The Legal Services Board (LSB) has given the green light to the introduction of the controversial Bar Course Aptitude Test (BCAT) for aspiring barristers.
The new test will be compulsory for entry to the Bar Professional Training Course (BPTC) and requires prospective students to achieve a minimum required standard as specified by the Bar Standards Board (BSB).
In the decision notice published today, LSB chief executive Chris Kenny said that the impact of the test on issues such as diversity and on the number or competence of authorised persons is “impossible to verify in absolute terms at this stage by the very fact that the test has not operated in practice, other than in limited pilot circumstances”.
He added: “This uncertainty has a material impact on our ability to reach definitive conclusions, both about the impact in relation to individual regulatory objectives and better regulation duties, and our assessment of the broader impact on the overall public interest.”
The news follows the Law Society warning against the viability of the BCAT in March 2012, where it questioned its implementation prior to the conclusion of the Legal Education and Training Review (LETR) (6 March 2012).
The Society’s concerns came after the BSB standards-monitoring report 2010-11 published in January threw doubt on whether the BCAT was fit for purpose (10 January 2012).
Due to the level of “uncertainty”, the LSB has asked the BSB to commit to undertake a five-year data gathering, analysis and evaluation period. Following the conclusion of this, a formal review will take place with a decision to “continue, revise, suspend or cease the BCAT”.
In a statement a BSB spokesperson said: “The BSB welcomes the LSB’s approval of the Bar Course Aptitude Test, being the outcome of several years work on this project. We look forward to working with a range of stakeholders over a five year period to properly evaluate the impact of the test in support of the regulatory objectives, particularly in terms of seeking to encourage an independent, strong, diverse and effective legal profession.”
The BCAT will be in place from September 2012 ahead of applications opening for the 2013 BPTC. The application fee for the test will be about £67.
Readers' comments (19)
Pevil Superevil | 25-Jul-2012 2:21 pm
When does it start then? The 2013 intake?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 25-Jul-2012 3:21 pm
There are far too many people trying to enter both main branches of the legal profession.
Anything that can weed out weak candidates at an early stage, and prevent them from spending tens of thousands of pounds studying for a profession they will never join, should be welcomed.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 25-Jul-2012 4:15 pm
Such an unfair, selfish and self-centred comment from an individual who thinks that candidates aspiring to join the profession can simply be 'weed out' to preserve the status quo.
Is this the way you will inspire/encourage your children (if you have any) to strive to excel?
Absolute let down.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
anon | 25-Jul-2012 4:36 pm
I agree that to "weed out" is a strong expression - but here we are talking about academic tests. I don't see how this is in favour of preserving the status quo?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
RT | 25-Jul-2012 4:59 pm
Perhaps, rather than aptitude tests wannabe barristers should take a series of rigorous personality tests, such as spending an hour working as part of a team without storming off and insisting they know best, or perhaps understanding they don't need to be pompous tw*ts all the time? Or perhaps even being trained to treat clerks and chambers directors as fellow human beings, and maybe even their clients too? Who knows, the Bar might even become a more bearable place if we can 'weed out' some of the awful silver spoon loonies before they get to pupillage.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Lord Francis | 25-Jul-2012 5:11 pm
Of course you need to weed out the ones who simply don't have what it takes. This "diversity" rubbish is just positive discrimination - a completely arbitrary and illogical concept. The logic behind diversity targets etc is "we want more ethnic minorities so we don't look like a bunch of racists". It's still discrimination!
Far too many people purchase the BPTC and LPC, driving prices up for the ones who actually have what it takes - and in some cases driving them out of a profession that they would love and in which they would do well.
Academic tests that reflect the rigour of the BPTC and life at the Bar would stop those who think "I'll give it a go, sounds pretty good to be able to say I'm an aspiring barrister, and daddy will pay the fees so it doesn't matter if I change my mind".
Of course, if people fail the entry test, they can look at what they need to improve, improve it, and come back and do it again.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 25-Jul-2012 6:51 pm
The bar is not for everyone, most law schools insist on students taking the LSAT, this is no different.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
positive move | 26-Jul-2012 10:04 am
I see this as a positive and will go some way to levelling the playing field. Not sure why some posters are still complaining about diversity etc, when this should help on that front – if you are bright enough, no matter what you colour, creed or religion, you stand as good a chance as the next man. Isn’t it just like the good old days of the 11+ and the rise of social mobility. Of course, there will be no pleasing some folk, but this is certainly a step in the right direction. Only the most committed need apply.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
RT Fahty | 26-Jul-2012 10:26 am
RT, I'm sorry you didn't get pupillage anywhere but on reflection that was probably a good thing. Perhaps if you'd been weeded out at an earlier stage your hopeless application wouldn't have been the unwelcome distraction it no doubt was.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Ben.M | 26-Jul-2012 11:15 am
So those taking the GDL path will have a maximum of a couple of months exposure to the law prior to taking the exam while those on full undergraduate degrees will have approximately two and a half years to prepare. Have I missed something, or this fundamentally unfair?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment