The changes, under which people will be able to join law firms as apprentices after leaving school, marks the biggest reform to legal education in a generation.

After gaining mandatory work experience, they will sit a two-part exam for solicitors in order to become fully qualified.

The move, which is similar to the old system in which articled clerks paid firms to give them on-the-job training before they sat a final exam held by the Law Society, is controversial. Legal academics and solicitors have accused the Legal Services Board of “dumbing down” entry requirements with the new regime.

Its proponents, however, led by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), say it will broaden access to the profession to people who would otherwise be excluded.

The new system will reduce costs by tens of thousands of pounds.

Helen Phillips, chairwoman of the Legal Services Board, said that it aimed to “ensure consistency of standards and improve diversity access to the sector”.

She added that the reforms were designed to “help increase consumers’ trust and confidence, create a profession that better reflects society, and widen access to justice”.

In 2016 law professor Anthony Bradney, published an 18-page paper for think tank Politeia claiming the proposals would dumb down the law.

Professor Bradney, of Keele University, said that “emphasising the lack of connection between degrees and qualification, as the SRA is doing, when other occupations are doing the reverse will diminish confidence in solicitors”.