News focus: Multiple questions on the SQE

Can a multiple-choice test asking 360 questions on aspects of legal knowledge that may never be needed again really be classed as a suitable entry gateway for solicitors? And what does the profession do with the sizeable proportion who fail this test the first time round?

These questions continue to dominate the thoughts of junior lawyers, training providers and regulators, with no easy answer emerging.

First, the facts: the first part of the Solicitors Qualifying Examination is difficult to pass. Just 53% of entrants reached the required mark in the first year and subsequent sittings have produced similar results. Speaking to the Gazette earlier this month, SRA chief executive Paul Philip was unapologetic, stressing that SQE needs to be a rigorous assessment of an aspiring solicitor’s suitability for the high demands of the legal profession.

The SQE produces different results depending on who takes it. Pass rates were significantly higher in the first year for white candidates – 66% compared with 43% for Asian candidates and 39% for black candidates. Entrants with a background as an apprentice appear to do much better, perhaps not surprising given their hands-on experience.

The SRA has commissioned research from the University of Exeter to look into disparities in pass marks, although it points out that similar outcomes have been reported in other professional entrance exams, suggesting a wider societal issue might be responsible rather than particular problems with the SQE.

While the results themselves are clear cut, the consequences of so many candidates failing first-time are uncertain. There are concerns that some law firms are cancelling job offers when potential employees report that they have not passed. The fear is that the exam in its current form – literally a box-ticking exercise under intense pressure – may not be a reliable basis for such employment decisions.

The City of London Law Society training committee last week met with 16 firms as well as HR and training professionals to discuss a response to the SQE annual report. The response calls for a ‘supportive, understanding approach’ which takes into account that this is a ‘new, little-known assessment regime’.

The committee said: ‘The level successful candidates are expected to achieve in the SQE1 is that of a “day-one solicitor”, in contrast to the level under the LPC which was that of a “day-one trainee”.

‘Although the SRA stated that the exam would assess students’ knowledge of general legal principles, some candidates had reported that some of the questions were rather esoteric and not things that a day-one solicitor could be expected to know without looking up.’

'Having to go back over numerous areas of law... and having to retain that information to be able to recall it in a closed-book scenario was a lot of pressure and at times felt impossible'

India Jenkins, senior apprentice solicitor

The exam environment was described as ‘gruelling’ and unsuitable in particular for neurodiverse candidates. IT issues were reported at some test centres, with the committee suggesting some candidates have been prevented from taking water in with them.

Patrick McCann, director of learning at magic circle firm Linklaters and chair of the training committee, urged firms to keep hold of their talent for now. ‘The assessment is largely unvalidated, tests performance with a methodology unfamiliar to nearly all candidates, [and] is producing unexpected outcomes for some. I’d urge understanding, support and latitude.’

India Jenkins, a senior apprentice solicitor at a national firm, sat the SQE1 in January and wrote on LinkedIn about her experience, saying the process ‘really took its toll’ on her mental wellbeing. Her exam was made up of two five-hour exams, each containing 180 multiple choice questions, spanning 14 different areas of law and professional conduct.

‘Having to go back over numerous areas of law (some of which I hadn’t studied for years) and having to retain that information to be able to recall it in a closed-book scenario was a lot of pressure and at times felt impossible,’ said Jenkins.

‘Having gained over six years’ experience working in the legal profession I know that I am now capable and ready to qualify, however the exams felt like a huge unknown and unnecessary hurdle to jump over right at the very end of the process.’

Jenkins passed, but her anxiety meant she had to take time off work during the six-week waiting period to find out her results.

Employers (and the wider legal profession) must be patient with non-passers, providing support and encouragement to help them to improve their skills and knowledge. This is especially important for junior lawyers who are just starting their careers and may lack the experience and confidence necessary to succeed.

Daria Cernobrivec, chair of the Junior Lawyers Division, accepted the SQE is a new exam and designed to be rigorous. But she stressted that failing at the first attempt is not necessarily a sign that an aspiring solicitor lacks knowledge.

She added: 'It is essential that employers take a long-term view of their investment in young lawyers and recognise the benefits of investing in their development. By being patient and supportive, employers can help to ensure that the next generation of solicitors are well-equipped to meet the challenges of the modern legal profession.'

The SRA insists it is satisfied with the nature and outcome of the SQE. The regulator says that firms are required to judge when is the right time to put candidates in for assessments: unlike the LPC, which acted as a starting point for training, the SQE is consciously designed to be a gateway to practising as a solicitor.

This article is now closed for comment.