The Kenya School of Law Students Governing Council (SGC) has protested to the Council of Legal Education (CLE) over the failure rate in the March 2023 exams and the disparity in the examination and course content.
In a letter to CLE, SGC Secretary-General Georgina Mongina said that students are in the dark about the resit schedule for the 2022 cohort and want an earlier resit date.
“It has come to our attention that the resit schedule for November 2023 is prejudicial to the affected cohort,” said Ms Mongina. “We note with great concern that a significant majority of candidates who sat for the conveyancing paper failed. In light of this, we kindly request that the candidates be given an opportunity to resit the paper at the earliest convenient time, preferably in July or August,” said Ms Mongina.
She noted that a reorganised resit schedule would enable them “rectify their performance and continue their progression without unnecessary delay”.
However, CLE acting chief executive Mary Mutugi said that it will not depart from the guidelines published on its website and that the candidates should have raised the issues before the examinations.
According to Ms Mutugi, the Council believes that vacating the planned schedule of exam activities, more so a resit, will cause confusion, interfere with the budgetary allocation of the year and “in totality” disrupt the examination preparation processes.
“We note that the council did not receive any concerns or queries regarding the guidelines it had shared with candidates sitting the March 2023 examination. The concerns were to be raised before the examination series began and not during or after the examination series,” Ms Mutugi said in her July 3 response to SGC.
Ms Mutugi noted that prior concerns from students would have ensured that the administration of the examination schedule “was transparent and would have allowed candidates enough time to make various preparations towards sitting for any given examination”.
She added that the council’s examination activities are carried out “in the interest of justice and fairness” and that it offers an opportunity for candidates who have passed the papers time to apply for a remark.
The students also stated that they have engaged their conveyancing lecturers who have expressed their concerns about the disparity between the questions set in the examination and the content covered in the course.
“The consequences of a failure in a single unit for the 2022 cohort may significantly impede the progression of their legal careers, causing undue delays and hindrances,” said Ms Mongina.
She noted that it is in the best interest of both the students and the legal profession to address the issue promptly and rectify the situation to ensure “a level playing field for all candidates”.
In response, CLE stated that it has continuously engaged KSL on course outlines and content, noting that when it sets examinations it refers to the course outline and content from KSL.
“To this end, the Council has not received any formal complaint from KSL regarding the examinations and particularly the Conveyancing Paper. The council is open to objective critiques and makes evidence-based adjustments when the need arises,” Ms Mutugi wrote.
She told the students that it would be unjustifiable and chaotic for CLE to engage on issues regarding the already administered examinations based on unfounded claims but “the concern has been noted and we shall follow up with KSL”.
