work based learning middlesex report

8/2/2019 Work Based Learning Middlesex Report

1/191

SRAFinalReport

InstituteforWorkBasedLearning,MiddlesexUniversity2010 1

SRA Final Report

EvaluationWork Based Learning Scheme Pilot

Cohort 12008 - 2010

ReportDateDecember2010


2/191

SRAFinalReport

2 InstituteforWorkBasedLearning,MiddlesexUniversity2010

Reportcompiledby InstituteforWorkBasedLearning

MiddlesexUniversity,2010

Headofproject ProfessorCarolCostley IWBL

Leadresearchers DrKateMaguire IWBL

SusanScottHunt SolicitorandPrincipalLecturerMULawSchool

Legalresearchsupport DuncanMcLuckieMAHonsTraineeSolicitor

Literatureresearchsupport DrNatashaShukla

Criticaladvisers ProfessorJohnStephensonconsultanttoIWBL

DrStan

Lester

consultant

to

IWBL

MaureenSpencerPrincipalLecturerinLawandHeadofthe

BusinessSchoolLearningDevelopmentForum

Criticalreaders ProfessorJohnStephenson

MaureenSpencer

Editorialtechnicalsupport DrNicoPizzolato


3/191

SRAFinalReport


Theoverall

objective

of

the

Work

Based

Learning(WBL)

project

is

to

develop

an

approach

to

ensuringthecompetenceofqualifyingsolicitorsthatisqualityassured,consistentand

reliable.

Source:SRAWebsite


4/191

SRAFinalReport


ContentsGlossaryofTermsasusedinthisReport............................................................7

1. ExecutiveSummary.....................................................................................10

2. EvaluationMethodology....................................................................... 19

3. EvaluationConclusions...............................................................................25

GGeenneerraallccoonncclluussiioonnss................................................................................... 26

QQuuaalliittyyaassssuurraannccee....................................................................................... 28

LLeeaarrnniinnggoouuttccoommeess.................................................................................... 29

PPoorrttffoolliioo.......................................................................................................31

AAsssseessssmmeenntt................................................................................................ 33

BBaarrrriieerrssttooeennttrryy......................................................................................... 36

PPrrooffeessssiioonnaalliissssuueess...................................................................................... 394. KeyRecommendations........................................................................... 41

QQuuaalliittyyaassssuurraannccee....................................................................................... 42

LLeeaarrnniinnggoouuttccoommeess.................................................................................... 44

PPoorrttffoolliioo..................................................................................................... 44

LLeeaarrnniinngg

oouuttccoommeess

aanndd

aasssseessssmmeenntt

..........................................................

45

PPrrooffeessssiioonnaalliissssuueess..................................................................................... 47

BBaarrrriieerrssttooeennttrryy......................................................................................... 49

Annexe1.i...................................................................................................... 49

1. Consultation,Design&Implementation(CDI)..............................................50

2. SRAmonitoringvisitsandtheMUevaluationexercise..........................50

3. Handbookandcommunicationmanagement........................................51

4.

Fulfillingaims

and

objectives

summary

..................................................

53

5. Learningoutcomes..................................................................................55

6. Portfolio...................................................................................................56

7. Timecostsfororganisationsandcandidates..........................................66

8. Issueswhicharoseregardingthefutureofthescheme.........................66

Annexe1.ii..................................................................................................... 68

stream2:

paralegals

.......................................................................................

68

1. Issuesarising................................................................................. 68


5/191

SRAFinalReport


2. Potentialtoaddresssocio/educationalbarriers........................... 69

3. NoevidencethattheWBLpilotdirectlyaddressedanyother.............

barrierstoentry..............................................................................71

4. Feasibleroutetoqualificationforstream2typecandidates....... 72

5.

Use

of

external

assessment

organisations

....................................

73

Annexe1.iii.................................................................................................... 75

Narrativereporting........................................................................................ 75

1. Sufficiency......................................................................................... 75

1.1 Outcomesandissuesoflevel.................................................... 75

1.2 Skillsrequiredasasolicitor....................................................... 77

1.3 WBLportfolioandemployability............................................... 78

1.4

Key

Criteria

of

WBL

learning

outcomes

and

employability

.......

78

22.. SSRRAArroolleeiinnrreellaattiioonnttoovvooccaattiioonnaall((ttrraaiinniinngg))aannddssttaannddaarrddiissaattiioonn....... 79

33.. VVooccaattiioonnaall((ttrraaiinniinngg))ssttaaggeeiinnccoohheerreennttttrraaiinniinnggffrraammeewwoorrkk.................81

4. FutureDevelopmentandImpactonVocationalStageTraining.......... 85

Annexe2 Resourcepapers........................................................................... 88

1. Theworkbasedphaseofinitialprofessionaldevelopment:..................

practicesandtrendsamongUKprofessions..................................... 89

2.

Challengesto

achieving

professionalism.

.........................................

94

3. Theroleofportfoliosinthedevelopmentofpersonalcapability.....100

4. TheRoleofaccreditationofpreviouslearning............................... 105

5. Learningoutcomes.......................................................................... 108

6. Masters(Level7)andDoctorate(Level8)AssessmentDescriptors1137. Theuseofreflection....................................................................... 115

8. Assessment..................................................................................... 122

9.

Ethicsand

dilemmas

.......................................................................

123

1100.. WWhhaattiissccooaacchhiinngg??........................................................................... 125

11. Equalityinthelegalprofession....................................................... 127

Appendix1BackgroundtotheWBLPilotScheme........................................ 149

Appendix2EvaluationandScopeofActivities.............................................. 160

Appendix3SRAScopingDocument2008......................................................162Appendix4MUScopingDocument2009..................................................... 171


6/191

SRAFinalReport


Appendix5Datagatheringandanalysisdetail.............................................177


7/191

SRAFinalReport


GlossaryofTermsasusedinthisReportSRA SolicitorsRegulationAuthority

WBL WorkBasedLearningwhichreferstothepilotscheme

wbl workbasedlearninginitsgenericform

IWBL InstituteforWorkBasedLearning,MU

MU MiddlesexUniversity

Context thelegalprofession

Setups thevariouslegalenvironmentsinwhichtraineesare

trained:small,mediumandlargelegalfirmswitharange

ofspecialisations;legaldepartmentsinorganisations

whichare

not

legal

firms

Trainees individualsemployedastraineesonatrainingcontract

Paralegals individualswhoareemployedtodoparalegalwork

Candidates allindividualswhetheremployedbyanorganisationasa

traineeorasaparalegalwhoareenrolledontheWBL

pilotschemetoqualifyassolicitors

Cohort1 allcandidatesregisteredfulltimeforthescheme

commencing2008andending2010

Stream

1

candidates

all

candidates

on

the

WBL

pilot

scheme

employed

as

traineesandwhoareeitherinternallyorexternally

assessed

Stream2candidates allcandidatesontheWBLpilotschemewhoare

employedinlegalrolesandareexternallyassessed

EAOs externalassessmentorganisationscontractedtoreview,

supportandassesscandidates.Inthispilotscheme,there

aretwoEAOs:NLSandOXILPselectedthrougha

tenderingprocessfortherole

NLS NottinghamLawSchool(NottinghamTrentUniversity)

contractedforallstream1andasmallnumberofstream

2

OXILP OxfordInstituteofLegalPractice(OxfordBrookes

University)contractedforLawNetfirms

LawNetfirms legalfirmswhoarepartofanetworkinggroupofover60

legalpracticesinEnglandandWales

IAOs internalassessmentorganisations:legalfirmsinternally

assessingtheircandidatesontheWBLpilotscheme


8/191

SRAFinalReport


accordingtoSRAguidelinesandsubjecttoSRA

monitoring

SupportiveEmployers legalfirmsandlegaldepartmentsinotherorganisations

preparedtomeetalltheprocedures,trainingandethics

criteriaset

down

by

the

SRA

for

participation

in

the

pilot

schemeandabletoprovideevidenceofbeingina

positiontogivefullsupporttotheparticipating

candidatesintheirorganisations

Participants bothprofessionalsandcandidatesparticipatinginthe

schemeunlessotherwisestatede.g.candidate

participants

Professionals allprofessionalsinvolvedinthedeliveryofthescheme:

EAOsandIAOs

Standardisation theachievementofasetofstandardsthatarereliable

andconsistentacrossallsetups

Formative/incremental

assessment

assessmentofdifferentstagesofprogresstowardsan

award

Summativeassessment finalassessmentforanawardaftertheincremental

stageshavebeensuccessfullycompleted

Useofitalics indicatesquotesfromdata

Guideonhowbesttousethisreport1. Executivesummaryprovidesabackgroundtotheprojectandsummarisesthe

keyfindingsinrelationtomeetingtheobjectivesofthepilotscheme.

2. Evaluationmethodologydetailshowtheevaluationwascarriedoutandhowthechallengeswereaddressed.

3. EvaluationconclusionslisttheconclusionsoftheevaluationteambasedonacritiqueoftheFindingsofAnnexe1.i.

4. Recommendationslistthekeyrecommendationsarisingfromthefindingsoftheevaluation.


9/191

SRAFinalReport


Annexe1

i. Findingsrelatetothemainthemeswhichreflectparticipantsviewsandexperiencesrelatingtotheschemewhichemergedfromtheevaluationexercise

accompaniedbyevaluators'comments.Themesrelateto:thesetup;supportand

maintenanceofthescheme;keyfindingsonaimsandobjectives,learning

outcomes,portfoliosandassessment;wideningparticipationandthefuture.

ii. Stream2candidatesthissectionexplorestheissuesarisingfromhowthisschemeaddressedwideningaccesstotheprofession.

iii. Narrativereportssupplementtheextractedfindingsbyi.capturingthemoodandmodesofexpressionsofprofessionalswhentalkingabouttheschemewhich

conveytheimplicitsandtheintangibles.Thesetermswereusedfrequentlyby

professionalandcandidateparticipantstodescribewhattheybelieveobjective

measures

cannot

ii.

contributing

a

range

of

professional

participants

views

about

howtoensureprofessionalstandardsacrossallsetups.Thenarrativereportsare

onsufficiency:sufficiencyoflearningoutcomesandlevels;sufficiencyto

demonstratetheskillsrequired;sufficiencyofaWBLportfolioandemployability;

sufficiencyofcorrespondencebetweenevidenceofkeycriteriaand

employability;theroleoftheSRAinthevocationaltrainingstage;thepurposeof

thevocationalstageasdistinctfromtheotherstages;desirabilityof

standardisation;theimpactthefuturedirectionoflawfirmswillhaveontraining.

