Technical glitches during digital exams: A nightmare for many examinees

The introduction of electronic examinations for the second state examination in Bavaria should have been a milestone in the digitalization of legal examinations. However, what began as an innovative step ended in a nightmare for many candidates. In Munich and Augsburg, there were massive technical problems with the laptops and servers used, which significantly disrupted the examination process. From delayed exam starts to technical error messages - the candidates were under extreme stress. During the exams, some of which lasted up to five hours, insufficiently charged batteries and slow IT support made life a challenge for the prospective fully qualified lawyers. For many, this was an unpredictable scenario that went far beyond normal exam stress.

The frustration of those affected: Chaos and uncertainty in the exam rooms

The reactions of those affected speak volumes: "It was absolute chaos," reports one examinee who took part in the mishaps in Munich and Augsburg. During the exam, many participants were left helpless when their laptops displayed error messages and IT support did not respond quickly enough. Some received replacement devices with almost empty batteries, while others experienced a veritable technical odyssey. The pressure to master a demanding exam within a tight timeframe was intensified by these unforeseen technical problems. Although the response of the State Judicial Examination Office to the situation was helpful - a 15-minute extension to the writing time was granted - this measure could not remedy all the damage.

Options for those affected: What happens now?

In the end, there were several options for the candidates concerned: Either to let the exams stand, without deleting a replacement, or to rewrite a replacement exam. However, many were not very enthusiastic about the idea of rewriting. After several days of intensive exams, most participants are exhausted and the idea of writing another exam under these circumstances seemed too much for many.

The decision as to whether an exam would be made up or not could not always be communicated smoothly due to technical problems. One examinee reported an overloaded mailbox at the State Judicial Examination Office, which delayed his message, adding to the uncertainty.

Digitization yes, but not at any price!

For us, it is clear: the digitalization of the exam is a necessary step, but it must be implemented with more care and clear guidelines. The technology must be so sophisticated that it does not create unnecessary hurdles for the candidates, but instead makes the process efficient and fair. And this applies not only to the exams, but to any digital procedure that is associated with decisive consequences.

The incident impressively demonstrates how important it is to act proactively and responsibly when introducing new technologies. Companies and authorities must ensure that contingency plans and technical support are quickly put in place to avoid similar mishaps. Otherwise, confidence in digital audits and processes could be permanently shaken. A little more thoughtfulness in the planning and execution of audits would not go amiss - because in the end, it is not only progress that counts, but also how well it works for everyone.