University law schools should certainly stop calling their law degrees Qualifying Law Degrees now, but it’s not correct to say that they only keep the seven core subjects in their law degrees for potential Bar students; the best firms of solicitors still want a law degree of quality or GDL as well as SQE, for traineeships and also for any NQs or junior lawyers they take on. They’re much less likely to take someone with no full law degree or GDL, even if they’d passed SQE. The firms know that the SQE prep courses are crammers, the exams are MCQs only with no writing and the depth of legal knowledge obtained is shallow. They want people with high quality legal education.
So, keeping the seven core subjects means a law degree has a kite mark of quality. Universities would be mad to make their law degrees a smorgasbord of optional quasi-legal modules and thereby lose their flagship attractiveness to the best students.

Yer just prejudiced!!!

I remember over 20 years ago the law departments of certain Scottish universities didn’t explain clearly in their literature that the three year degree courses there are for an “ordinary” degree (a bare pass in England) and that to get an honours agree you would need to do an extra year.

Not to mention the additional costs and time that it takes to qualify there.

Speaking from experience.