It seems unlikely that those seeking to qualify and practise as barristers, and indeed the profession itself, have ever confronted a set of more serious, complex, and in some cases contradictory challenges than they do at present.

Over recent years, BVC enrolments have been growing steadily (driven in part by demand from those from the very ethnic and socio-economic backgrounds, that Bar must encourage into the profession if its laudable policies on access and diversity are to succeed).

However, pupillages have been declining, and markedly so. Initially this may initially have been caused by the introduction of mandatory funding for pupils. However, in recent years it has almost certainly been attributable to some of the fundamental and long term uncertainties which face the “independent” Bar. These include, most notably: the post-Carter changes to Legal Aid; the increasing number of solicitors with higher rights (and the likelihood that the SRA will make it even easier to acquire them); and, as a result of the Legal Services Act, the introduction from 2009 of Legal Disciplinary Partnerships, and from 2012 of Alternative Business Structures.

Aspirant barristers have, of course, always risked not being able to obtain pupillages, then tenancies, and then sufficient work to establish viable practices. However they now face a double, perhaps even a triple whammy: the high costs of the BVC (inevitable granted the levels of staffing and other resources required to deliver a programme of this kind, and to the standards rightly demanded by the BSB) on top of the debts they are already carrying from their undergraduate degrees; a marked and long-term decline in pupillages; and an ever-narrowing base for traditional, independent practice.

It is therefore incumbent on all those responsible for the qualification-process, and especially of course the Bar Council, the Bar Standards Board (BSB) and the BVC providers, to do all that they can to ensure that those who opt for a career at the Bar do so on the basis of informed consent.

For that reason alone, the BSB’s decision to publish a table1 which compares, for each provider, the number of students who started pupillages in 2005 and 2006 with the number who completed the BVC in the same years, was welcome, timely and generated a great deal of interest, witness the front-page coverage it received in the Lawyer.

However, research conducted by the College of Law’s Careers Service, suggests that the BSB’s figures need to be treated with some caution and, if they are really to be of much value to those considering the BVC, need much further refinement.

Firstly, they do not show when the students who started the pupillages had taken their BVCs. Therefore, unlike the annual “First Destinations” surveys which many Careers Services (including the College’s) carry out, they can provide only a very rough guide to the “pupillage-acquisition rate” (PAR) of a given cohort of each provider’s BVC students.

In particular, the BSB’s figures will tend to understate the PAR of any provider, such as the College, whose BVC numbers had increased appreciably over the relevant period; and, for the same reasons, overstate that of any provider whose BVC numbers had decreased.

Secondly, and much more importantly, a simple “inter-provider” comparison such as that presented in Routes to Pupillage, fails to identify the factors which really determine whether or not BVC students obtain pupillages.

To investigate these, the College conducted research in 2007, which:

• Matched the information supplied by ex-BVC students who responded to its 2006 and 2007 “First Destinations” survey, with that held on its records system about the respondents’ “pre-BVC” academic record, age, and, where available, ethnic background;

• Organised the respondents into bands based on a combination of their degree class and A level scores (or equivalent). So for example, some bands combined high degrees with high A levels; others high degrees and lower A levels; others lower degrees and high A levels; and one lower degrees and lower A levels”;

• Discovered the PAR for each band; and finally

• Discovered how far the PAR rate for each band varied when the respondent’s age and ethnic background were factored in.

Though perhaps predictable, the results were nevertheless striking and potentially of some value both to aspirant barristers and to those who are carrying out the current BVC review, and for that reason have been shared with the BSB.

The key headlines were as follows:

• The best PAR is for those with both top degrees and high A level scores, and if anything A level counts more than degree. So for example:

  • The vast majority of those with a 1st and 340+ UCAS points from A level had obtained pupillages, whereas the PAR was significantly lower for those with a 1st but less impressive A level scores.

  • The PAR for respondents with a 2(1) and less than 340 points was only slightly higher than the PAR for those a 2(2) and 340+ points.

• In each band the PAR for Russell group graduates was significantly higher than that for graduates of other universities. Indeed, almost certainly reflecting the weight which pupillage committees attach to A level scores, Russell Group 2(2)s fared far better than other universities’ 2(1)s.

• Age seemed to make little difference

• The picture on ethnic background is some what contradictory.

  • On the one hand, minority ethnic students in the top bands had an even higher PAR than their white counterparts

  • On the other, a much higher proportion of all minority ethnic students than of all white students are in the “lowest” PAR bands (eg have relatively weaker degrees and/or A level scores).
    

For those considering a career at the Bar, the messages from these findings are pretty clear and will, almost certainly hold true, no matter which provider they select for their BVC:

• Think once, even if you have (or can confidently predict) a 1st class degree and left school with at least 340 UCAS points. Though you’ll almost certainly obtain a pupillage and to practise as a successful independent barrister will prove a hugely challenging and attractive way of making a living, yet prospects for the Bar have never been more uncertain and you’re very well qualified for a wide range of other jobs.

• Think twice if your degree is lower than 2(1) or you left school with less than 340 UCAS points.

• Think twice again (and then some) if your degree is lower than 2(1) and you left school with less than 340 UCAS points

• Think one time less if, even though your degree is lower then 2(1), you obtained it from a Russell Group university.
  

For those in the BSB and the Bar Council who are currently reviewing the BVC, and entry to the Bar more generally in the wake of the Neuberger Report, the messages are, perhaps, more complex. So too are they for the BVC providers who are nervously awaiting the outcome of this review.

This is most especially the case in relation to the debate over whether the raise the entry requirement to a 2(1) degree.

• At first sight the findings seem to lend strong support to those who have been urging the BSB to do just that.

• However, because only a very small proportion of “2(2)s” – almost all of them with 340+ UCAS points and Russell Group degrees – now obtain pupillages anyway, it would have little impact on the overall numbers or the academic standards of those entering the profession.

• It would certainly reduce the number of BVC students, and by the same token the number of unwelcome applications which pupillage committees have to wade through each year.

• However if the intention is to protect those with little or no prospect of pupillage from embarking on the BVC with all its associated costs and risks, then the College’s findings suggest that any change in entry requirements ought to be expressed more in terms of UCAS points than of degree classes.

• In either case, for the reasons given above, it would have a disproportionate impact on the number of BVC students from minority ethnic backgrounds.

• The overall impact upon BVC providers will, of course, depend on a wide range of factors, including, most importantly the academic profile of their BVC students.
  

So, whatever the BSB eventually decides about entry standards, the content of the BVC, or the rules which will govern barristers in independent practice, LDPs, or ABSs, a career at the bar is not for the risk averse, not for those with low self-esteem, and not for those who see a proper work-life balance as requiring a 9-to-5 day and a 5-day working week. No change there then.

Richard de Friend, Director, College of Law, London, Bloomsbury