• Hey Guest, Have an interview coming up? We’ve opened new mock interview slots this week. Book here
  • Received a training contract offer? We're hiring. It's fully remote. Apply by 27 April 2026
  • TCLA Premium: Now half price (£30/month). Applications, interviews, commercial awareness + 700+ examples.
    Join →

TCLA Direct Training Contract Applications Discussion Thread 2025-26

Hey guys, just wondering if anyone can help me with this q. On Vantage applications theres a box for SQE1 and 2 information. I'm not sure whether to put my BPP LLM grade + modules, or my actual SQE grades + mark breakdown. Thanks in advance!Screenshot 2026-04-15 at 15.52.17.png
 
Hey guys, just wondering if anyone can help me with this q. On Vantage applications theres a box for SQE1 and 2 information. I'm not sure whether to put my BPP LLM grade + modules, or my actual SQE grades + mark breakdown. Thanks in advance!View attachment 8235
it doesn't matter, their application system is trash and doesn't reflect how SQE works, I reported it to them but they don't care and just want money from law firms and don't fix bugs. either one is fine - just choose the higher one!
 
Also, I’d really appreciate some advice on how to list work experience. I have considerable experience, but I don’t think I’m able to effectively convey it. My usual style is preliminary details (duration, team, etc.) followed by bullet points of the specific work I did. However, I realised after someone pointed out that since I’m an international candidate, the specific bullet points may not effectively be conveying the kind of work I did. They suggested using prose, but I haven’t been able to find samples that I feel satisfied by. Any suggestions are welcome!
Hey!

I would always recommend writing your work experience in prose (unless the firm states otherwise) as it allows you to add depth to each experience and make sure that the graduate recruitment team fully understands the context of your role, rather than expecting them to piece it together from bullet points.

In terms of structure, I would keep it quite simple and follow a structure such as:
  • Start by clearly setting out what your role was and the context (e.g. the team, practice area, and type of work the organisation does)
  • Then explain your main responsibilities in the role, but in a way that shows depth rather than just listing tasks
  • Finally, and most importantly, highlight the skills and insights you gained and explicitly link these to how they would be useful as a trainee solicitor
The last part is often what is missing - it isn't necessary just about what you did, but what it demonstrates about your abilities and fit for the role. For example, rather than just describing drafting or research, you can draw out skills like attention to detail, commercial awareness, managing deadlines, or communicating complex information clearly.

I always liked to think of it as telling a short story or blurb about your work experience - outlining what you did, what you learned, and why that matters for a trainee role :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: rain2801
Has anyone done a VS AC before and also done a TC AC before? Was there a substantial difference in your experience/ what you feel they're looking for? Any advice on how to do well for DTC ACs despite having failed VS ACs?

Feel free to DM too - happy to hear from different perspectives and experiences!

(because I assume at VS ACs, they're more willing to take a risk on a candidate because there is a 2 week "interview" (VS) afterwards right? is the DTC AC higher standards?)
 
Has anyone done a VS AC before and also done a TC AC before? Was there a substantial difference in your experience/ what you feel they're looking for? Any advice on how to do well for DTC ACs despite having failed VS ACs?

Feel free to DM too - happy to hear from different perspectives and experiences!

(because I assume at VS ACs, they're more willing to take a risk on a candidate because there is a 2 week "interview" (VS) afterwards right? is the DTC AC higher standards?)
Hey!

I have done both, and I would say that DTC AC's typically do have a higher benchmark as the firm isn't able to assess you over an extended period of time like a VS. This can sometimes mean that the standard of performance is higher, and I have found that they usually include additional tasks as well (to assess you across more competencies).

With a vacation scheme AC, as you mentioned, the firm knows that they'll have a couple of weeks to get to know you, so there is sometimes a bit more room for potential. They can see how you work in practice, how you take feedback, and how you develop over time. With a DTC AC, they don't have that follow-up period, so they are usually looking for things to come across more clearly on the day.

In practical terms, I found that this means your answers need to be more polished and well-formed. Your motivations should feel really clear and backed up with evidence (e.g. why commercial law, why this firm, why you), your competency examples should be a bit more developed and structured, and your commercial awareness should come across in a more practical and applied way - instead of just showing that you know what is going on, you need to be able to explain why it matters for clients or the firm. They aren't expecting lots of legal experience, but they are expecting you to show how your experiences have made you suited to the role of a trainee solicitor at this specific firm.

On the VS vs DTC point, I do think it is fair to say that firms can take slightly more of a "wait and see" approach with vac schemes, whereas with DTC they need to be a bit more confident upfront. However, I don't think that means that the bar is wildly different, and plenty of people who don't convert a VS AC go on to succeed at a DTC AC (myself included - and I don't think of myself as particularly confident in those sorts of assessments!).

If you have had a VS AC that didn't go your way, I always found that these were really valuable in shaping how I prepared for the next one. Things such as being more structured, more concise, and a bit more deliberate in how you link your answers back to the firm and its work are all little things that can make a huge difference. There is absolutely no reason why you would fail to convert a DTC AC just because you might not have converted a VS AC in the past - different firms have different benchmarks, and it might just be that you weren't the right fit at the time (+ you might be for this firm!).

I hope that offers an alternative perspective, but happy to chat about it further if you have any other questions! :)
 

About Us

The Corporate Law Academy (TCLA) was founded in 2018 because we wanted to improve the legal journey. We wanted more transparency and better training. We wanted to form a community of aspiring lawyers who care about becoming the best version of themselves.

Get Our 2026 Vacation Scheme Guide

Nail your vacation scheme applications this year with our latest guide, with sample answers to law firm questions.