Survey of practical legal training in NSW reveals fewer than half of assignments are practical

The survey’s respondents also:

• perceived PLT completion as ticking a box and lacking deep relevance to legal practice
• said the shift toward online delivery for most of the course led to a lack of in-depth learning
• deemed the course difficult to fail
• reported a lack of academic rigour
• described PLT costs as prohibitive and failing to offer value
• considered paralegal work and other work undertaken during studies more useful than PLT
• believed employer-funded PLT could encourage new lawyers to choose private practice, which deepened the existing workforce imbalance across practice areas

The Legal Profession Admission Board (LPAB) reached out to PLT providers with copies of the report and requested detailed information to inform the LPAB's review of PLT in NSW, Bell said. Justice Tony Payne, the LPAB’s presiding member, has also formed a PLT working group; the group consists of the LPAB’s members and senior practitioners from around NSW.

The group seeks to explore short-term and long-term proposals for reforms and address the cost and quality issues regarding PLT, Bell said. The group is holding detailed focus group meetings with practitioners to discuss the concerns raised in the survey. The group plans to conduct further consultations, where current PLT students, recent PLT graduates, and others can participate. 

According to Bell’s statement, that Urbis received more than 2,500 responses from recently admitted practitioners and over 2,000 responses from supervisors as a part of the survey. Urbis conducted the survey on behalf of the LPAB; it primarily targeted recently admitted practitioners who had finished PLT within the past decade and their supervisors within that period.