Latest news with #testTakers
Japan Times
08-07-2025
- Japan Times
Over 800 people found to be involved in TOEIC cheating scheme
At least 803 people were involved in cheating schemes on the Test of English for International Communication known as TOEIC over the past two years, the organization that runs the exam announced on Monday. Wang Likun, a 27-year-old Chinese graduate student from Kyoto University, was arrested last month for taking the TOEIC exam while posing as someone else, according to Jiji reports. He was also arrested in May for entering a testing center under a false identity. He is thought to have posed as a different person to take the exam and achieve a high score for whoever had commissioned him to take the test on their behalf. He also attempted to use a small microphone under a mask to tell other test-takers in the same venue the right answers. Given the incident, the organization that administers the exams, the Institute for International Business Communications, conducted an investigation on the tests that were taken between May 2023 and June of this year. So far, the organization found there were 803 test-takers who had submitted home addresses that were the same as or similar to Wang's, which would enable them to take the test at the same venue as him. For those who were identified, their test scores have been nullified and their accounts for the exam have been suspended. The organization is continuing to look into whether there are other cases where addresses that are similar to each other have been used when applying for the exam. There are also suspicions that Wang is part of a bigger cheating scheme involving more people. The exam organization had also implemented new measures since last month to prevent such cheating from occurring, such as test proctors ensuring all examinee's electronic devices are turned off as well as emphasizing the rules of the test and the severe consequences of cheating, such as notifying police. TOEIC is a widely taken English exam in Japan often required when applying for certain jobs or schools, as well as for some career advancements. The test is thought to be valuable for examining the test-takers' abilities to understand English in the business world, as well as in regular conversations. The results are evaluated on a numerical scale where 990 is a perfect score.
Fox News
03-06-2025
- General
- Fox News
More than 200 California bar exam-takers move from fail to pass after new scoring adjustment
More than 200 people who took California's bar exam in February will have their scores changed from "fail" to "pass" after a California Bar committee approved new scoring adjustments. The grading change affected 230 test takers in the State Bar of California's latest attempt to mitigate the fallout of its disastrous February test, which was plagued with technical and logistical problems. That exam prompted several lawsuits, including at least two filed by test takers and one filed by the state bar against the company that administered the exam. With the changes approved on Friday, the exam's overall pass rate jumped from 56% to 63%, nearly double the state's historical average of 35%. Applicants who nearly passed and received a second read on their written questions will be given the higher of two scores for each question, as opposed to the average of the first and second-read scores that the Bar had initially done. Test takers will be notified this week if the adjustments gave them passing scores. This change, unlike many other remedies, does not require approval from the state Supreme Court, the Bar told Bloomberg Law. Applicants for the July exam will automatically be withdrawn if the Bar determines they passed the February test, the Bar said. The scoring changes are the latest in a series of remedies Bar leaders are approving for thousands of applicants whose legal careers were impacted by the exam that crashed on test day. After approval from the state Supreme Court, the state bar has already implemented a lower raw passing score and "imputed" scores for test takers who failed to complete significant portions of the two-day exam. The Committee of Bar Examiners will soon ask the state Supreme Court to also approve a scoring method that could increase some scores on the performance portion of their exams using statistical analysis, according to Bloomberg Law. The state Supreme Court was also asked to consider a proposal to allow all February applicants — including those who withdrew before the exam — to practice law provisionally under an attorney's supervision. The February exam was the debut of California's hybrid remote and in-person test without the components of the national bar exam the state has used for decades. The change aimed to save as much as $3.8 million annually, but resolving all its issues for the July exam is now expected to add nearly $6 million in costs. Some state Bar trustees have expressed discomfort with some of the exam's proposed remedies and the higher pass rate, pointing to the bar's duty to protect the public from unqualified lawyers. The Bar said it faced the difficult task of finding "fair solutions" that maintained the exam's integrity. The Bar "would never take any steps to detract from its public protection mission," it said in a statement. Fox News Digital has reached out to the State Bar of California.
Reuters
15-05-2025
- Business
- Reuters
California bar exam-takers were told they failed. Oops, they passed.
May 15 - The State Bar of California said on Wednesday that a number of scoring errors had occurred on its February bar exam — the latest black eye for the disastrous test plagued by logistical and technical issues. A review of the February exam's scoring revealed three separate categories of mistakes, which resulted in four examinees going from failing to passing after those problems were corrected, the bar said in an email to test takers, opens new tab that Reuters reviewed. More than 4,200 people sat for California's February exam. The state bar is still looking into a fourth category of potential problems involving the incomplete transfer of performance test answers and does not yet know how many examinees were impacted by that issue, it said. The February exam was marred by problems ranging from delays and computer crashes to lax exam security and distracting proctors. Those issues prompted the state bar on May 5 to sue Meazure Development, the company that delivered the exam. Meazure, which did not immediately respond to a request for comment, said after the bar filed its lawsuit that the bar was trying to "shift the blame" for the flawed rollout of the test. Test-takers have filed a separate lawsuit against the company. The faulty February exam also spurred the resignation of the bar's top administrator. The state bar's email on Wednesday also said the agency plans to hire an 'independent third party' to undertake a comprehensive review of the registered complaints of the scoring and grading of the exam. California isn't the first to give out incorrect bar exam results. Kentucky in 2020 wrongly told 15 bar examinees they had passed when they actually failed, while three were wrongly told they failed when they passed. Three Michigan bar examinees were incorrectly marked as failing in 2021. And scoring errors led to 90 Georgia bar examinees in 2015 and 2016 being wrongly told they failed. Some February test takers raised concerns about scoring anomalies in public comments to the state bar and on social media after the results were released on May 5. The February exam had a 56% overall pass rate — far higher than the historical average of 35% — after the California Supreme Court allowed the state bar to implement a lower raw passing score because of all the exam's problems. The state bar also plans to ask the court to approve a provisional licensure program under which those who failed osuedr withdrew from the February exam can work under the supervision of an experienced attorney for up to two years while they retake the bar exam. The February exam marked the debut of California's hybrid remote and in-person test without the components of the national bar exam the state has used for decades — a change that was intended to save as much as $3.8 million annually. In addition to the tech issues, the state bar later revealed that a small portion of the multiple-choice questions were generated by a third-party contractor using ChatGPT. The state high court has ordered the July exam to be conducted in person and to return to the Multistate Bar Exam—the 200-question multiple choice portion of the exam developed by the National Conference of Bar Examiners which the state had used prior to the February test. Those changes are expected to add nearly $6 million in costs. State Bar Executive Director Leah Wilson has said she will step down in July, citing the botched rollout of the new exam. And the state bar has sued testing platform Meazure Learning over the many tech problems, as have at least two groups of test takers. Read more: California Bar backs provisional licensing after February exam mess California scraps new bar exam for July, adjusts scores on botched February test
