We use necessary cookies to make our site work. We would also like to set certain functional and advertising cookies to help us improve our site. We won't set optional cookies unless you enable them. Using this tool will set a cookie on your device to remember your preferences.

You can click "Accept all cookies" below to accept use of all cookies on this website, or select "Manage cookies preferences" to choose which cookies we can use. For more information about the cookies we use, see our Cookie Notice 

person typing on laptop
Dr Giles Proctor
10 September 2026

SQE1 exam changes: why candidates need more than six extra seconds

Dr Giles Proctor
Published on 10 September 2026
SQE preparation SQE assessments SQE1 preparation College statements

Six extra seconds won't solve SQE1's biggest problem, says The College of Legal Practice

College welcomes SRA reforms but calls for candidates to be allowed to sit and pay for FLK1 and FLK2 separately at their first attempt

The College of Legal Practice has welcomed today's announcement from the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) that the SQE1 assessment will be reduced from 360 to 340 questions and that candidates will be given greater clarity about which practice areas will be assessed in each examination session.

However, the College believes the reforms represent an improvement rather than the transformational change many aspiring solicitors need.

From January 2027, candidates will answer 170 questions in each Functioning Legal Knowledge (FLK) assessment rather than 180, reducing the overall number of SQE1 questions from 360 to 340. While the duration of the assessment remains unchanged, candidates will gain an additional six seconds per question, increasing the average time available from approximately 102 seconds to 108 seconds per question. The SRA has also confirmed which practice areas will be examined in each session, giving candidates greater certainty when preparing for the assessment.

The College agrees these changes are positive and reflect growing recognition of concerns expressed by students, employers and training providers. However, it believes the reforms do not address what many candidates identify as the most significant challenge of SQE1: the need to learn, retain and revise an enormous volume of legal knowledge across both FLK1 and FLK2 before sitting two demanding assessments within days of each other.

The College is therefore calling on the SRA to take the next, more meaningful step and allow candidates to choose whether to sit FLK1, FLK2 or both assessments at their first attempt.

More than 80% of The College of Legal Practice's SQE students self-fund their studies and examinations, while around 70% study part-time. More than 100 College students are apprentices who balance legal study alongside employment. For these students, the challenge is not simply how quickly they answer individual questions on assessment day. The real challenge is finding sufficient time to prepare for two substantial assessments simultaneously whilst continuing to work, support families and meet financial commitments.

The College's research into student experiences of SQE1 suggests concerns extend far beyond the number of questions in the assessment.

More than 85% of respondents described SQE1 as "challenging" or "very challenging", regardless of whether they passed or failed. Around 60% felt the time available was "short" or "very short". Students reported struggling to complete or review questions, experiencing significant mental fatigue and finding the overall examination process exhausting.

The findings suggest that the pressure candidates experience is not simply a function of question timing. It is a consequence of the intensity of preparing simultaneously for two high-stakes assessments covering a broad syllabus.

Dr Giles Proctor, CEO of The College of Legal Practice, said:

"We welcome the fact that the SRA has listened to candidates. The changes announced today represent an acknowledgement that the current SQE1 experience places significant pressure on aspiring solicitors.

However, reducing 20 questions across a 360-question assessment should not be mistaken for a solution to the broader challenges students continue to face.

Candidates are still expected to prepare for an immense syllabus, retain that knowledge and sit two demanding assessments within the same assessment window. For many students, particularly those studying alongside full-time employment, caring responsibilities or financial pressures, that remains the real challenge.

The difference between 102 seconds and 108 seconds per question is welcome. The difference between preparing for one FLK assessment and preparing for two simultaneously would be transformational."

The College believes allowing candidates to split FLK1 and FLK2 at their first sitting would represent a significant step forward for accessibility, student wellbeing and social mobility without lowering the standard expected of newly qualified solicitors.

Such a reform would:

  • Allow candidates to focus on a smaller and more manageable body of knowledge at any one time.
  • Give working students greater flexibility to balance study with professional and personal commitments.
  • Reduce the risk of burnout and assessment fatigue.
  • Enable candidates to spread qualification costs across a longer period.
  • Create greater flexibility without compromising standards.

Importantly, it would not make qualification easier. It would make access to qualification fairer.

The College's student research also highlights the wider pressures faced by aspiring solicitors, including the cost of assessment fees, resit fees, travel and accommodation, together with the financial consequences of unsuccessful attempts. Students frequently reported feeling exhausted, overwhelmed and concerned about the overall affordability of the route to qualification.

Dr Giles Proctor added:

"The profession does not need less rigorous assessments. It needs assessments that allow capable future solicitors to demonstrate their knowledge without unnecessary barriers.

We know from our students' experiences that success in the SQE is not simply about academic capability. Time, financial resources and personal circumstances all play a role.

Many highly capable candidates working in paralegal and legal support roles have significantly less study time available than candidates who can study full-time or whose qualification journey is fully sponsored. The assessment structure should not place those candidates at an avoidable disadvantage.

Today's announcement is evidence that the SRA is prepared to listen and evolve. We welcome that wholeheartedly.

But if the objective is to improve the SQE experience in a meaningful way, we believe the conversation now needs to move beyond question numbers and towards genuine flexibility in how candidates are assessed."

For the College, the issue is not whether standards should remain high. They should. The issue is whether the route to qualification unnecessarily concentrates risk, cost and pressure into one assessment window when more flexible alternatives are available.

Giving candidates the choice to sit FLK1 or FLK2 separately could be transformative.