15-year-old with no legal knowledge scores 48% on SQE practice paper, claims Kent Law School deputy head

By on

Academic reveals daughter’s super exam efforts

An experienced legal academic claims her teenage daughter scored just shy of half-marks on part of the Solicitors Qualifying Exam (SQE) practice paper, despite having “absolutely no knowledge” of the law.

Lisa Dickson, deputy head of Kent Law School, said in an email to colleagues that her 15-year-old daughter had used “logic”, “common sense” as well as an “understanding [of] multiple choice formats” to secure a respectable score of 48% in the first 25 questions of a practice paper covering functioning legal knowledge.

Dickson went on to reveal her daughter, who is yet to sit her GCSEs, was “extremely peeved” not to have achieved 50% and has even requested a law revision book “so she can answer the next 25 later in the week and pass!”

The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) declined to comment.

The SQE assessment will be split into two parts: SQE1 focusing on black letter law and taking the form of a computer-based, multiple-choice assessment, while SQE2 will test prospective solicitors’ practical legal skills such as advocacy and interviewing. It will replace both the Legal Practice Course (LPC) and Graduate Diploma in Law (GDL) when it comes into force next September.

The 2019 Legal Cheek LPC Most List

The legal education provider tasked with delivering the SQE, Kaplan, has previously defended the assessment’s proposed multiple-choice format, claiming a well-drafted MCQ involved the “application of fundamental principles”, which in turn reduces the “likelihood that candidates will pass or fail by luck”.

Earlier this month, Ken Oliphant, a professor of tort law and head of Bristol Law School, pointed out an apparent error with one of the sample MCQs published on the SRA’s website.

Responding to the purported blunder, a spokesperson for Kaplan stressed that all questions go through an “extensive review and editing process”, and any deemed to be flawed can be withdrawn by the exam board.

For all the latest commercial awareness info, and advance notification of Legal Cheek's careers events:

Sign up to the Legal Cheek Hub


Kirkland NQ

That’s nothing, I got 100% in my degree exams when I was 6.


Real Kirkland NQ

You are a pretender, Sir. I got my degree in the respectable age of 17. I did smash my first PE deal when I was 6 though.


The Real Kirkland NQ

Please sir, stop impersonating me.I smashed a PE deal at 5 then smashed supermodels in my lambo.



Can someone invent some new personalities for the comments section please?


CMS 4th Seat Trainee

Will do once I sort that Kirkland job application.

Kirkland NQ

Do we need a “Kirkland Concierge” commenter though?


10% higher than the average Kent law grad would get on it.



There is a University of Kent? Well, you learn something every day.



What’s a Kent and where can I buy one?


King Alfred

Get fucked it’s mine


Not from Kent

It is ghastly place. Imagine a place filled with the most basic sort of Brexit types. You are picturing Kent.


#Ecclesiastical Banter

I was under the impression only Lambeth degrees emanated from Kent.



Lambeth degrees are the only valid degrees which emanate from Kent, if you ask me.



No one did pal so shut it.


N Quistive

I thought Lambeth degrees were the only valid ones that emanated from Kent. Is this correct?


Influencer manager

If the SRA and Kaplan gave Eve enough money I’m sure she’d be willing to make a video saying the SQE is so hard that she got all the questions wrong



I watched one of these videos. I felt a little part of my brain dying.


Eve admirer

I don’t know why she’s so hated, however, it does pain me to admit I’m a little bit attracted to her



Bit clickbaity, but I suppose “15 year old with legal academic parent who probably talks about law over dinner quite regularly does 25 multiple choice questions and gets nearly half right” isn’t as catchy as “15 year old scores 48% on SQE practice paper”



The social justice warriors will want to know how a BAME 15 year old performs so they can look to have the paper reorganised to overcome the deep rooted bias in everything.



So you’re triggered by something that hasn’t happened?



I imagine the poster’s point is that it is happening in society generally.



It is not that far off beam is it? When the dummy runs off the SQE first stage written paper showed difference in outcomes between BAME candidates and white candidates, the diversity brigade were pushing to dumb down the paper which is why it is now multiple choice. The SRA sought to abandon the written paper because a written paper “may set an unnecessary barrier to qualification which disadvantages BAME candidates”. Imagine expecting prospective solicitors to be able to write answers to legal questions rather than ticking a multiple choice box. And imagine calling a requirement to complete written answers a “barrier to qualification”.



This nonsense is infuriating. I regularly deal with US associates of similar year qualification and they always make quips like “Solicitor? Is that what you call a senior paralegal or is it something closer to the sex-worker trade?” ….

I guess a bit of column A and column B if I’m being honest.

Anyways, this lowering of the entry standards is just going to make the transatlantic phone calls that much more cringe.



Not on topic, but the question shown in the tweet is a disgrace. A GDL student could answer it after a couple of weeks study, and certainly no revision.

Also, I don’t want to nit-pick but it’s actually wrong on a second count anyway. She could never invoke her Art 8 Convention right in a national court – only her Art 8 right under the HRA 1998.


Comments are closed.

Related Stories