NCBE Confirms Shift to Absolute Grading in NextGen Bar Exam
The National Conference of Bar Examiners yesterday published a summary of its recent field testing as part of its ongoing implementation research for the NextGen Bar Exam, which is slated to be administered for the first time in some jurisdictions with the July 2026 bar exam.
More than 4,000 graduating law students and recent law graduates at 88 law schools across the country participated in the field test in January 2024. One of the most notable discussions from the research brief is the confirmation of a major shift in grading: from the current relative grading system to an absolute grading model.
Evaluating absolute grading was a key component of the field test, and the field test provided the NCBE with the opportunity to examine how this grading shift might affect graders.
What is Relative Grading?
Under the current Uniform Bar Exam, most jurisdictions use relative grading, which ranks exam answers against one another.
According to an article previously published by the NCBE:
Relative grading training helps graders identify consistent standards in ranking papers and then apply those standards to put papers in piles according to their relative strength. The 1–6 scale used at the workshop simply means that a score of 6 is reserved for the best papers among all answers assigned to a particular grader. It is better than a 5, which is better than a 4, and so on, all the way to 1—a paper that is among the weakest papers. Relative grading means that in any group of answers, even if no single paper addresses all the points raised in an item, the strongest papers still deserve a 6 (using a 1–6 score scale). They do not have to be perfect nor necessarily deserve a true A or 100%. Using the same principles, a paper need not be completely devoid of content to get a 1 if the other papers are strong.
So when it comes to essay and MPT writing on the bar exam, it’s not about writing a good response. Rather, it’s about writing a better response than others.
Example: Imagine a group of examinees where none of the essays are stellar. The highest score will still be assigned to the strongest paper, which could get a 6, even if it’s not perfect. All other essays are ranked relative to that one. This system is useful when the quality of responses varies significantly, but it can result in uneven evaluations across jurisdictions and exams.
I previously wrote about relative grading here: "What FSU's Snub from the CFP Can Remind Bar Examinees About Relative Grading” (Dec. 4, 2023) and “War! What Is It Good For?" (Nov. 12, 2021).
What is Absolute Grading?
Starting with the NextGen Bar Exam, NCBE is transitioning to absolute grading, a more objective and criterion-referenced system. Each answer will be scored against a specific rubric, with graders evaluating whether it meets certain standards. Rather than comparing answers, this method focuses on whether each response meets the predetermined requirements for each score level.
The NCBE's field research brief highlights that absolute grading is “more straightforward for graders” and “will benefit all jurisdictions, especially medium and large ones, which currently must maintain relative grading standards across a large volume of written responses.” The shift ensures that essays and performance tasks are judged based on their merit, not in comparison to other papers.
Example: If several responses meet the criteria for a top score, they will all receive that score. Graders aren’t limited by ranking; instead, they evaluate how well each answer satisfies the given standards.
Relative vs. Absolute Grading: Which is Better?
While relative grading has helped jurisdictions maintain a sense of fairness by ranking answers against one another, it can lead to inconsistencies across different administrations and jurisdictions. Examinees might receive different grades depending on the overall quality of their cohort in the jurisdiction where they are taking the exam, not purely on their performance. This can create unpredictability.
Absolute grading, on the other hand, offers a clearer and more reliable system, where every response is assessed against the same set of standards. It’s designed to eliminate some of the variability that comes with relative ranking and provides examinees with greater transparency about how they’re evaluated.
For more on the NCBE's findings, check out the NextGen field test research brief.