Annexe2

ResourcePapershavebeenwrittenorcommissionedespeciallyforthisreportrelatingdirectlytotheissueswhichhaveariseninthisparticularpilotschemeand

inthecontextofthelegalprofession.Theycanbeusedtoi.supportthe

recommendationsii.contributetoanexplorationofwhetheraspectsofthe

schemearestillrelevantintheexistingclimatewhichhaschangedsincethe

schemewasfirstintroducediii.provideideasonhowrecommendationswhich

areconsideredrelevantcanbereframedandrealised.Thepapersareon:WBLin

otherprofessions;beingaprofessionalandbeingprofessional:competencesand

skills;portfoliosandcapabilities;accreditation;learningoutcomesandcredit

systems;leveldescriptorsofachievement;theuseofreflection;assessment;

ethics;coachingmodels;criticalliteratureondiversity:educationandthe

professions.

Appendix1isabackgroundtotheconsultation,designandimplementationoftheWBLpilotscheme.

Appendix2isagridofthetasksrequiredoftheevaluationexerciseaslistedintheSRAScopingDocument2008.

Appendix3SRAScopingDocument2008.

Appendix4MUScopingDocument2009.

Appendix5gives

details

of

the

analysis

of

each

phase

of

data

gathering.


10/191

SRAFinalReport


1. Executivesummary

BackgroundThetrainingcontractstageofqualifyingasasolicitorisaprimeexampleof'workbased

learning'(WBL),aphrasethatgenerallydescribesthelearningprovidedinconnection

withapersonsemployment.Itisthroughworkbasedlearningthatemployeesgainthe

vocationalskillsandknowledgeneededtobecompetentintheirjobroleoradvancetheir

careerandwhilethereisageneralconsensuswithintheprofessionthatthetraining

contractsystemseemstofunctionwellenoughinprovidingthenecessaryknowledgeand

skills, neverthelessithasbeenvulnerabletothefollowingconcerns:

standardisation:thatthetrainingcontractdoesnotexposealltraineestothe

samecoreareasoflawanddevelopasetofskillsthatarequalitatively

comparable whetherfromasmallfirmintheNorthoramagiccirclefirmin

London;

underrepresentationofdiversesocioeconomicandculturalgroupsandofthose

withdisabilities;

unfairnesstothoseinparalegalroleswhohadnotbeenabletogaintraining

contractsevenalthoughtheyhadsuccessfullycompletedthefirsttwostagesof

theroutetobecomingasolicitorandwhounderthecurrentsystemwerehighly

unlikelytoeverqualify.

Arisingfromtheseconsiderations,theWorkBasedLearning(WBL)pilotschemewas

initiatedbytheSRAinSeptember2008toresearchandexploreanalternativemodelof

assessingcompetenceatthetrainingcontractstageofqualifyingasasolicitor.The

primaryaimsoftheresearchwere:

todevelopamethodofassessmentthatwasqualityassured,consistentand

reliableallowingdemonstrationofcompetence;

totestaroutetoqualificationthatdidnotdependonthecandidatehavinga

trainingcontractandasavehicleforreducingbarrierstoaccesstothesolicitors

profession.

TheInstituteforWorkBasedLearningatMiddlesexUniversitytenderedfortheroleof

externalevaluatorforthepilotandwascontractedinFebruary2009.Theroleofthe

externalevaluatorwastoensureanobjective,thoroughandinformedassessmentof

everyaspectofthescheme.TheevaluationwasintendedtoprovidetheSRAwitha

reliableanalysisofthescheme,acrossarangeofsetupswithacrosssectionof

participants,toinformitseducationandtrainingstrategy,andtoprogressthe

developmentofacompetencebasedframeworkthatwouldfulfilitsobligationsasa

regulator.

ProjectdescriptionThepilottestedandevaluatedapointofadmissionassessmentofcompetenceagainsta

set

of

WBL

outcomes

during

the

period

2008

2010.

The

outcomes

specified

fell

under

eightkeyheadings:


11/191

SRAFinalReport


1. applicationoflegalexpertise

2. communication

3. clientrelations

4. businessawareness

5. workloadmanagement

6. workingwith

others

7. selfawarenessanddevelopment

8. professionalconduct.

TherewerefourdifferentstrandstotheSRAproject,ofwhichtwohavebeencompleted

infullandtwoareongoing:

Thetrainingcontract/employerassessedroute employersassessedtheirtrainees

againsttheWBLoutcomes;

Thetrainingcontract/externallyassessedroute employersagreedthatan

externalprovider

would

assess

their

trainees.

Theothertwostrandsare:

Theparalegalroute aimedatthosewhodonothavetrainingcontractsbut

whoselegalworkiscommensuratewiththeworkundertakeninatraining

contract.Assessmentisprovidedbyanexternalprovider.Fulltimecandidates

havecompletedtheirassessmentandthefindingsareincludedinthissummary

report.Parttimecandidateswillbeassessedduring2011and2012.

Thecombinedroute singleproviderprovidingalawdegree,LPCandassessment

ofWBL

in

two

contexts:

client

facing

experience

in

the

University's

Student

Law

Office(aprobonoclinicprovidingfreelegaladvicetothelocalcommunity),anda

placementwithanemployer.Assessmentsforthisstrandwilltakeplacein2012.

TheMiddlesexReportevaluatesthosepartsoftheprojectthatcompletedbyDecember

2010.Findingsfromthoseontheparttimeparalegalrouteandthecombinedroutewill

alsobegatheredandusedtoinformfuturework.

UndertheWBLpilot,theSRArequiredcandidates,boththoseintrainingcontractsand

paralegals,tocompleteaperiodofpractical,assessedlegalexperiencepriorto

qualification,with

the

aim

of

ensuring

that

each

candidate

should

demonstrate

the

requiredstandardofcompetencethroughtheWBLoutcomesinsupportivelegal

environments.

Aportfoliowaschosenbyboththeinternalandexternalassessmentorganisationsasthe

methodbywhichtraineeswouldbeabletodemonstrateevidenceoftheircompetency

againsttheWBLoutcomes.Suchevidenceincludedarangeofmaterialsuchasreflection

sheets,supervisorfeedback,examplesofexposuretoareasoflaw,andexperienceof

contentious/noncontentiouswork.

Thebasic

nature

of

the

current

training

system

remained

in

that

training

was

designed

anddeliveredbyautonomousorganisationsunderthecentralregulationsandguidance


12/191

SRAFinalReport


oftheSRA.ForcandidatesinparalegalrolesintheWBLscheme,externalassessment

organisationsdesignedanddevelopedprogrammesunderthenewpilotframework

whichtheSRAvalidated.Theexternalassessmentorganisationsperformedthefinal

assessmentofcompetenceforthisgroup.

Methodology

Asystemofmixedmethodswasusedtogatherthedataincludingquantitativemethods

forbenchmarkinginformationandqualitativemethodsintheformofinterviewsand

thematicanalysisofquestionnaires.TheevaluationteamatMiddlesexjudgedthatthis

would:

bestcapturetherangeofdatarequiredtoattendtotheaimsandobjectivesofthe

SRA

ensurereliabilityoverawiderangeofvariablesintheabsenceofthediversesample

beingabletoproducesignificantstatisticalreliabilityinallaspects

the

opportunity

for

triangulation

to

increase

reliability

give,asfaraspossible,abalancebetweendatathatcouldberegardedasobjective

anddatawhichwouldbeexperienceandopinionfocussed.Thiswasimportantfor

candidatesforwhomthispilotwouldbeanentirelynewexperience.Itwas

anticipatedthatcandidatesontheparalegalrouteinparticularwouldhaveauseful

perspectiveontheendeavourtowidenparticipationandthatthiswouldnotbe

capturedindepththroughsurveysonly

elicitdataonbothgeneralandspecificareasandissues

capturerepresentativeindividualviewsandperspectivesaswellassystemic

considerations.

Othermethodologicalconsiderationswere:

issuesarisingintheevaluationduetothenumberofvariablescontainedinthe

sample:differentsetups;differentcandidatestreams;differentassessment

arrangements;differentregions;differenteducationalandexperiencelevels

amongcandidates

theevaluationexerciseitselfcouldimpactontheviewsofparticipants

theadditionaltime,overandabovetherequirementsoftheirtraining,thatthose

inthesamplewouldberequiredtogivetotheevaluation

the

responsibilities

of

the

evaluator

to

provide

reliable

data

to

inform

future

decisionsinthelightoftheSRAsaims,andthepotentialoftheevaluation

exercisetoimpactonfuturepolicies.

Tokeeptheseconsiderationsattheforefrontoftheevaluationexercise,theevaluation

teamhadregularmeetingswiththeSRAinthefirstphasesoftheresearchandinvolved

externalexpertsonlawandprofessionalqualificationstoactascriticalreadersand

advisers.

Participationintheschemewaslimitedtocandidatesatsupportiveorganisationsin

EnglandandWaleswhohadorwouldhavecompletedtheacademicrequirements(alaw


13/191

SRAFinalReport


degreeorGDL)andtheLPCbeforethestartofthescheme. Thedeadlinewas3April

2008.

Thereweretwosourcesofcandidates:

1. Candidatesnominatedbyparticipatinglegalfirmswhohadalreadyagreedtotake

themon

for

training

as

solicitors

2. Candidatesvolunteeringfortheschemewhowereinemploymentinlegalroles

(whichwouldnototherwisehaveledtoqualification)inlegalfirmsorlegal

departmentsofotherorganisations.

Thefinalnumberofcandidateswhoparticipatedintheschemeisshownbelowwith

assessmentoutcomes:

No.

candidates

Passed Revised

deadlines

Referred Withdrawn

Externally

Assessedby

Nottingham

LawSchool

35* 27 6 1 1

Externally

Assessedby

OxfordInstitute

ofLegal

Practice

8 8 0 0 0

Internally

Assessedby

Legalfirms

36 35 0 0 1

TOTAL 79 70 6 1 2

*Over85%ofthisgroupwereparalegals/inlegalemploymentinorganisationswhich

werenotlegalfirms.

AnalysisAsystemoftriangulationofdatawasused:eachdatastream(surveys,interviews,

portfolios,literature,policydocuments,qualityassurancedocumentsfromthevarious

setups)wasanalysedandcheckedagainsteachotheruntilthedistillation

producedconfidentsuperordinatethemes(highconsensus)andsubordinatethemes

(lowerconsensusbuthighsignificanceforcertainparticipants).Wheretherewasno

consensusinthedatacollectedthedatawaseitherusedtodescribeorillustrate

particularproblems,oromitted.Theconclusionsandrecommendationsinthefinalreport

arebasedonthemesthatwereconsistentlysuperordinateandhighsubordinateinthe

final

phases

of

the

evaluation

exercise.


14/191

SRAFinalReport


Keyfindings

TThheeffiinnddiinnggssrreeppoorrtteeddhheerreeaarreeoorrggaanniisseeddttooaaddddrreessssssppeecciiffiiccaallllyytthheettwwoopprriimmaarryyaaiimmssooff

tthheepprroojjeecctt::

1. todevelopamethodofassessmentthatwasqualityassured,consistentand

reliable

allowing

demonstration

of

competence;

2. totestaroutetoqualificationthatdidnotdependonthecandidatehavinga

trainingcontractandasavehicleforreducingbarrierstoaccesstothesolicitors

profession.

1.1 WWoorrkkbbaasseeddlleeaarrnniinnggoouuttccoommeess

1.1.1 TheWBLschemedemonstratedthevalueoflearningoutcomesasanappropriate

learningandassessmentapproachforthevocationalstageoftraining.

1.1.2 Learningoutcomeswereregardedbyalargemajorityofrespondentsasgood

practiceinprinciple.Learningoutcomes:

areamove

in

the

right

direction

to

achieve

objective

measures

and

standardsacrossallsetups

assistinqualityassurance

enhancelearningifdeliveredwell

guidethecandidateandencourage,eventually,selfmanagedlearning

guidethesupervisor/reviewerinhowbesttosupportthecandidate

formasoundbasisforassessmentinskillsapplicationandcompetences

encourageaprofessional(solicitors)attitudebytheirrequirementto

evidenceallwork,beproactive,disciplined,businessawareandmanage

timeappropriately.

1.1.3 Allthelearningoutcomeswereconsideredrelevantbutthebusinessawareness

outcome,particularlyinthechangingeconomicclimate,emergedasakeyonefor

bothlegalfirmsandotherorganisations.

1.1.4 Whilealargemajorityofrespondentsregardedthelearningoutcomesasgood

practiceinprinciple,therewerereservationsandqualifications:

intheircurrentformtheyareadministrativelyburdensomeandtime

consumingforeveryone

althoughdesignedtobegeneric,notallmayberelevantforallsetsupsorshouldbegiventhesameemphasis

therearetoomany

severaloverlap

anumberarechallengingtoevidenceparticularlythoseinvolvingpeople

skills

concernsaboutassessinglevelsofincrementallearning

concernsaboutwhetheronecoulduse,andthevalueofusing,thesame

pieceofevidenceforseveraloutcomes

uncertaintyaboutreflectionsheetsandhowbesttousethem


15/191

SRAFinalReport


notconvincedthatontheirownthelearningoutcomesmeasureanything

morethanskillsapplicationandtrackthedevelopmentofthatprocess.

1.2 Portfolios

TherewasnounanimityontheeffectivenessoftheWBLportfolioasanassessmenttool

buttheconsensusdrawnfromthedatawasthattheportfoliowasausefultoolfor

providingapicture

of

acandidate's

readiness

to

be

a'Day

1solicitor'

in

terms

of

certain

specificskillsandtheirapplicationundersupervision.However,theportfoliowas

consideredinsufficienttogiveacompletepictureofwhetherornotthatcandidate

wouldbeagoodsolicitor. Thelimitationofthisendorsementrelatedtotwocrucial

factors:

i. theinabilityoftheportfolio,byitself,toshownecessaryskills,inparticular

softskills,suchasinterpersonalcommunication

ii. strongconfidenceonthepartoftrainingorganisationsintheinstincts,

perceptivenessandgoodjudgementofprofessionalsinvolvedintrainingin

respectof

the

relevant

qualities

of

trainees.

It

was

frequently

stated

that

thesequalitiesweredifficult,ifnotimpossible,todescribe,defineor

evidenceinanobjectiveformat.

Mostlegalfirms,eventhoseexpressingreservations,intendedtodooneofthefollowing

withanumberstatingtheyhadalreadystartedtodoi.orii.:

i. adoptaWBLscheme

ii. adaptthebestoftheWBLschemetothebestoftheirownpractices

iii. belessresistanttoanadaptedversionofWBLfromtheSRA

Benefitsincludedforsome

WBLisgoodbecauseithelpsatraineetoconcentratemoreonacquiringskills.

Itwillproduceamuchmoreroundedindividual.

theresponsibilityWBLseemedtoputonthetrainee,isonethingthatattracted[ourfirm]

tothescheme.

Overall,therewasconcernforeveryoneaboutwhatstagesoftheportfolioshouldbe

measuredatwhatlevel.Forthosewhohadnegativecommentsontheeffectivenessof

theportfolio,

criticism

focused

on

the

whole

exercise

having

the

clear

potential

to

becomeameaningless,mechanicaltickboxprocess.Therewasanindicationthat'just

gettingon'withwork,showinginitiative,willingness,selfmanagedlearning,attentionto

detail,professionalknowledgeorhowtogetitandbeingproactivewereclearenough

indicatorsofemployabilityintheprofession.Amorecomplexcriticismarosefroman

overallperceptionthattheschemedidnotdeliverasystemmorebeneficialthantheone

usedbytherespondingorganisation.

2 Reducingbarrierstoaccess

2.1 InrelationtotheaimtotestWBLasaroutetoqualificationthatmayhelpto

reduce

barriers

to

access

to

the

solicitors

profession,

the

pilot

found

that:


16/191

SRAFinalReport


mostcandidateswereconvincedthatsuchaschemewouldhelpaddress

thespecificperceivedbarriertoentryintotheprofessionof

socio/educationalbackgroundbutonlyrelatingdirectlytoparalegalsand

thoseinlegalrelatedemployment

professionalswerenotconvincedthatbyitselftheWBLschemecould

address

barriers

to

entry

but

rather

barriers

to

entry

needed

to

be

addressedearlierintheeducationandtrainingprocess,forexampleat

thetrainingcontractapplicationstage

duetotheeconomicclimate,professionalsinlawfirmsbelievedthatthe

levelofdegreeandtypeofuniversitywouldstillneedtobeoneofthe

criteriaofinitialselection forprocessingtointerviewstage

professionalswerenotconvincedthathavingaWBLportfoliowould offer

anyparticularadvantagetotheindividualinseekinganewlyqualified

solicitorjobinalegalfirm.Itcouldassisttosecureaninterview.

2.2

Professionals

in

legal

firms

all

agreed

that

this

route

for

paralegals

to

qualify

as

solicitorswasafairersystem. Howeveroverthecourseofthepilottheybecame

lessconvincedthatitwasdesirableorfeasibleonalargescaleduetoanumber

offactors:

shiftingeconomicclimateandpotentialprofessionalisationof

otherlegalrolesinfluencedamodificationinviewsfromsupportivein

principletoperhapsnotfeasible

allprofessionalsdidbelieveitwasfairtohavethisroutebutwere

concernedthatreducedavailabilityoftrainingcontractswouldmake

entryintotheprofessionevenmorecompetitiveandselectioncriteria

wouldbeevenmorerefinedmakingachangetothedegreelevel

requirementunlikely

concernsoverwhetherbeingemployedasaparalegalcouldgivefull

exposuretotheareasoflawwithouttheparalegalbecomingafulltime

trainee

theprocessofreplacingaparalegalwouldalsoincurmorecostsforthe

employer

duringthecourseoftheschemeconcernsarose,whichwerenotevident

inthefirstyear,thatgivingaccesstoparalegalstoentertheprofession

throughtheWBLschememaycreateatwotiersystembecauseparalegals

wouldneverbeabletohavethesameexperienceastraineesunlessthey

wereemployedsolelyastrainees

theimpactofAlternativeBusinessStructuresaswellasthe

emergenceof aprofessionalbodyforparalegalswasmentionedinthis

contextbutnotelaboratedupon

thepossibilityoffirmsbecomingmorespecialisedandtraditional

paralegalworkgoingabroadmeantthatfirmswouldbelookingfor

individualstoentertheprofessionwhohadthehighestknowledgeand

skillslevelstobringinandmaintainbusiness.Itwasbelievedbysomethat

thisapproachwasameritocraticapproach,decidedbythemarket,that


17/191

SRAFinalReport


wouldremovebarrierstoentrywhichwerebasedonotherfactorssuchas

age,ethnicityandgender.

2.3 Themajorityofotheremployerswhoseemployeesaccountedforthemajorityof

paralegalsontheschemeallagreedthatthisrouteforparalegalstoqualifyas

solicitorswasafairersystem.Howevertheywerenotconvinceditwasdesirable

inall

cases

and

their

reasons

differed

from

the

legal

firms

in

anumber

of

respects:

iftheparalegalsweregoodatdoingtheirjobtheemployerwouldnot

wanttolosethembutrecognisedtheyalsodidnotwanttostandinthe

wayofadvancement

extracostincurredintermsoftimetohelptheirparalegalstoqualify

extracostincurrediftheparalegalswantedtostayonasqualified

solicitors

wantingtosecurestaffdevelopmentfortheiremployeesand

reconsideringwhether

this

is

the

most

appropriate

way.

