Law Soc calls for LPC entrance test
Related images
The Law Society is pushing for major changes to the entry requirements for the Legal Practice Course (LPC) to make the application process fairer and reduce the numbers of candidates taking the course.
The society said that it is investigating the viability of introducing an aptitude test, similar to the one being piloted by the Bar Standard Board (BSB) for entry onto the Bar Vocational Training Course (BPTC).
“We’re at an early stage of a scoping project to assess whether or not the implementation of an aptitude test in a similar vein to that currently being piloted by the BSB to address challenges faced by the Bar, would provide any parallel benefits to the solicitors profession,” explained Law Society chief executive Des Hudson, who first initiated the proposals.
The proposed test, which could only be implemented by Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), has won backing from students who are angry at law schools for taking on candidates who are not “academically bright enough” to train as a solicitor.
A spokesperson for the SRA said in a statement: “The SRA would consider any recommendations to review the current admission criteria for the LPC made by the Law Society but ultimately it is within the SRA’s remit to decide on the standards for the profession, through consultation with all stakeholders.
Law student Grace Salmern, who is studying at Queen Mary University of London, said: “I’ve always backed the test being introduced by the BSB because in my opinion there are too many people wasting their money, on courses like the LPC, who have no real chance of gaining a training contract.”
A report on whether the LPC aptitude test should get the go-ahead is expected to be conducted by the Law Society by the end of the year..
The news comes after the BSB extended its pilot aptitude test for entry onto the BPTC in a bid to ensure the exam was fair for all applicants’ (see story).
The BSB has been continually toying with the idea of introducing an aptitude test for aspiring barristers wanting to secure a place on the BPTC since the publication of the Wood Report in 2008.
But following criticism from the Office of Fair Trading, which hailed such an exam “anticompetitive”, the BSB pushed back its plans to launch a test for 12 months.
Now following a pilot of the test in 2009, which 182 candidates took part in, the aptitude test will be made compulsory from September 2012.
View results 10 per page | 20 per page
Readers' comments (15)
Mr | 16-Sep-2010 12:48 pm
The problem, and the reason why many people do not get training contracts is NOT because of their ability. There are plenty of people with ABA and a strong 2:1 at Law schools, who still cannot get a training contract and there are also many bright candidates who just do not understand the application process- how to complete a solid application, interview technique, where to look for work experience opportunities and even some students who lack the positive and ambitious attitutde needed to secure a training contract.
Restricting the LPC so that only those 'bright' enough are eligible for a study place will NOT remove the problem of too many applicants v training contracts available.
The pass rate of the LPC is pretty high, meaning that most people who take it actually pass anyway!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 16-Sep-2010 12:51 pm
LPC providers should interview candidates who are applying to study the LPC.
In the interview they should discuss the applicants aims, ambitions, and understanding of the whole solicitor process. The LPC providers should then inform the student of the competitive odds and provide a realistic picture of the current recruitment market. The applicant can then decide whether they wish to pursue with their £10k
Too many students fall into the trap of taking the LPC, just because they did a law degree and think they might like to be a lawyer. Or because they think you can apply, and get a training contract just like that once you have finished the LPC.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
IHateBPP | 16-Sep-2010 12:53 pm
A very interesting idea but not one that the LPC providers will consider unless legally compelled to as it's in their interests to keep filling seats and taking fees.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Spucchenzio Dogga | 16-Sep-2010 3:40 pm
A far better idea would be to regulate admission to the LPC so that everyone who gets onto it will get a TC.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 16-Sep-2010 3:46 pm
How about being really radical and, say, ban people commencing the LPC until they had secured a training contract? That, or scrap the whole thing and replace it with firm-centred legal education?
Frankly, the whole thing looks like a knee-jerk reaction against the fact that the Law Society has abysmally failed to regulate the market for legal education.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 16-Sep-2010 4:36 pm
As a solicitor I am ashamed of the SRA. This is just another way to control the legal profession and keep the pie for certain people. Not surprising at all.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Nigel Savage | 16-Sep-2010 6:21 pm
This is another example of a piecemeal approach to legal education. What we really need is a wholesale review. Such a test is going to make it increasing difficult for students from poorer backgrounds to break into the legal profession. I think it's appalling - who is running legal education the Law Society or the SRA?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
L M | 16-Sep-2010 7:03 pm
It would be ridiculous to restrict the LPC to those who have secured training contracts.
Many students secure training contracts during and shortly after their LPC and lots of smaller firms and in-house departments recruit on an ad hoc basis, favouring students who have already completed their LPC.
I think that everyone should be able to take the LPC, but should do so having a full and a clear view of their chances of securing a training contract. This would be best done via the suggestion above, that the LPC providers should interview applicants.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
A City lawyer | 16-Sep-2010 9:35 pm
Just require all applicants to have a 2:1 from a Russel Group university, four or more A levels at A grade or higher from public, private or grammar school and a southern accent.
Sorted.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 17-Sep-2010 11:27 am
Speaking as one of those who has completed the LPC and had no luck yet securing a training contract, in retrospect I agree with the poster above who says LPC providers should discuss in depth with LPC applicants the nature of the legal recruitment market and the hurdles to be overcome. Admittedly the recession hit after I had already committed myself to the LPC, but even so such a frank discussion would have been extremely helpful. The schools are never going to do that, though. They need the fees.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment