Am i mad to try and do the FE1's without a law degree??

OP, please don't think I'm sort of academic snob, but an ordinary degree (level 7) was until a couple of years ago called a National Diploma i.e a level 7 award. Under the National Framework of Qualifications a National Diploma became an Ordinary Degree.

The Law Society's requirement for candidates sitting the FE-1's to possess a university or HETAC degree pre-dated this change i.e when what was then merely a degree meant what is now termed an honours degree or level 8 award. My guess is that the Law Society have not lowered the entry threshold to allow ordinary degrees/national diploma satisfy their requirements, although I must admit I don't know this for sure. However, it was always possible for people who didn't satisfy this requirement to sit the preliminary exam, after which you can progress to sitting the fe-1's.

You won't want to hear this but it is the brutally honest truth; with just a level 7 ordinary degree behind you, you will probably struggle in the marketplace to obtain a traineeship as virtually all of your competition will possess at least an honours degree and a substantial proportion will also have post graduate qualifications too. I am not saying that you face an impossible task, but in my opinion, the only way for you to give yourself a realistic chance of leveliing the playing field in obtaining a traineeship is by: a) doing the 1 year in WIT and getting an honours law degree. Not only will this improve your cv it will prepare you better for the fe-1's. [quickest option]
b) obtaining significant legal secretarial, progressing to legal exec type experience pre traineeship. Really the only solicitors I know who do not possess a degree(i.e honours degree) either qualified 30 years ago or worked for a substantial period of time as legal secretary/exec, usualyy ILEX qualified too and gained valuable experience in that way before qualifying.

I suppose what I am saying to you is that, at the moment, you may be better served focussing on improving your qualifications and/or work experience. Because in reality I fear that in order to give yourself a reasonable chance of succeeding you need at least one or the other and preferably both. But where you don't really have either you are making it substantially harder for yourself to succedd then it need or ought to be. Okay, other may well post and say they know this person or that who is an trainee/solicitor/partner in some big firm or other and they don't have a honours degree and yes there are some people like that, but let's be realistic; these people are very much the exception rather than the rule and I would imagine that even these people would admit that it would have made life easier just to possess the qualifications.

Ashlinggnilsia wrote: »

thanks, you have given me alot to think about, however even if i do the 1 yr in WIT and get the honours degree if what your saying is true then it still will not be enough because it is not a university but and IT.

Dom't panic there is no discrimination like that. Anyway, I think I said "university or HETAC degree" in my other post. I'm sure you know that Intitute of Technologies do not have the power to confer their own awards/degree, as this power rests with HETAC. Which means that graduates from I.T.'s are conferred by HETAC and not the institution they attended. In any event, there is no discrimination on the basis that your honours degree was obtained after studying at an I.T., because HETAC awards are, as already pointed out, recognised by the Law Society.

law_lady wrote: »

OP, I definitely don't think you'd be mad to do the FE1s without a law degree, as the prep courses are quite comprehensive from what I've heard, and event those of us with law degrees have not touched certain subjects since first year, so we're not that far ahead at all! Best of luck with it.

Sorry to hog your thread a little, but I am considering sitting my first 4 FE1s in March, but would only be starting my study now. I just obtained my apprenticeship for May 2011 and am currently in the second semester of an LLM. I only have a few hours a week, and my work load is unlikely to be heavy until April.

I could live with only passing 3 out of the 4, it would just be great to be able to go for the other 5 in October and potentially have them out of the way with a few months of freedom before I start into my contract. But is it just impossible to cover that amount of material in just 2 months? Am I being totally unrealistic? All opinions gratefully received! Thanks in advance!

Cartianly it is possible to do them at this stage, just make sure you pick the smallest/easiest ones - the consensu would be equity, criminal, property, contract are the 4 easier ones.

Stay away from EU and constitutional at first as they are huge. I studied for 2 months an got all 4 fine, I know of ppl getting all 8 with 8 weeks study. Obviously you'll need to be doing an awful lot between now and then. I have alot of essays, notes on email if you want em? just PM me your e mail address if you want em!

On the whole level 8 thing, I think that a level 7 one is fine because I know of 2 ppl in my class who got pass degrees/3rd class honours and did the FE-1s in the last year. I think 3rd class honours are a level 7 qualification arnt they?

I think people are missing the point, the issue of whether the OP can sit the FE-1's is only one aspect of it. And whilst I doubt whether a level 7 ordinary degree will satisfy the Law Society requirements, the fact remains that it is easy overcome that difficulty, as it is really only a matter of passing the preliminary exam anyway. In any event, as far as I know the distinction between level 7 and level 8 awards is decided on the basis of modules/credits studied rather than grades per se, so that a 1:1 level 7 still ranks below a 3rd level 8.

Anyway, I think people should be realistic and offer realistic advice rather than of the theoretical variety. Really anybody who doesn't possess, at least, an honours degree (in any subject) and/or legal work experience will find it next to impossible to actually get a traineeship; and afterall that's what it is all about. Not much point passing 8 fe-1's if you cannot get a job afterwards! So why would one go to all of the effort of passing the fe-1's when the reality is that they are at a very significant disadvantage? Owing to their qualifications being below what most others possess and they don't even have the benefit of significant work experience to compensate for that.

I honestly don't think it is always a simple matter of advising people to go straight to do the fe-1's, sometimes people would undoubtedly be better served spending the time obtaining better qualifications or work experience which will serve them well when seeking a traineeship.