2.4 Candidateswhowereemployedasparalegalswereveryenthusiasticaboutthe

schemebutalsohadreservations.Overalltheyreported:

thepilotaddressedbarrierstoentryonthegroundsofsocio/educational

discrimination

itwasafairersystembecauseitrecognisedthatwithoutatraining

contractthosewhohadsuccessfullycompletedthefirsttwostagesof

trainingcouldneverqualify

theyunderstood

why

previous

experience

was

not

taken

into

considerationbutwouldliketoseeitcountiftheschemeisrolledout

theWBLframeworkencouragedthembemoreproactiveinseeking

opportunitiesthatwouldenhancetheirlearning

theWBLframeworkhelpedthemtoengageatamoreprofessionallevel

ofthinking

concernsaboutwhethertheiremployerwouldbesupportive,andwere

notclearwhatshouldbeexpectedintermsofreasonablesupport

differencesarose/wereaccentuatedbetweenhowtheyweretreatedin

relationtotraineesonstandardtrainingcontractse.g.fortraineesona

trainingcontract,

the

professional

skills

course

was

paid

for

by

the

employerand theyhadmorefreedomtomovearoundseats

concernaboutgettingexposuretoalltheareasoflawrequired,

contentiousandnoncontentiouswork,andalackofconfidencethat

asecondmentcouldworkforthemortheiremployers

littleconcernthatWBLmaybeasecondrate/tierroute

moreconcernaboutpaymentforprofessionalskillscourseand

exposuretoadvocacy.

2.5 Candidateswhowereemployedastraineeswerelessenthusiasticinthefirstyear

ofthe

scheme

but

on

the

whole

were

more

enthusiastic

towards

the

completion

oftheirtrainingcontract:


18/191

SRAFinalReport


atfirsttheyfelttheywerebeingtreateddifferently,havingtodomore

work,meethigherlevelsofevidencethancolleaguesonstandardtraining

contracts

duringthesecondyearconfidencehadincreased,theyfelttheyhad

achieved

more

and

could

evidence

it

unlikeparalegalsandthoseemployedinotherlegalroles,theybelieve

theywerehelpedbytheirorganisations,drawingontheorganisations

existingtrainingpracticetosupportthemaswellastheWBLsystem

theydidnothaveconcernsaboutexposuretoareasoflawbuthad

concernsaboutgettingexperienceofadvocacy

theyhadconcernsthattheprofessionmayconsidertheirWBLtrainingto

beinferiortothestandardtrainingcontractbecausetheprofessiondid

notreallyknowaboutit.

Summaryof

key

recommendations

TheMiddlesexEvaluationReportfoundthattheWBLframeworkdemonstratedalevelof

successinprovidingthelegalprofessionwithalearninganddevelopmentapproachto

thevocationalstageofqualificationthatassuresqualityinassessment,andthatcanbe

monitoredandcontributetoenhancingstandardsacrossallsetups.Theevaluation

reportalsohighlightedanumberofkeyrecommendations:

1. Undertakefurtherworktosetouttheskillsandattributesforqualifyingasa

solicitor;

2. DevelopprogressivestepsofachievementlinkingtheLPC,thevocationalstage

andDay1competences;

3. Setout

the

learning

outcomes

necessary

to

demonstrate

competence;

4. Consideracreditsystemtoassessincrementallearningandtoopenthedoorto

moreflexibleroutestoqualificationandtransferbetweenprofessions;

5. Retainanddeveloptheuseoftheportfolioasalearningjournal;

6. TrainkeyprofessionalsincoachingandassessingwithinaWBLframework;

7. Continuetheboldmovesinwideningparticipationthroughexploringan

accreditedlearningschemeforpriorlearning;

8. Addressbarrierstoentryatsecondaryschoollevelwhenchoicesofuniversity,

coursesandfuturecareersarestillintheformativestage.


19/191

SRAFinalReport


2. Evaluationmethodology

Introduction

Theroleofeducationandtrainingstrategyforanyregulatorthatsetsprofessional

standardsis

to

apply

education

theory

and

practice

across

critical

areas

of

risk

the

validity,consistencyandreliabilityofassessmentinordertoensurecompetenceand

theembeddingofprofessionalvaluesandethics.Forthevocational/admissionstageof

solicitortraining,failureinthesecriticalareasconstitutesrisktothepublicintermsof

assuringthecompetenceofnewentrantstotheprofession.

Currently,thereisnoassessmentatthepointofadmissiontothesolicitorsprofession.

ThiswaspivotalinthedecisionbytheSRAtopilotWorkBasedLearning(WBL)forthe

vocationalstagetoinformfuturestrategy.TheSRAtooktheviewthataworkbased

learningframeworksupportedtheaimofensuringcompetenceratherthanadheringto

process,and

also

allows

flexibility

of

routes

to

qualification.

At

the

moment,

large

numbersofgraduatesoftheLegalPracticeCourse(LPC)donotsucceedingettingtraining

contractsandthereforecannotproceedwiththevocationalstageofsolicitortraining.The

WBLpilotalsohadtheaimofexploringaworkbasedroutetoassessingthecompetence

ofsuchindividuals,workinginparalegalroles,toentertheprofession,andtherebythe

opennessoftheschemetocandidatesfromawiderangeofbackgroundsandexperience.

UndertheWBLpilot,theSRArequiredcandidates,boththoseintrainingcontractsand

paralegals,tocompleteaperiodofpractical,assessedlegalexperiencepriorto

qualification,withtheaimofensuringthateachcandidateshoulddemonstratethe

requiredstandard

of

competence

through

the

Work

Based

Learning

Outcomes

in

supportivelegalenvironments.

Thebasicnatureofthecurrenttrainingsystemremainedinthattrainingwasdesigned

anddeliveredbyautonomousorganisationsunderthecentralregulationsandguidance

oftheSRA.ForcandidatesinparalegalrolesintheWBLscheme,externalassessment

organisationsdesignedanddevelopedprogrammesunderthenewpilotframework

whichtheSRAvalidated.Theexternalassessmentorganisationsperformedthefinal

assessmentofcompetenceforthisgroup.

An

external

evaluation

of

the

scheme

by

consultants,

experienced

in

both

work

based

learningandlegaleducation,wasconsiderednecessarytoensureanobjective,thorough

andinformedassessmentofeveryaspectofthescheme[Appendix3SRAScoping

Document].SuchanevaluationwouldprovidetheSRAwithareliableanalysisofthe

scheme,acrossarangeofsetupswithacrosssectionofparticipants,toinformits

educationandtrainingstrategyandtoprogressthedevelopmentofacompetencebased

frameworkthatwouldfulfilitsobligationsasaregulator.TheScopeofWorkdocument

preparedbytheSRAwasextensiveanddetailedandhaditselfbeeninformedbytheopen

andengagedprocesswhichtheSRAencouragedduringitssettingupofthepilotandits

recruitmentprocedures.


20/191

SRAFinalReport


Theexternalevaluationteamwasgivenaccesstoallaspectsoftheschemeandall

participantsduringtheCohort1trainingperiod2008 2010.Thisreportisbasedonthe

findingsoftheMiddlesexUniversityevaluationteamoverthisperiod.Thescopeofthe

evaluationexercisecanbefoundinAppendices2and3.

TheEvaluationmethodologywasinformedbytheguidanceissuedintheSRAScoping

document[Appendices

2,3,4]

and

the

Institute

for

Work

Based

Learnings

considerable

experienceinmethodologiesappropriatetoprofessionalworkenvironments

underpinnedbyacommitmenttoinclusion.TheIWBLsupportsthenotionthateveryone

hasthepotentialtolearnandcontributetoknowledgethroughcriticalreflectiononwork

experiencesandpractices.

Theevaluationteamdecidedonamethodologicalframeemployingmixedmethods

(quantitativeandqualitative)thatwould:

bestcapturetherangeofdatarequiredtoattendtotheaimsandobjectives

ofthe

SRA

[Appendix

2,

SRA

scoping

document,

Appendix

3,

MU

scoping

document];

ensurereliabilityoverawiderangeofvariablesintheabsenceofthediverse

samplebeingabletoproducesignificantstatisticalreliabilityinallaspects;

theopportunityfortriangulationtoincreasereliability;

give,asfaraspossible,abalancebetweendatathatcouldberegardedas

objectiveanddatawhichwouldbeexperienceandopinionfocussed.This

wouldbeimportantforcandidatesforwhomthispilotwouldbeanentirely

newexperience.Itwasanticipatedthatstream2candidateswouldhavea

voiceofvaluetotheprofessionparticularlyinitsendeavourstowiden

participationand

that

voice

would

not

be

captured

in

depth

through

surveys

only;

elicitdataonbothgeneralandspecificareasandissues;

capturerepresentative individualviewsandperspectivesaswellassystemic

considerations.

Othermethodologicalconsiderationswere:

issuesarisingintheevaluationduetothehighlevelofvariablescontainedin

thesample:differentsetups;differentcandidatestreams;different

assessmentarrangements;

different

regions;

different

educational

and

experiencelevelsamongcandidates;

theevaluationexerciseitselfcouldimpactontheviewsofparticipants;

thesamplewouldbesubjecttoevaluationattentionwhichwouldrequire

theirtimeoverandabovetherequirementsoftheirtraining;

theresponsibilitiesoftheevaluatortoprovidereliabledatatoinformfuture

decisionsinthelightoftheSRAsaims,andthepotentialoftheevaluation

exercisetoimpactonfuturepolicies.

Tokeeptheseconsiderationsattheforefrontoftheevaluationexercise,theevaluation

teamwould:


21/191

SRAFin

Institute

Analysi

(formo

Evaluat

alReport

forWorkB

haver

involv

reader

sdetailfor

redetailed

asyste

quanti

qualita

thema

supero

theme

areasa

descri

allthe

andre

subord

asyste

intervi

docum

othert

consen

certain

ionresear

sedLearnin

gularmee

externale

andadvis

eachphas

informatio

mofmixed

ativeforb

tiveinthe

icanalysis

rdinate=

withalo

ndsetups.

ingindivid

hemesin

t

ommenda

inateinPh

moftriang

ws,portfo

entsfromt

illthedistil

sus)andsu

participan

hpathway

g,Middlese

ingswitht

pertsonl

rs.

oftheev

non

the

an

methods

nchmarkin

ormofint

wastheor

ajorthem

erconsens

Issuesrais

alproble

hebody

of

ionsareb

ses3and

ulationof

lios,literat

hevarious

lationprod

bordinate

s)

University

eSRAint

wandpro

luation

alysessee

asused

ginformat

rviewsan

anisation

swithhigh

usbutstill

dwithno

s

thefinal

r

sedwerec

oftheev

atawasus

re,policy

setups)w

ucedconfi

hemes(lo

2010

efirstPha

essionalqu

ppendix5

ion

thematic

fthemeso

consensus

importanti

consensus

portand

o

onsistently

luationex

ed:eachda

ocuments,

sanalysed

entsupero

erconsen

esofther

alification

)

nalysisof

vertimein

andsubor

nresponse

ereomitt

which

th

superordi

rcise

tastream(

qualityas

andcheck

rdinateth

usbuthig

esearch;

toactasc

uestionnai

to

inate=

tospecific

edorused

conclusio

ateandhi

surveys,

urance

dagainste

mes(high

significan

21

itical

res

for

s

h

ach

efor


22/191

SRAFinalReport


ProfileofSample

Stream1

Candidatesemployedbylegalfirmsonatrainingcontract.Internallyassessedby

theirindividualemployers.

