Betwixt and between: what has happened in England and Wales since the LETR?

The publication of the Legal Education and Training Review in 2013 caused much discussion about what its proposals will mean for the lawyers of the future. Here, Jane Ching of Nottingham Law School, gives her view on its impact.

Before the Legal Education and Training Review (LETR) research phase report was published in June 2013, I often used to ask students, and university applicants, how many legal professions there were in England and Wales.  I would always get "two" and sometimes up to "five" - and some surprise when my response was "at least eight".  And that doesn't count the accountants regulated to provide legal services under the Legal Services Act 2007.  One aspect of the LETR research phase - with a remit to cover all eight regulated legal professions, as well as paralegals and the unregulated sector - might perhaps be to highlight how much variety there already is in "law jobs".

The LETR research phase report was, of course, only the first phase in an ongoing process for legal services education in England and Wales. Some of the regulators' earlier projects, such as the work-based learning pilot for intending solicitors, were put on hold pending its results; other projects - such as Chartered Institute of Legal Executives' (CILEx) changes to its qualification and CPD regimes - continued. Others, like the development of apprenticeships in England and Wales, progressed in parallel.

So some of the changes now being discussed might be (as one of the authors, I would like to think) because of the LETR report; while others were going to happen anyway. CILEx had, for example, planned to seek approval to be able to practise independently of solicitors - to set up "legal executive firms" - for some years, and is now awaiting parliamentary approval for the change. Other developments - such as the Association of Costs Lawyers suspending new entrants to their qualification courses until September 2014 - have been driven by external factors; in that case, by substantial changes to the civil costs regime.

Here, I am going to focus on two projects of particular relevance to new entrants.

Competence frameworks

A competence framework is a set of (measureable) statements about what a person should be able to do (or to know, or to be) at a particular stage. Although the context is the workplace, they are very similar to the learning outcomes that are used in classroom education. So degrees, LPCs, BPTCs and other qualifications use learning outcomes to define what students should expect to learn and to what level. Such frameworks already exist in parts of our legal services sector: for individual firms or organisations (such as the CPS); for pupillage and to some extent for the training contract; for the Qualified Lawyer Transfer Scheme and for paralegals working with the Institute of Paralegals.  Legal executives who wish to obtain chartered status now have to demonstrate their competence by submitting a portfolio measured against the CILEx Competency Framework.

Following the LETR research report, however, both the SRA and BSB are working on the drafting of competence statements for the point of qualification. The SRA is also consulting on draft Training Regulations 2014 requiring that: "If you qualify as a solicitor, you: will have achieved and demonstrated a standard of competence appropriate to the work you are carrying out; [and] will have had such competence objectively assessed where appropriate …". 

Non-degree routes

Several of the legal professions pride themselves on their accessibility outside the university system.  Although law degrees (or GDLs) are more common among solicitors and barristers, it is still possible to enter either of those professions without a degree (for solicitors from the CILEx route and for barristers by way of discretion). Many of the "non-degree" professions nevertheless have fast-track routes to qualification for graduates, and in some cases for LPC or BPTC graduates. The CILEx Graduate Member status is probably the best-known.

In the age of increasing student debt, many people will be thinking seriously about whether to go to university: at 18 rather than later, or at all. So, although this is only at consultation stage, the SRA is investigating whether entrants could be exempted from the degree or the LPC (or both) by demonstrating achievement of the relevant standards by "equivalent means". The same consultation paper suggests replacing the training contract with "recognised training" in an authorised training provider, normally of not less than two years (if full-time).

An alternative route, at present into CILEx qualifications, is provided by the recently established legal services apprenticeships schemes in England and Wales. At present there are three levels of apprenticeship: level 2 (equivalent to GCSE/AS level), level 3 (equivalent to A level) and level 4 (equivalent to first year LLB). Level 7 apprenticeships (equivalent to LPC/BPTC/masters level) are under discussion.

Finally

Some of the choices entrants have always had remain the same, or may be widening.  Others are still under detailed investigation. Monitoring these developments, and the new opportunities that might emerge, will be as challenging as keeping up with the law itself for the next few years. Bookmark the websites of the regulators and professional bodies in whom you are interested and check them periodically. Participate in consultations and events if you can. Think widely about all possible kinds of legal work rather than narrowing your focus to only two (or three or five) of the regulated legal professions.

It is possible, entirely possible, to have a very satisfying career doing legal work (eg, advising on law, negotiating and drafting contracts) under a different professional title, or no distinct professional title at all. What's far less satisfying is finding yourself part-way through a qualification route, without an obvious means of moving on. We may be starting to see qualification mechanisms emerging that might recognise a wider range of forms of legal experience, and be more flexible, than has traditionally been the case.

Jane Ching is professor of professional legal education at Nottingham Law School.