Solicitors Qualifying Exam: Law lecturers and academics label SRA “disingenuous” over reporting of concerns raised about ‘super exam’

The Association of Law Teachers (ALT) has criticised the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) over the regulator’s “disingenuous” reporting of the widespread criticism of its plans to introduce a new Solicitors Qualifying Examination (SQE). 

Employers, educators, trainers and lawyers were all consulted as the SRA put together its plan for a new ‘super exam’ that all prospective solicitors will have to take at the point of qualification. The proposals have received considerable criticism from both legal educators and law firms. But as The Lawyer reports, the ALT is angry at the “disingenuous” way that the consultation responses have been presented – it alleges that the SRA has deliberately conflated support for an independent form of assessment of qualifying solicitors in principle with support for its specific SQE proposals, which is not the same thing. The SRA has also sought to attribute opposition to the SQE to universities worried about  what the proposals mean for their lucrative courses. The reality is that 68% of all respondents, including academics and firms, did not think that the SQE proposals would make for a “robust and effective measure of competence”.

Furthermore, the ALT accused the SRA of trying to play down the scale of opposition to the plans by only publishing 148 of the 253 responses received during the consultation. However, the SRA responded that it asks for permission to publish respondents’ comments on its website, so it did not publish responses where no permission was given.

Professor Elaine Hall, who analysed the consultation responses on behalf of the ALT, said: “The SRA conflate ‘support for an independent professional assessment in principle’ with ‘support for the SQE’. This is a stretch, since the second consultation looked at specific questions about the SQE only. The assessment principle was partially addressed in the first consultation with 209 respondents, published in 2016: 41 agreed, 33 were neutral and 135 disagreed. The ‘support in principle’ is not evident anywhere in this data. The SRA – by using terms like ‘general support’ and suggesting that it is universities who ‘consistently’ oppose the SQE – are drawing attention away from the simple facts: 68% of the respondents think the SQE is not ‘a robust and effective measure of competence’ and 66 per cent think it is not ‘a suitable test of the requirements needed to become a solicitor’. These negative views are not only the province of universities, they are held by the majority of solicitors’ firms who responded and more than half of individual legal professionals. These are the people who will employ newly-qualified solicitors and they are not convinced that this a good idea.”

A spokesperson for the SRA commented: “We have always been clear that views on SQE were mixed, and open about the fact that those organisations that supported centralised assessment in general said they were concerned about the detail.We agree that there is a more work to do on the detail of SQE, and, as we have said, we are committed looking to working with everyone over the coming months to get it right.”