Othervariables:locationmainlyLondon;largeandmediumpractices;cityfirms,

litigation;commercial;

ethnicity;

gender.

Candidatesemployedbylegalfirmsonatrainingcontract.Externallyassessedby

OXILP.

Othervariables:locationmainlyLondon,southandsouthwest;mixtureofmedium

andlarge;differentspecialisations;ethnicity;gender.

Stream2

Candidatesemployedbylegalfirmontrainingcontracts.ExternallyassessedbyNLS.

Othervariables:locationtheNorth;largefirm;ethnicity;gender;socio/educational.

Candidatesemployed

by

legal

departments

in

avariety

of

organisations.

ExternallyassessedbyNLS.

Othervariables:theNorth,theMidlandsandLondon;varietyofsmall,mediumand

largeorganisations;differenttypesoforganisationsincludinglocalgovernmentand

bigbusiness;widerrangeofage,gender,ethnicity,socio/educationaland

socio/economicbackgrounds.

Researchphases

Phase1

Febto

April

2009

anexplorationofthesetup,selectionandrecruitingdocuments

ofthe

SRA

pilot

anevaluationofthelearningmaterialsandguidancedocuments

ofthevariousassessmentorganisations

anoverallbenchmarkingquestionnairetoallcandidatesand

professionalsinvolvedinthescheme

ongoingliteraturesearchondiversityintheprofessionsandin

education.

Developmentsinworkbasedlearningpracticeandasspecifically

appliedtoprofessionalqualificationsmostnotablyinthe

assessment

of

competence,

skills

and

capabilities.

Bestpracticeinworkbasedlearningintheprofessions

Phase2

MaytoSept2009indepthinterviewswithkeyprofessionalsanddiscussionswith

SRAteammembers

Indepthinterviewswithabroadselectionofcandidates

INTERIMREPORT

Phase3

MarchtoJuly2010

akeyquestionnairedesignedtopayattentiontothekeyissues

distilledfrombothananalysisofthedataandtheemerging

picturefromtheSRAmonitoringofthescheme

ongoing

literature

search

on

diversity

in

the

professions

and

in

education.


23/191

SRAFinalReport


Developmentsinworkbasedlearningpracticeandasspecifically

appliedtoprofessionalqualificationsmostnotablyinthe

assessmentofcompetence,skillsandcapabilities.

Bestpracticeinworkbasedlearningintheprofessions

INTERIMREPORT

Phase4AugustDecember

2010*

furtherindepthinterviewswithkeyprofessionalstospecifically

focuson

learning

outcomes,

assessments,

widening

participation,thepilotschemeasawhole,thefuture.

examinationofawideselectionfrombothIAOsandEAOsof

completedportfoliosandsummativeassessments

indepthinterviewswithprofessionalsoffirmsnotinvolvedin

theschemetotestvalidityofthefindingsfortheprofessionasa

whole

analysisofthedatafromtheevaluationexerciseandan

interpretationofthefindings

recommendations

commissioningof

particular

papers

to

support

the

recommendationsbasedonthefindings

assessmentofthediversitystrategy

extrapolationofbestpractice

FINALREPORT

*AllassessmentswerenotcompletedtillendofOctober2010

DDeettaaiillssooffeennqquuiirryyaaccttiivviittiieessoovveerr22yyeeaarrss

Year1 deskresearchintosetupofpilotscheme

1benchmarkingsurveytoallcandidates

19interviewswitharangeofcandidatesfrombothstreams

9interviewswithprofessionalsincluding2withEAOs

Year1andYear2deskresearchintoawiderangeofassessmentdocumentsand

portfoliosystems

literaturesearch:diversity;socio/economicdiscrimination;

professionalroutestoqualification;WBLasappliedtothe

professions

Year2 1majorkeyquestionnairetoallparticipants

17interviews

with

professionals

LargeCityofLondon/internationalfirms

Mediumsizedlitigationintensivefirms centralLondon

Smallhighstreetmixedpracticefirms suburbanLondon

LegaldepartmentsofCityCouncils

Mediumregionalmixedpracticefirms northofEngland

Mediumregionmixedpracticefirms southernEngland

Nonschemesmalllitigationintensivepracticefirm

regional,NorthofEngland

Nonschememediumsizedmixedpracticefirm

centralandsuburbanLondon

Nonscheme

international

exclusively

corporate

practice

firm

(CityofLondon)


24/191

SRAFinalReport


ExternalAssessmentOrganisations

Considerationswhicharoseduringtheevaluationexercise:

AnumberofteamchangeswhichtookplaceintheSRA

Twoteamchangesintheevaluationteam

A

change

to

team

leadership

in

the

SRA

Fullimpactoftheeconomicdownturn

Imminentchangesinthelawprofession

CChhaalllleennggeessdduurriinnggtthheeeevvaalluuaattiioonn

Responses

1.Multiplevariablesandno

representativesampleforsome

factors

increaseinterviewsforreliability

gooutsideoftheschemetocheckvalidity

2.Socioeducationalfactorscitedas

majordiscriminationfactorinthe

legalprofession

dedicateadiscretesectioninthereporton

stream2.[SeeAnnexe1.ii.]

widendiversityliteraturesearchandbarriersto

entryintotheprofessions[Resourcepaper11]

3.CooperationwiththeSRAonan

independentreporthavecriticaladvisers

recognitionthatduetothesignificant

implicationsofthepilotschemeitwasnecessary

tocooperate

on

certain

issues:

information;

changestoprocedures/materials;reviewing

changesinfocusduetoshiftingexternaland

internallandscape

nocollaborationduringPhase4andwritingof

theFinalReport

4.Twoprocessesgoingonatthe

sametimei.themonitoringofthe

schemebytheSRAwhichalso

includedconsultationsandeliciting

evaluationmaterialfromparticipants

forSRA

purposes

ii.

the

independent

evaluationbytheMUteam.Thisled

tocandidatesandprofessionals

beingregularlycontactedfor

informationandviews

cooperationwithSRAontheKeyQuestionnaire

agreementonprioritizingtheissues

5.ThattheSRAmonitoringvisits

appearedtohavetwofunctions:i.

theSRAmonitoringofthe

implementationanddeliverytomeet

qualityassurancerequirementsii.

informationgathering/research

on

aspectsofthescheme

regularlyapologizingtoparticipantsforwhat

appearedtothemtoberepetitivechecking


25/191

SRAFinalReport


recognizingtheinfluencethesemeetingswith

theSRAwerehavingontheviewsofthe

professionals

recognizingthatthemoreoftenthe

professionalswereasked,themoredistilledand

cleartheirthinkingappearedtobecome

6.Presentationof

interim

reports

to

theEducationandTraining

CommitteenotbyanMUteam

member

tobe

clearer

in

discussions

with

the

policy

executiveaboutthenatureofinterimreports

andthefinalreport

ensurethatthefinalreportisgiveninpersonby

anMUteammember

3. Evaluationconclusions

Theconclusions

listed

here

emerge

out

of

the

Findings

[Annexe1.i]

and

are

informedbyanextensiveliteraturesearch[Resourcepaper11:workbasedlearning;

wideningparticipation]andtheworkbasedlearningexpertiseinresearch,

employerengagementandprofessionaltrainingandpracticewhichhasbeen

developed,andinsomecasespioneered,bytheInstituteforWorkBasedLearning

overthelastnineteenyears.

Theevaluationexercisesoughttoevaluatetheschemeagainstthetemplateof

validity,consistencyandreliabilityintheapplicationofeducationtheoryand

practiceinthevocationalstageoftrainingandtoassesstheschemesimpacton

addressingthe

issue

of

widening

access

to

the

profession.

Thelegalprofession,aftermanyyearsofifisisntbrokenwhyfixitapproachhas,

throughitsregulator,beguntochallengetheacceptedrouteofatrainingcontract

initspresentformasbeingthemostappropriateandsustainablefortheprofession

inthecurrentsocio/political/economicclimateofaglobalworld.Asystemwhich

hasnoobjectiveassessmentcriteria,hasahighvarianceinstandardsandhasno

requirementforobjectiveevidenceofskillsandcompetencesacrossallsetupsis

onethatwouldfinditnotonlyincreasinglydifficulttocompeteinaknowledge

economybutmostimportantlywithstandscrutinyofstandards,qualityassurance,

risk,

ethics

and

inclusion.

TheWBLframeworkisanadaptableframeworkwhichhasatitscoreasetof

learningoutcomeswhich,ifsuccessfullyachieved,demonstratearangeof

competences/capabilities/skillswhichareevidencedthroughvariousactivitiesand

recordedinsomeform,themostcommonvehicleforthiscurrentlybeinga

portfolio.Thelearningoutcomesareformatively/incrementallyassessedandthe

portfoliocontainingtheactivities,whichconstitutethebodyofevidence,provides

thebasisforthefinalassessment.Suchalearningoutcomesfocusedapproach

facilitatesandenhancesqualityassuranceacrossarangeofsetupswithinthesame

professionwhichensurestheregulatoryobjectivesofaprofessioncanbemet.


26/191

SRAFinalReport


Theevaluationexercisewasabletosomeextenttodifferentiatethereasonsbehind

someofthefindingsrangingfrominsufficienciesinalearningoutcomesframework

itself,thevariouswaysinwhichitwasinterpretedandappliedandtheinfluenceof

environmentalfactors.

