Legal Cheek readers call for cheaper fees, better exam rooms, past papers and more
Since Legal Cheek exclusively revealed last week that law firms were rescinding training contract offers from students who failed the SQE on their first attempt, social media has been flooded with criticism of the solicitors’ assessment.
With this in mind, Legal Cheek took to its busy socials to ask its law student and lawyer followers: how do you think the SQE can be improved?
It’s evident from the responses we received that the cost of the exams is a source of annoyance. One lecturer and solicitor took to LinkedIn to write: “… the costs of the examinations bear no relation to reasonable expense and are clearly out of step with agendas of widening participation, diversity and open access.”
Another unhappy follower also called for a reduction in exam fees and suggested students with a law degree be exempt from SQE1. The “whole system needs revising!” they wrote. “Nothing accessible about it unfortunately.”
Currently, exam fees for SQE1 amount to £1,798, and for SQE2, £2,766. However, self-funded students must additionally bear the expenses of a preparation course, which can vary from a couple of thousand pounds to well over £10,000. Students are also required to pay the full exam fees again for resits.
“The exams, introduced to improve accessibility indisputably make the profession less accessible,” another follower wrote on Instagram. “Candidates are fumbling in the dark without clear direction, have to take annual leave to study for the exams, and I met a few candidates who had to take a bank loan to fund the endeavour. As well as this, City law firms are still internally peddling the view that TC’s are the superior method to qualification whilst SQE + QWE is spoken about as being inferior.”
Making changes to the exam venues, the IT and the practicalities of sitting the SQE also seem high on the agenda when talking improvements.
“[The] centres are categorically not the right venue for these exams,” claimed one SQE student. “I personally experienced a protracted distraction during one of the written exams… while other candidates I know experienced outages, frozen screens and delays.”
Another commenter went as far as to suggest that the SRA “needs to sack” SQE assessment provider Kaplan. “The SQE has been plagued with issues since its launch in 2021,” they said. “Considering the cost of the exams, the IT platforms simply aren’t fit for use.”
Another reader suggested the “locations and [exam] rooms should be appropriate,” before claimng that their oral exams were conducted in a “re-arranged hotel bedroom”. Continuing, they said “given you’re in a closed room with only one examiner this can be uncomfortable for some people. A meeting room or classroom is more appropriate”.
Along with adding more (appropriate) exam locations, they go on to say that “exam day rules should be reasonable to reduce on-the-day stress” and “it’s not necessary to ban water during the exams”.
Other readers also raised concerns with the pass rate. “Right now it is clear that the numbers of those successfully completing the SQE exams is far too low,” one concerned follower wrote. “When students with extensive and high-level experience from within legal practice are unsuccessful then it is clear that there is a worrying disconnect between training provider outcomes and the final examination requirements.”
They continued: “A first step would be ensure that a more open dialogue exists between the SRA, Kaplan and training providers to ensure that the high expense of taking on formal training is directed towards best preparation.”
“The use of an MCQ/best answer format is clearly at odds with the actual requirements of the job role in practice,” they continued. “We are looking for analytical and creative minds who can provide the best service to clients — we do not need people with eidetic memory — although I did quite enjoy watching Mike Ross in Suits.”
Improving the study materials was also a suggestion that featured heavily across Legal Cheek’s socials. This comment on Insta summed up the mood:
“A more specific specification or a textbook [should be] provided by Kaplan so that different providers can standardise the information required to be taught. Split the exams to smaller chunks by subjects. Provide a few past papers (the sample questions on the website are not an accurate representation of the level of difficulty).”
Many commenters went as far as calling for the SQE to be scrapped and replaced with its predecessor the Legal Practice Course.
How do you think the SQE can be improved? Let us know your thoughts in the comments.👇
