." The truth is that these fish were measured frozen off shore and thawed on shore. The FWC (state) officer did not know fish shrink, so the only reason that these fish could be bigger was a swap. There is no difference between a 19 1/2 fish or 19 3/4 fish, short fish is short fish, the ticket was written. In addition the FWC officer testified at trial, he does not measure fish in accordance with federal law. There was a document prepared by the FWC expert that said yes, fish shrink and if these had been measured correctly they averaged over 20 inches (offshore frozen). This was a smoke and mirror prosecution.

  5. I love this, Dave! Many congrats to you! We've come a long way from studying for the bar together! :)

ADVERTISEMENT