Theevaluationconclusionshavebeenorganisedintosectionswhichfocusonthe

differentpartsoftheWBLframeworkasdescribedabovewithanintroductory

paragraphforeach. Theuseofboldindicatesareasfornoteordevelopment.Key

recommendationstoaddresstheseareinSection4andResourcepaperstosupport

therecommendationsareinAnnexe2.

GGeenneerraallccoonncclluussiioonnss

TheevaluationteamfoundthattheWBLpilotschemewascarriedoutwithdue

attentiontoconsultation,researchandtransparency.Throughitsownmonitoring

ofthescheme,theSRAwasabletocontinuetoclarifyorconsultonissueswhich

arosefor

all

participants.

Some

operational

aspects

took

time

to

resolve.

The

WBL

schemewasconsideredbyasignificantmajorityofitsparticipantsasmotivatedby

necessaryandworthwhileaimswhileatthesametimeraisingbothpositiveand

negativeresponses.Anumberofnegativeorresistantresponseswereinfluenced

bychangesintheeconomicclimatesincetheWBLpilotschemewasinitiated.

3.1 Thepilotwasasuccessagainstmostofitsstatedaims:

todevelopanapproachtoensuringthecompetenceofqualifying

solicitorsthatisqualityassured,consistentandreliable;

todevelop,

test

and

evaluate

WBL

as

amodel

for

improving

the

quality

assuranceofthevocationaltrainingstageofqualificationasasolicitor;

todevelop,testandevaluateWBLasamodelforwideningaccesstothe

profession.

3.2 Intermsofdevelopinganapproachtoensuringcompetence,thepilotwas

successfulintesting:

theconceptofaframeworkofcompetencemeasuresforthepractical

vocationalstageofsolicitorsqualification.Thepilothasshownthatthis

conceptis

appropriate

for

SRA

aims;

thecompetencemeasuresthemselves(theWorkBasedLearning

Outcomes).Althoughtheycovertheessentialareas,modificationsto

thestyleandstructureoftheOutcomesareneeded[Resourcepaper5];

theuseofevidencebasedassessmentcriteria;

avehicleforevidencingcompetences(theportfolio)whichhasprovided

valuabledatatoinformthenextstepsinthisarea[Annexe1.i.Findings

andResourcepaper3];

aqualityassurancesystemthatcanbemonitoredandcontributeto

enhancingstandards;

themeans

for

candidates

to

self

manage

their

learning;


27/191

SRAFinalReport


amodelforwideningaccesstoqualificationasasolicitor,allowing

conclusionstobedrawnastothenextstepsinthisarea[Annexe1.ii

andResourcepapers4and9].

Detailedconclusions

3.3

TheSRAs

design,

implementation

and

monitoring

of

the

WBL

pilot

scheme

wereunderpinnedbyconsiderableresearchandongoingconsultationwithin

theprofessionandwitheducationalexperts.

Anumberofoperationalissuestooktimetoresolve.

3.4 Thepilotstwomajoraimswereambitioustoachievewithinthesame

scheme:

(i) aprofessionaltrainingandassessmentframeworkthatisquality

assured,consistent

and

reliable

(ii) andwidensaccesstotheprofession.

Itwasaboldmovetoincludethesecond.Itbrokewithtraditionand

producedvaluabledatatoinformfuturestepsregardingwidening

participation[Annexe1.i.andii.andResourcepapers4,5].

3.5 Theschemesucceededinpersuadingeventhemostresistantparticipantsof

therationalityofthepurposeoftheschemeresultinginseveralparticipating

legalfirmsenhancingtheirexistingtrainingpracticesduringandsincetheend

ofthis

Cohort

1pilot.

3.6 Itdidnotsucceedinconvincingtheprofessionthatitcouldbeadoptedasa

trainingframeworkinitspresentform.

3.7 Impressiveprogresstowardsaviablesystemofprofessionallearning

appropriatetoallsetupswasevident.

Thereisstillaconsiderableamountofdevelopmentandconsultationwork

tobedonewhichrequireslookingatalllevelsoflegaltraining.

3.8

TheWBL

pilot

was

able

to

demonstrate

progressive

learning

and

development

appropriatetotheprofessionalstandardsrequiredtoqualifyasasolicitorand

anacceptablelevelofconsistencyacrossallsetupswasachieved.

TheWBLframeworkneedsfurtherdevelopmentparticularlyintheareaof

assessment.

3.9 TherewasahighlevelofcompliancetotheWBLframeworkandits

proceduresandprotocolsbecauseitwasacloselymonitoredexercise

introducedbytheregulatorforwhichorganisationshadvolunteered.

Ifanewframeworkisrolledoutthereisnoguaranteeofsuchahighlevelof

compliance

which

needs

to

be

taken

into

consideration

when

planning

qualityassuranceandcomplianceprotocolsacrossallsetups.Howeverif


28/191

SRAFinalReport


thenewframeworkcanmeettheconcernsraisedduringthisevaluation

exercisethencompliancewillnotbeacoreissueasthebenefitsto

organisationswillbeevidentandmakesoundbusinesssense.

QQuuaalliittyyaassssuurraanncceeaannddeennhhaanncceemmeenntt((QQAAEE))

TheSRAismovingtowardsanOutcomesFocussedRegulationframeworkforallits

regulatoryactivitiesdirectedatensuringtherightoutcomesforsolicitors'clients

andothers.Thisrequireseffectiveandproportionatequalityassuranceofentrance

totheprofession.TheSRAneedsaframeworkwhichensuresthatcompetenceto

practiseasasolicitorisattributedtoeachindividualthroughassessmentthatis

valid,consistentandreliable andtheWBLpilotwasdesignedtoresearchandtest

this

Inthisinstancewearereferringtoqualityassuranceasprocesseswhichreducerisk

to

the

public

and

the

profession

by

ensuring

that

professional

standards

and

practicesaremonitoredandmaintained. Qualityassurancehassensiblyevolvedto

includeenhancementthroughtheaspirationofhighqualitylearningand

development.Itcannotrelyonasetofruleswhichemployeesfollowbecauseof

authoritycomplianceratherthanstakeholdercompliance.Qualityassuranceforthe

professionsintegratesfundamentalprinciplescommontoallworkandprofessional

practicesandthosewhicharedomainspecific.AmongthecontributionswhichWBL

philosophyhasmadeinthelastfifteenyearsare:

(i) thenotionthatprofessionalpracticeisacontributortoknowledgeworthyof

academicaccreditation;

(ii) thatthecritiqueofprofessionalpracticeasopposedtojustdoingitproduces

guidancetoqualitythatisrelevant,informed,opentoongoingdevelopment

andmakesgoodbusinesssense.Mostimportantly,itencouragescompliance

throughprovidingaprofessionderivedbasisforconsistencyacrossdifferent

setupswhichcanbeobjectivelymeasuredagainstastandardthathasbeen

designedandsupportedbyitsmemberswiththehighestaspirationsforits

membership.

3.10 Theschemeraisedawarenessinlegalfirmsofthebenefitsofworkingtoa

WBLtrainingframework/adaptedframeworkinparticularitsvaluein

facilitatingself

managed

learning

and

supporting

supervisors.

Thevehicleofdelivery(theportfolio)initscurrentformisadministratively

burdensomeforcandidatesandprofessionals.

Thevehicleofdelivery(ifusedonitsown)haslimitationsinassessing

whetheranindividualhasmetthecriteriaforprofessionalqualification [see

LearningOutcomesandPortfoliobelow].

3.11 Theschemeachievedsuccessinprovidingafirmbasisandanappropriateand

flexibleframeworkforobjectiveassessmentcriteriawiththepotentialto

achieve alevelofstandardisationacrossallsetupsbutconsiderable

challengesremain.


29/191

SRAFinalReport


Evenbasiclevelcompetencesvaryindifferentsetupswithvaryingdegrees

of supervisoryskillsinassessingandfacilitatinglearning.

Theuseoftheportfoliovariedacrossdifferentsetupsgivingsome

indicationofthechallengetodrawingupasetofbasiccompetenceswith

whicheveryoneagreesandcomplies.

3.12Attempts

to

standardise

could

possibly

result

in

afocussing

on

aminimum

standardtoqualify.Thisisachallengenotuniquetothelegalprofession.

LLeeaarrnniinnggoouuttccoommeess

Thepilotschemeaimedtotestalearningoutcomesframeworkwithinthelegal

professionanditspotentialtoreplacethestandardtrainingcontractasamore

objectiveprocesswhichencouragesselfmanagedlearning,aprofessionalattitude

toworkthroughevidencegatheringandreflectionandtoassuretheregulatorand

theprofessionthatqualifyingsolicitorshavemetanevidencedbenchmarkstandard

acrossallsetups.Thelearningoutcomesforthisschemewerebasedonwhatwere

consideredthemaincompetencesrequiredofaDay1solicitorandtheseneededto

betestedforrelevance.

Theliteratureonskills,competencesandcapabilities[Resourcepaper11]hasbeen

extensiveparticularlyinthelastfifteenyearswithconfusionsarisingover

terminologyandarangeofcompetingconceptualisationsofaprofessional:the

skillsandattributesrequired;anapproachtofacilitatethedevelopmentofa

professionalandasystemofobjectivemeasurestoassesswhetherthatgoalhas

beenachieved.Theevidencedlearningoutcomesapproachhasemergedasthe

mostappropriate

pedagogic

framework

to

fulfil

these

aims

and

has

the

flexibility

for

applicationindifferentprofessionsandenvironments.However,traininginhowto

facilitateandassesslearningoutcomeshasbeenshowntobeanessential

componentinthesuccessoftheframeworkparticularlytheuseofreflectionand

whatconstitutesevidence[Resourcepaper5].

3.13 TheWBLschemedemonstratedthevalueoflearningoutcomesasan

appropriatelearningandassessmentapproachforthevocationalstageof

training.

3.14

Thelearning

outcomes

approach

was

overall

effective

in

guiding

candidates,

supervisorsandreviewers:

toensurecandidatesreceivedadequateexposuretotheareasoflaw

Thiswasmorechallengingforstream2.

toenablecandidatestobeproactive

toenablecandidatestoselfmanage

Selfmanagementwasaslowerprocessforsomethanforothersbut

noclearevidenceastowhy.

