Neurodivergent Candidates in the SQE: What the Data Actually Shows

If you are neurodivergent and preparing for the SQE, the question you probably want answered is a simple one: does it make passing harder?

The SRA, through Kaplan Assessments, published a detailed report in January 2026 covering the performance of neurodivergent candidates across FLK1, FLK2, and SQE2 for the 2024-25 assessment cycle. The data covers around 26,700 candidate assessments. The headline finding is not what many candidates fear.

Who counts as neurodivergent in this data?

The report focuses on candidates who received a reasonable adjustment for a disclosed neurodivergent condition. The conditions covered are:

• Autism
• ADHD
• Dyspraxia
• Dyscalculia
• Dyslexia (including those with multiple conditions)

Neurodivergent candidates with a reasonable adjustment plan made up 5.6% of the total candidate assessments in the dataset. Within that group, 57% of all reasonable adjustment plans were for neurodivergent conditions specifically.

The proportions by assessment were:

The slightly higher proportion in SQE2 (7.2% vs around 5% for FLK papers) may reflect the greater number of candidates who seek adjustments for written and oral assessments compared to multiple-choice papers.

The pass rate data

This is the part that matters most for candidates preparing now.

Neurodivergent candidates with reasonable adjustments in place outperformed non-neurodivergent candidates on all three assessments. The mean score differences followed the same pattern: 314 vs 307 for FLK1, 312 vs 303 for FLK2, and 344 vs 336 for SQE2.

How to read this carefully

The report is appropriately cautious about overinterpreting these findings. Neurodivergent candidates with reasonable adjustments are not a fully representative cross-section of the overall cohort - they may differ on other characteristics that influence performance, such as educational background, preparation time, and prior legal experience.

What the data does rule out, with reasonable confidence, is systematic disadvantage. If neurodivergent candidates were being materially penalised by the assessment format, you would expect to see lower pass rates and lower mean scores. The opposite is observed.

The report's conclusion is measured but worth quoting: the findings "offer reassurance that candidates with neurodivergent conditions are not disadvantaged in the SQE assessments."

What reasonable adjustments are available?

The SRA offers a range of adjustments for candidates with disclosed conditions. Common adjustments include:

• Additional time (typically 25% extra)
• Rest breaks
• Use of a word processor
• Enlarged font or coloured overlays
• A separate room
• A reader or scribe in certain circumstances

Applications for reasonable adjustments need to be submitted before the registration deadline for each sitting. The SRA requires supporting evidence, typically from a qualified assessor or medical professional. If you have a diagnosis but have not yet applied for adjustments, it is worth doing so before your next sitting - the process takes time and late applications are not always accepted.

Practical implications for neurodivergent candidates

On SQE1 (FLK1 and FLK2)

The multiple-choice format of SQE1 has particular characteristics that affect neurodivergent candidates differently. The volume of questions (180 per paper) and the time pressure are significant. Candidates with processing differences often find that their accuracy improves markedly under timed practice once the format becomes familiar.

Active recall techniques (spaced repetition, flashcard systems) tend to suit neurodivergent learners well because they break revision into discrete, testable chunks rather than relying on sustained passive reading. Tools like Quizlet, where existing SQE1 decks are available, can be more effective than extended note-reviewing sessions.

The error log approach - tracking every wrong answer and the reason for it - works particularly well for candidates who struggle with sustained attention during passive revision. It creates a structured, outcome-focused review process.

On SQE2

SQE2's format is arguably more accommodating of neurodivergent cognitive styles than SQE1 in some respects. Each assessment is a discrete task with a clear brief, which reduces the sustained-attention demand compared to 180 consecutive MCQs.

The key structural insight for SQE2 is that the SRA marks legal knowledge and skills separately. Even if your FLK recall under pressure is not perfect, strong structure, clear professional language, and a client-focused approach can still produce high skills marks. This is particularly relevant for candidates who find retrieval under pressure more difficult than retrieval in low-stakes conditions.

Writing your structure template at the start of each written assessment - Legal Research, Legal Writing, Case and Matter Analysis, Advice Note, and Legal Drafting - anchors the task before you begin drafting. For oral assessments (Interviewing and Advocacy), having a loose framework rather than a rigid script tends to produce better outcomes, since it allows you to respond to the scenario rather than follow a predetermined path.

The Pearson VUE platform used for SQE2 written assessments is worth familiarising yourself with before the day. For Legal Research in particular, navigating the research materials under time pressure in an unfamiliar interface creates an additional cognitive load that practice removes.

If you have not applied for adjustments yet

If you have a diagnosis that could entitle you to reasonable adjustments and have not yet applied, prioritise this before your next registration deadline. The data shows that candidates with adjustments in place perform well - partly because the adjustments level the playing field, and partly because the process of applying and preparing with adjustments often prompts more structured revision habits.

The SRA's guidance on reasonable adjustments is on its website. The key requirements are a recent assessment report and a completed application form submitted by the deadline. If your diagnosis is older, a reassessment may be needed.

The broader picture

SQE1 and SQE2 are hard exams. The first-attempt pass rates are 60.8% for FLK1 and 57.8% for FLK2 - so roughly 4 in 10 first-attempt candidates do not pass each paper. SQE2 is more forgiving at 81.6% first-attempt, but it is still a high-stakes professional assessment.

What the January 2026 data adds to this picture is that neurodivergency, with appropriate support in place, is not a disadvantage in the SQE. If anything, the data suggests the opposite. That is not a reason to be complacent about preparation, but it is a reason to focus on what actually drives performance: structured practice, active recall, output-based revision, and understanding the marking criteria - rather than worrying that the format itself is working against you.