The latest USNWR law school ranking has some significant swings in the bar exam component. It made three significant changes: increasing the weight from 2.25% to 3%, and measuring “all graduates who took the bar for the first time,” and including graduates who were admitted via diploma privilege in both a school’s passers and the overall passers. From the methodology:

Specifically, the bar passage rate indicator scored schools on their 2020 first-time test takers' weighted bar passage rates among all jurisdictions (states), then added or subtracted the percentage point difference between those rates and the weighted state average among ABA accredited schools' first-time test takers in the corresponding jurisdictions in 2020. This meant schools that performed best on this ranking factor graduated students whose bar passage rates were both higher than most schools overall, and higher compared with what was typical among graduates who took the bar in corresponding jurisdictions.

For example, if a law school graduated 100 students who first took the bar exam – and 88 took the Florida exam, 10 the Georgia exam and two the South Carolina exam – the school's weighted average rate would use pass rate results that were weighted 88% Florida, 10% Georgia and 2% South Carolina. This computation would then be compared with an index of these jurisdictions' average pass rates – also weighted 88-10-2. (For privacy, school profiles on usnews.com only display bar passage data for jurisdictions with at least five test-takers.) Both weighted averages included any graduates who passed the bar with diploma privilege. Diploma privilege is a method for J.D. graduates to be admitted to a state bar and allowed to practice law in that state without taking that state's actual bar examination. Diploma privilege is generally based on attending and graduating from a law school in that state with the diploma privilege.

In previous editions, U.S. News divided each school's first-time bar passage rate in its single jurisdiction with the most test-takers by the average for that lone jurisdiction. This approach effectively excluded many law schools' graduates who took the bar. Dividing by the state average also meant the location of a law school impacted its quotient as much as its graduates' bar passage rate itself. The new arithmetic accounts for average passage rates across all applicable jurisdictions as proxy for each exam's difficulty and reflects that passing the bar is a critical outcome measure in itself.

The new methodology really changes the results for two kinds of schools. (The increase in the weight from 2.25% to 3% obviously also benefits schools that do well and harms schools more that do poorly.)

First, it benefits good schools in jurisdictions with tougher bars and strong out-of-state placement.

Second, it harms Wisconsin’s two law schools.

Let’s start with the first. Which schools benefited most from 2022 (measuring the 2019 bar) to 2023 (measuring the 2020 bar)? (These charts exclude a handful of schools that did not include their bar passage statistics this time around.)

On the left are the school’s pass rate in 2019 with its modal jurisdiction, and that jurisdiction’s pass rate. Next is cumulative pass rate in 2020 along with the cumulative jurisdiction rate. Finally is the delta of the USNWR score—how much better the school did this year compared to last year in the weighted Z-score.

(I noted last year that we saw major swings at some schools in 2020. We see how those are playing out here.)

The University of San Francisco saw a tremendous improvement in California of almost 40 points (aided in part by a lower cut score in California in 2020). But the next three schools are telling. William & Mary and Washington & Lee are strong schools in a very tough bar exam market (Virginia is one of the toughest bars in the country), and Emory in Georgia in an above-average difficulty bar. Each did reasonably well in 2019. But when adding in performances in other jurisdictions, their scores climbed. ABA data shows W&M went 15-for-15 in DC, 15-for-15 in Maryland, and 10-for-10 in New York. All were excluded in the old metrics; all are easier bars than Virginia. W&L grads went 13-for-14 in DC, 13-for-13 in North Carolina, and 9-for-10 in New York. Emory went 21-for-21 in New York and 11-for-11 in Florida.

In other words, a diffuse and successful bar exam test-taking base redounds to the benefit of these schools.

Let me add one more detail. The new methodology puts law schools closer to parity with one another when comparing bar passage rates, especially those outside the “outliers.” The more graduates you have taking the bar, across jurisdictions, the less likely the difficulty of the bar matters in the end; and the inclusion of “diploma privilege” (or adjacent) admissions lifts the results. The 2019 “denominator” of the bar exam ranged from 55% at the low end of law schools (i.e., Maine) to 87% at the top end (i.e., Kansas), a gap of 32 points. That shrunk a bit in 2020 with the new methodology, from 70% to 99% (29 points). But the difference between the 10th and 90th percentiles shrunk significantly, from 2019 (61% and 81%, 20 points) to 2020 (75% to 86%, 11 points). In other words, there differences between the 19th and 168th law schools in terms of their “jurisdiction pass rate” was about half as much in the “overall pass rate” this year compared to last year.

Let’s look at the worst-performing schools.

You can see that several schools performed worse, or relatively worse, compared to their 2019 figures (again, consistent with what I noted earlier, major swings at some schools in 2020). But note outliers. Marquette (98.2%) and Wisconsin (100%) both have extraordinarily high bar passage rates, due principally to in-state diploma privilege.

In the past, this redounded to their benefit, as ordinary test-takers who took the bar exam performed substantially lower than 100% (see 71% in 2019), giving them a huge advantage. The new USNWR methodology, however, includes all of those diploma privilege admittees as “passers” in cumulative jurisdiction’s pass rate, too. Wisconsin and Marquette used to perform 30 points above the average; they’re now basically at the average.

In one sense, there’s a greater honesty to the metric in comparing similarly-situated graduates to one another. But it comes at the cost of punishing two schools whose graduates are all (or nearly all) immediately able to practice law. That’s a tremendously valuable outcome for law students.

It might be beneficial for USNWR to instead include two factors, absolute passers and relative passers (like this one). Some (especially California deans!) critique an “absolute” passer rate that lacks accounting for the difficulty of the bar. But if we care about law students’ ability to practice law, it seems to me that it’s important to capture whether your graduates are successfully getting students there, regardless of how hard or easy the bar exam is. (Of course, relative performance also should matter, I think, at least to some degree, as it suggests that some schools are improving opportunities for their graduates.) I confess, others would disagree.

How did other schools, like those in Utah, Washington, or Oregon, not perform much better or worse despite emergency “diploma privilege” being introduced? Recall it’s a mixed bag, depending on the school and the state, history and out-of-state test-takers. February 2020 did not have such exemptions, which are partially included in the figures above. Utah and Oregon still had a decent set of in-state test-takers, as diploma privilege did not extend to everyone—but schools in those states didn’t see as dramatic changes in overall passing rates, as in both states they were keyed to pre-set levels of test-taker success (86%, with an exception in Oregon for in-state schools), and that meant most people taking the test would have passed, anyway. Washington, in contrast, opened up diploma privilege to essentially all test-takers, and the corresponding increase in passers put the University of Washington near the bottom of changes from 2019 to 2020 (suffering something that Wisconsin and Marquette experienced this year).

It’s a seemingly small change in methodology, and it’s hard to know what a number like “0.0497” means to an overall score. But it’s worth identifying that the changes are not value-neutral and can affect similarly-situated schools quite differently.