Itwasunclearfromtheportfolioshowmuchandwhatkindofhelp

wasgiven

by

supervisors/reviewers.

Not

every

exchange

was

recorded

intheportfolio.


30/191

SRAFinalReport


toensurecandidatesprovidedevidencefortheirlearningwhichformed

thebasisfordiscussionsbetweencandidatesandsupervisors/reviewers

aswellasforassessment

Theuseofonepieceofevidencetomeetseveraloutcomesisindicativeof

(i) theoverlapinthelearningoutcomes

(ii) insomecasesalackofvariedwork(moreevidentinstream2)

(iii) challengesinevidencinglearningoutcomes58.

3.15 Theschemesucceededinensuringallcandidateshadexposuretotheareasof

lawinpartduetothisexercisebeingacloselymonitoredpilotinwhich

compliancewasexpected.

Thiswasmorechallengingtoachieveforstream2andneedsfurther

development.

3.16 Thelearningoutcomesweretoonumerous,overlappingandprescriptivefortheintendedpurposeandtookupresourcesparticularlyintimecausing

hesitationaboutand,insomecases,resistancetoadoptingsucha

frameworkinthefuture.

3.17 Allthelearningoutcomeswereconsideredrelevantoverallbutthebusiness

awarenessoutcome,particularlyinthechangingeconomicclimate,emerged

asakeyoneforbothlegalfirmsandotherorganisations.

Thechallengewasnotrelevancebuthowtheycouldbedemonstrated.

3.18The

soft

skills

learning

outcomes

58were

challenging

to

demonstrate

for

all

candidatesusingtheevidencerequired. InotherapplicationsoftheWBL

framework,softskillsi.e.interpersonalandsocialskillsaredemonstrated

moreeffectivelythroughlearningconversationsandthroughreflection

sheets.

3.19 Reflectionsheetswereusedinseveralcasesinanattempttodemonstrate

theseoutcomesintheabsenceofotherformsofevidence.

GuidanceonthepurposeandvalueofreflectionwithinaWBLframework

waslimited,absentinsomecases,andneedstobeaddressed.

3.20 Thecontentious/advocacyexperiencerequirementwasitselfcontentious

andoutofdate.Itrequiresclarificationofwhatdefinesit,whatevidencesit

anditsrelevanceinallsetups.

3.21 Thelearningoutcomesastheyareframedanddeliveredcannotontheir

ownevidenceprofessionalismorpotential.

3.22 Learningoutcomes,tobeeffectiveasalearning,developmentand

assessmentapproach,needtobecomplementedbyskilledsupervisorsand

reviewerswho

are

an

essential

source

of

learning,

development

and

assessment(ofpotentialandprofessionalismaswellasskills)and


31/191

SRAFinalReport


instrumentalinfacilitatingamovetowardsselfmanagementandprofessional

acculturation.

Itwasnotclearwhatimpacttheskillofthesupervisor/reviewerhadinthe

achievingoftheoutcomes.

Tobeeffectiveintheroleofsupervisor/reviewerandassessorwithina

learningoutcomesbasedapproach,trainingisessentialandshouldincludea

developmentalmodel

taking

the

candidate

from

dependence

to

independence,frombeingtaughttobeingcoached.Coachingmodelsare

widelyregardedasthemostappropriatefortheprofessions[Resource

paper10].

PPoorrttffoolliioo

Inworkbasedlearning,aportfolioisavehicleforevidencingcompetences.Inthis

pilotschemeitsusehasprovidedvaluabledatatoinformthenextstepsinthisarea.

AlthoughtheSRAdidnotprescribeaportfolio,boththeinternalandexternal

assessmentorganisations

chose

this

method

of

delivery,

record

keeping,

evidencingandassessment.Anumberofinternalorganisationschosetheportfolio

becauseaportfolioorsomethingsimilarwasalreadyafeatureoftheirexisting

trainingpractices.Externalassessmentorganisations,influencedbyworkbased

learningpractices,foundittobethemostsuitableandaccessibleformof

(i) collectingandrecordingevidenceacrossvarioussetups

(ii) facilitatinglearningdevelopmentforcandidatesandtheirroleasassessors.

Someorganisations,whichhadnotusedaportfoliobefore,founditusefulandwere

consideringadopting

it

with

some

changes

in

any

event.

However

aportfolio

is

not

theonlyvehicleanditsefficacyvariesdependingonseveralfactorsincludinghowit

isused,howthevariousaspectsoftheportfolioareinterpretedandmanagedand

whetheritbecomesrelieduponasthesolemeansofassessment.Itisopentobeing

highlyprescriptiveandprocessfocussedwhichdoesnotsupporttheSRAs

educationandtrainingstrategywhichemphasisescompetenceratherthanprocess.

Therearedifferentversionsofportfoliosandevidenceintheliteratureofdifferent

waysinwhichtheyareusedintheprofessions,inworkplacesandinacademic

settings.Inanacademicsetting,portfoliosaremoreoftenusedatthe

undergraduateand

masters

levels

as

evidencing

learning

and

development

in

particularpartsofthecurriculumwhichmaybenewandhavepracticecomponents.

Forexample,theycanbeusedtoevidencetheapplicationofresearchmethods

throughsmallexercisesorprojects,aslearningjournalsforworkplacementsto

recordhowtheoryisrelatedtopracticeorasevidenceofattendanceandof

contributionstheexperienceismakingtothelearningofthecandidate/student.At

doctorallevel,portfoliosaremostoftenusedasoptionalselflearningtoolsand

assessmentisbasedontheintegrationofknowledgeandpracticethrough

papers/projects.Inaccreditingworkplacelearning,portfoliosareareliablelearning

tooltheearlystageswhenarticulatingpracticethroughreflectionandwriting

papers

on

practice

are,

for

many

experienced

workers,

relatively

new

activities.

In

thesecases,theportfoliosaremoreafacilitationoflearningthananassessment


32/191

SRAFinalReport


tool.Iftheyareusedforassessmentthentheyconstituteonlyapartofthat

assessment.Howeverportfolioscanbeusedeffectivelyinaverysophisticatedway

fortheprofessions[Resourcepaper3].Ifportfoliosareusedinthedeliveryofa

WBLframeworkandforassessmentthentheyrequiretrainingforcandidates,

supervisors/reviewersandassessors.Theyarenotnormallyusedastheonlymeans

ofsummativeassessment.Portfoliosaremoreoftenconsideredasalearningtool

forthecandidate/studentandtheeducationalinstituteorworkplacethanas

somethingwhichistransferableandpublic.Oneoftheexceptionstothiswouldbe

inthearts.

3.23 TheWBLschemebroughtaboutthesuccessfulintroductionofaportfolioasa

vehicleforlearning,professionaldevelopmentandformativeassessment.

Attimeslearningoutcomesandportfoliowereusedsynonymously.

3.24 TheWBLportfoliosystemsucceededinhelpingcandidatestoplantheirwork,

tracktheirprogress,reflectonchallengesandhaveabasisfordiscussionwith

theirsupervisors

and

reviewers.

Itwasrepetitiveandburdensomeresultinginonepieceofevidencebeing

usedtodemonstrateseveraloutcomesparticularlyinstream2.

Itwasprescriptiveinhibitingcandidatesfromthinkingforthemselves.

3.25 Thelimitationsoftheportfoliowerealsoduetohowitwasusedby

candidatesandemployers(see2.242.28).

Overconscientiouslyasinthecaseofsomeorganisationswhichwerenot

legalfirmswantingtodoeverythingwellandtotheletter.

Somelegalpracticesoperatingitinparallelwiththeirexistingtraining

contractexamples

of

some

portfolios

concentrating

on

the

incremental

stagesandothersmoreonthefinalstages.

Supervisorsfeedbackandreportsvaryingindepthandskill.

Somecandidateswritingupfeedbacktoworkon,othersnot.

3.26 SomeIAOsallowedmorerepetitionofdocumentsintermsofevidencingthe

learningoutcomesthanotherswhichhadimplicationsfortracking

progression.SomeIAOswereverysuspiciousofallowingacandidateto

includeevidenceofsubstandardworkintheirportfoliosevenifitwasinan

efforttoshowthattheyhadlearnedfrommistakesandprogressed.Other

IAOswere

supportive

of

allowing

acandidate

to

show

where

failings

had

occurredandhowtheyhadcorrectedthemwhendealingwithfuturematters

indicatinglearningprogression.

3.27 Therewassomeconfusionabouthowtodealwithevidenceof

supplementary internaltrainingforcandidates.SomeIAOsprovide

extensiveinternaltrainingfortheirtraineesincludingcourses,presentations,

lecturesandseminars.Inonecasetheportfoliosweregiventheirownsection

todealexclusivelywithevidencingattendanceatsuchsessions.OtherIAOs

eitherhadlessformalinternaltrainingorchosenottoincludeevidenceofitin

theportfolios.


33/191

SRAFinalReport


3.28 Thepersonallearninganddevelopmentplanwasconsideredasignificant

contributionbyfirmswhichdidnotpreviouslyhavethispracticeandby

employersofstream2.

Stream2reviewersactivelyhelpedwiththiswhichinthevariedandoften

challengingcircumstancesofstream2wasgoodpractice.Itwas

instrumentalinhelpingtodevelopselfmanagementinachievingthe

outcomes.

Stream2candidateswerequitecapableofselfmanagementintheirlegal

rolesbuttherewasevidencethatundertakingtheWBLwasdeskillingwhen

candidatesmovedoutoftheirusualareaoflaw.

3.29 SomeIAOsemphasisedtheimportanceofthepersonallearningand

developmentplanandconstructedthemindetailwiththecandidateandthe

supervisorcollaboratingonitscontent.Theseorganisationstendedtobe

thosethatusesimilardocumentsorsystemsintheirstandardtraining

contracts.AnumberofotherIAOshowever,preferredtoallowagreater

degreeof

autonomy

in

their

candidates

by

having

them

formulate

their

own

personallearninganddevelopmentplansasameansofselfreflection.

3.30 SomeIAOsweremoreconcernedwithconfidentialitythanotherswithsome

beingparticularlyconcernedaboutthecontentsofportfoliosbeingviewedby

partiesoutsidetheorganisationwhilstotherswerecontenttouseredaction.

