Normal
This by no means constitutes advice and is from someone who doesn't have a clue about the recruitment process, however, I do have thoughts on this...I've always thought it's a bit odd that they ask for SQE/PGDL scores on applications when a significant number of contracts will be given to candidates, that are yet to sit either and could feasibly fail! Given that the only stipulation to start the TC is to just pass the exams, I've never understood why the score would matter? Surely a pass is a pass at this stage (i.e. pre-qualification)?For example, if I get a contract, I still need to sit both. If you've already passed yours, regardless of score, how can it be right that you could possibly be seen as a poorer candidate when I haven't even sat it yet! That doesn't make sense to me. Surely the fact you've sat it at all is demonstrating your commitment.Separately, I may message you at some point about your experiences of the PGDL. I'm a career changer too and slightly nervous about taking exams again...
This by no means constitutes advice and is from someone who doesn't have a clue about the recruitment process, however, I do have thoughts on this...
I've always thought it's a bit odd that they ask for SQE/PGDL scores on applications when a significant number of contracts will be given to candidates, that are yet to sit either and could feasibly fail! Given that the only stipulation to start the TC is to just pass the exams, I've never understood why the score would matter? Surely a pass is a pass at this stage (i.e. pre-qualification)?
For example, if I get a contract, I still need to sit both. If you've already passed yours, regardless of score, how can it be right that you could possibly be seen as a poorer candidate when I haven't even sat it yet! That doesn't make sense to me. Surely the fact you've sat it at all is demonstrating your commitment.
Separately, I may message you at some point about your experiences of the PGDL. I'm a career changer too and slightly nervous about taking exams again...