The Bar Vocational Course is set to be renamed as the Bar Professional Training Course (BPTC) as stakes rise on access to the Bar.
Aptitude tests for students wishing to take the BPTC are one of the measures recommended in the long-awaited report, published today (18 July) by a 17-member working party chaired by Falcon Chambers tenant Derek Wood QC (pictured).
The working party stated that the proposed aptitude test would avoid any cuts in the numbers of students applying, but rather raise the admission standards.
The revised BPTC would include formally taught professional ethics, a greater weight given to written and oral advocacy and a new section on resolution of disputes out of court, as well as involving members of the public in training on conference skills.
In addition a Bar Standards Board-established board of examiners would oversee centrally set and marked exams, as well as the aptitude test.
Course providers will explain course fees as part of a re-accreditation process, and will also have to publish three-year figures on the number of students who have obtained pupillage.
The costs of the course for 2008-09 will range from £9,000-£14,495.
Wood said: “We have reached the very definite conclusion that admission requirements should be raised. It is not fair on the weaker students that they should waste their money on the course, nor is it fair on the more able that their progress should be hindered by the less able, which we believe it is.”
He added: “There are students who simply would not meet the standards required to obtain pupillage, however many pupillages were on offer. Their deficiencies range from a lack of conceptual understanding of the way in which the law functions, to an inability to speak fluently, and an inability to write well-structured English prose. These deficiencies are not limited to students whose first language is not English.”
He concluded: “By raising the admission standards, we suspect that the numbers on the course would fall.”
The number of BVC students has risen from 1,406 in 2003-04 to 1,837 in 2007-08. The number of pupillages offered by chambers fell from 497 in 2004-05 to 471 in 2006-07.
The report follows Lord Neuberger’s report on diversity and access to the Bar, which was unveiled earlier this year.
See Editor's Blog: Can BVC providers seriously damage your health?
If the idea of the Bar's powers that be is to the make the Kafkaesque convolutions around access to the Bar even more surreal, it's mission accomplished. And great name too.
They're just recommendations (and not good ones at that) - sounds like another fudge.
The BSB is to be applauded for recommending that providers must justify their obscene fees as part of the accreditation process.
I'm not sure it is the BSB's job to create broader parity between those undertaking the BVC (or 'BPTC' as it may soon be catchily entitled), but this may go some way, as part of a strong campaign to inform those considering the Bar that the odds are stacked against them.
Once again the 2:1 threshold requirement seems to have been fudged.
We'll see how many of the recommendations are adopted...
A 2:1 from the proverbial University of the Inner Ring Road in no way ensures that the candidate will have an ability to think, speak and write cogently. Conversely, those with a 2:2 or below may well have the requisite abilities. The problem is rather that the Bar now attracts (along with some undoubtedly gifted people) in general the least talented law graduates (both in terms of academic ability and advocacy skills) because they cannot become solicitors without a training contract but they can become barristers simply upon completion of the BVC.
I feel the proposals are a good idea; nonetheless I strongly believe that the issue of pupillage needs to be seriously addressed, and the recommended proposals I am sorry to say do not address the problem. The solution would be in my view to incorporate the pupillage aspect of qualifying as a barrister into the actual training course, and making it a mandatory placement. These sorts of placements are currently in use in other professions, such as nursing etc. Law providers could sign up agreements with the various chambers. The way the current system is designed is just pushing so many talented students away from the Bar, who end up incurring huge amounts of debt which they find hard to clear - speaking as a current so-called 'barrister' who is in the financial red, looking for pupillage. What is the point of the title, when it has no meaning attached without commencing pupillage? Chambers need to start recognising the financial hardships pupils endure, and let's be honest, how much is the pupillage award that chambers’ offer? It’s barely enough to live on.
During my BVC year I attended an advocacy weekend organised by Middle Temple. The progess I made in that single weekend was probably comparable to a term on the BVC. The barristers who took time out of their busy schedule to teach us offered rigorous training and I assume that the time counted towards their CPD as well. The Inns of Court could probably teach negotiation and conferencing in a week each and advocacy in three and still achieve the same standard as a year at Bar school. The rest of the skills could be taught by distance learning, allowing students to take employment to cover the costs. I for one am confident that most students would probably feel that they would get better value for money if they paid the £12,500 to their Inns for a five-week intensive course, and a distance learning course. Middle Temple already interview everyone that applies for a scholarship if they have a BVC place; presumably they could extend this (and have their costs covered by the fees) to interview everyone for a place on their 'BVC training' - that way they could be perfectly blunt if they thought someone didn't have the requisite skills to gain pupillage. A student in such a position could then be given an opportunity to put their case forward if they still wanted to do the course (I knew some students who didn't want to practise as barristers but wanted the advocacy training for other careers). It could then be their choice, but with a greater understanding of the risks involved.
... and i forgot to mention - since it would only require five weeks on site, it would also be less onerous for students outside of London to stay for five weeks in a row, then to pay to come dining 12 times along with the travel and accomodation costs associated with it.
Why not simply allow 'barristers' to practice once they have passed the BVC? The standard of graduate professed to leave BPP, for example, is that of the competent pupil. As someone with 20 years' work experience, I do not need to spend 6/12/18 months doing someone else's filing and photocopying! Let me do the job I have studied part-time for eight years to do! It is as easy as that, but the Bar is still obsessed with academics, and it is not an academic exercise but a trade, a vocation.
Related Articles
Latest Jobs