Theevaluationteammembershadsomedifficultyinaccessingportfoliosin

somelegalpracticesonthegroundsofconfidentiality.

Therewasevidencefromtheportfoliosthatsubstantialredactionhadthe

sameimpactasexcludingthedocumentforanypotentialemployeror

external

monitor.

3.31 Theexternalassessmentorganisationsmadeseveralcontributionstorefining

andconveyingthepurposeandprocessesoftheWBLframeworkto

participantsinhowtomeetthelearningoutcomes.

3.32 Threetypesofportfoliosystemwereused adaptedelectronic,tailored

electronicandhardcopy.

Theportfoliosystem,particularlythehardcopyhassignificantproblems

concerningtransferability/portabilityincludingissuesofconfidentialityhard

copywasusedbymostofstream1andstream2.

Thetailoredelectronicwaswellreceivedbythosewhouseditincontrastto

theadaptedelectronicwhichwasveryunpopular.

3.33 Theportfolioofevidenceandassessmentoffersnoadvantagein

employabilityoverexistingtrainingsystems.Employerswillrelyontheir

interviewingprocessandonsupervisorsappraisalstodecidewhetheran

individualissuitableforapositionintheirparticularfirm.

3.34 Employerswillbemoreinclinedtoofferparalegalsaninterviewiftheyknow

theyhavecompletedtheWBLschemebutwouldmostlikelyonlyuse

supervisorsappraisals

to

inform

the

interview.


34/191

SRAFinalReport


3.35 IntermsofhowIAOsdifferedbeforeandaftertheyimplementedWBLthere

areacoupleofareastobehighlighted.Someorganisationswereclearthat

theydonotnormallyexpectlargeamountsofdocumentevidencetobe

collatedaspartofastandardtrainingcontractinordertodemonstrate

competence.Theportfoliosfarexceedtheamountofdocumentation

normallyexpectedofacandidate.Otherorganisationsdoexpectextensive

documentationfromtheirstandardtraineessotheportfoliotendedtobe

morefamiliartothemintermsofevidencerequirements.Insomecasesthe

organisationsinternalsystemsrequiregreaterevidencethanthatrequiredby

theportfolios.

AAsssseessssmmeenntt

Assessmentofcompetenceisperhapsoneofthemostresearchedareasofwork

basedlearning.TheSRAinitsendeavourtoimplementregulatoryobjectives

relatingtolicensuresoughttoexploreappropriateassessmentmethods.However,

itisalsooneofthemostchallengingaspectsofworkbasedlearningforthe

professionsasitssuccessispredicatedonaconceptualisationofprofessionalism,a

modelofskills,competencesandcapabilitieswhicharticulateit,asetofprocesses

andobjectiveswhichevidenceitandasetofdescriptorstoassessit.Inthispilot

scheme,everycarewastakentoensurethelearningoutcomeswereevidencedand

met.However,theschemealsohighlightedtheneedforaconfident

conceptualisationofprofessionalismintegratingskills,attitudesandattributes,a

robustmodeloftheseandchallenging,matureandcreativewaystodemonstrate

them.

Inthe

WBL

pilot

scheme,

the

portfolio

provided

the

demonstration

of

achievement

ofthelearningoutcomessupportedbyarangeofevidenceincludinglegal

documents;reflectionsheets;supervisor/reviewer feedback;useoffeedback;

formativeassessmentlevels;appraisals;exposuretoareasoflawand

contentious/noncontentiousexperience.Theassessmentofcompetencetoenter

theprofessionwasbasedonthisevidencebaseddemonstrationofachievementof

thelearningoutcomes.Howeverretentionbylegalfirmsofthesenewlyqualified

solicitorsappearedtobebasedonsomethingthattheportfoliosdidnotseemto

deliverontheirown[Resourcepapers2and7].

Inaddition

to

those

challenges

to

assessment

protocols

mentioned

there

are

others

whichrangefromcriteriatoobjectivity.Inworkbasedlearning,althoughdesigned

tomeetseveralofthosechallenges,someproblemsstillremain.Forexample:

(i) atwhatstagecanitbedecidedthatacandidatedoesnothavethepotentialto

achievethelevelsrequiredtogainanawardortoachieveprofessionalqualifications

andwhatcriteriaareusedtoreachthatdecision?Workbasedlearningisprogressive.

Learningoutcomesareachievedthroughaprocessofincrementallearninggivingrise

tothenotionthateveryonewillachievetheoutcomeseventually.Insome

organisationsifacandidatereachesacertainstageoveralongperiodoftimeitis

consideredunethical

not

to

allow

them

to

proceed.

To

address

this,

work

based

learninghasaseriesofleveldescriptorswhichclearlyoutlinewhatacandidateis


35/191

SRAFinalReport


expectedtoachieveateachlevel[Resourcepaper6].Ateachlevelthecandidateis

notonlyexpectedtomeettheleveldescriptorsbuttodemonstratepotentialforthe

nextlevel.Withoutdemonstratingthepotential,thecandidatecannotproceed.

Certainactionsaretaken,forexample,increasedsupportforthecandidate,andif

thisdoesnotinfluencetheoutcomethenthecandidatecannotprogresstowardsthe

particularawardtheyareaimingat.Howeversystemsareusuallyinplacetosupply

creditsoranexitawardsothatthereisrecognitionofthelearninguptothatpoint

[Resourcepapers2,4,5]

(ii) howcanlearningoutcomesensurethatprofessionalattributesandattitudescanbe

defined,developedandobjectivelyassessed?Portfoliosonthewholeareadequate

forskillsassessmenthowevertheassessmentofattributesandattitudesrequire

otherformsofengagementfromthecandidateandfromthesupervisorsuchasthe

skilleduseofreflectionandlearningconversationsbetweencandidateand

supervisor/reviewerandoralpresentationordialogicengagementinsummative

assessment [Resourcepapers2,3,10]

(iii)

whatdistinguishes

summative

assessment

from

formative

assessment?

Is

summative

assessmenttheaccumulationofformativeassessmentorissomethingmorerequired?

[Resourcepapers2,5,8].Formativeassessmentisameanstoassistalearnerto

progressthroughclearlydefinedtargetsofattainment.Summativeassessment

requiresanexpertviewonwhetherthelearningjourneyhasresultedintheacquiring

andintegrationofskillsandattitudeswhichthecandidatecanengagewithcritically.

Differentpracticesofassessmentexistacrossdifferentdomainsbutthereisgeneral

agreementthattodeliver,facilitateandassesslearningoutcomesfocused

approachesrequirestrainingforthoseengagedinit.

Acurrent

trend

in

the

development

of

assessment

protocols

considered

appropriateforworkplaceenvironmentsandwhichremoveassessmentfromthe

novice expertdyadisthe360degreeassessmentwhichhasvaryingdegreesof

success.Thisgiveseveryonewhoworkswiththetrainee/candidatetheopportunity

tobepartoftheassessmentprocessthroughfeedbackincludingthecandidate

havingtheopportunitytofeedbackoneveryoneelse.Suchassessmentsclaimto

captureamoreaccuratepictureoftheattributesandattitudesofanindividual,the

softskillsandofcoursetheskillsofthesupervisor

3.36 TheWBLschemedemonstratedthevalueoflearningoutcomesand

formativelyassessed

incremental

learning

as

an

appropriate

learning

frameworkfortheprofessionatthevocationalstage.Progresscouldbe

trackedontheportfoliosparticularlyinstream2.

Howthisprogresswasdefinedandassessedwasnotalwaysexplicit.

Guidelinesonhowincrementallearningisassessedwerenotsufficientand

in somecasesnonexistent.

Thelinkbetweenevidenceandprogressionwasnotclearacrossallsetups

therewasnoclearrationaleforthedifferentlevelsassignedtoattainment

intheportfolios.

Itwasunclearhowmuchsupervisionordirectionhadbeeninvestedto

produce

these

results.


36/191

SRAFinalReport


3.37 Theportfolioonitsownisnotareliablevehicleforsummativeassessmentas

itdoesnotadequatelydemonstratethedevelopmentofsoftskills,

professionalism,potentialandreduceddependencyontheinputofthe

supervisor/reviewer.

3.38 Theevidencerequirements,inhowtheywereused,emphasisedskills

(learninghowtodo)ratherthanattitude,initiativeandpotential.

3.38 VarianceinassessmentacrosssetsupswasprimarilyduetohowtheWBL

frameworkwasusedandlevelofindividualassessmentskills.

3.39 Thereweredifferencesinhowsupervisorsassessed.Someorganisations

seemedtoletacandidateseverydayworkaccountforthataspectoftheir

trainingandusethemeetingswithasupervisortogaugeareasinwhichthe

candidatecouldimprovethemselvesprofessionally.Otherorganisations

showedamarkedfocusontheportfolioasameansofphysicallyevidencing

professionalskills

and

these

show

agreater

degree

of

scrutiny

of

the

portfolios.Forexample,atoneorganisationthesupervisorsmadedetailed,

handwrittencommentsintheportfoliosthemselveswhilstatanotherthe

WBLsupervisoradmittedtonotpayingmuchattentiontotheportfolioatall.

3.40 Thereweredifferencesbetweentheminimumstandardachievedbyafew

candidatesfromstream2andstream1withtheminimumbeinghigherin

stream1.Howeverinhighperformersinbothgroupstherewasnomarked

differenceinlevelsofachievementandcompetence.

3.41

Therewere

differences

between

the

WBL

learning

and

assessment

system

andsomeofthosenormallyusedbyIAOsbutdifferencesvarieddependingon

thefirm.Weightandvarietyofevidencewashigherinsomecases,numberof

outcomesloweranduseofreflectionevidentbutnotintheformofseparate

reflectionsheets.

3.42 Interviewswithnonparticipantsintheschemedemonstratedastrong

consensusonthekeyissueswhichhaveemergedinthisevaluationexercise,

particularlyonchallengestoassessmentandwhattheattributesofanewly

qualifiedsolicitorshouldbe.

SeeFindingsAnnexe1.i.section6.3formoreextensiveevaluator

observationsonlearningoutcomes,portfoliosandassessments.

BBaarrrriieerrssttooEEnnttrryy

TheSRAdidnotholdbackinitsagendaforchange.TheSRAmadeitamajoraimof

t

work based learning middlesex report

Documents