Rejection from Oxford (Law) - pre-interview

[nicolepanizza]

Hi everyone,

I am new here, but I am wondering whether you could offer me support and/advice.

My daughter has just heard this week that she has been rejected, pre-interview, to study Law at Oxford. This has been her dream since primary school, and she is devastated. She is predicted AAA in her A-level studies (English Lit, History, Politics), and is a senior prefect in her school. She also completed an EPQ last year (Year 12), where she was awarded an A (internal moderation) but was downgraded to a B via AQA moderation (she was not a part of this sample, so it seems incredibly unfair that she was detrimentally affected. Her school requested a re-moderation, she was (once again) not a part of the sample that was re-moderated, and her grade remained at a B). She completed her LNAT, and was generally happy with her efforts. She has received a lowered offer from Durham (issued within a week of her application - which is great news), and is waiting on an offer from UCL, Kings, and Nottingham. I want to support her, but wonder whether I should also advise her to consider taking a year out, and re-applying to Oxford? Any advice will be gratefully appreciated...

I'm sure it's not even as vaguely clear cut as this.

The truth is that while she is undoubtedly a brilliant student and passionate about learning everyone competing for the places to read law at Oxford will have the best grades.

And to be honest, some of the best students in the country will be doing so at Durham. It's a fantastic university that is highly respected and coveted.

I would be so wary of taking a year out to reapply because as others have said the disappointment in the event of another rejection would be crushing.

But more than this, her place at Durham is something to be celebrated. It's a fantastic degree from an esteemed institution and is an impressive platform on which to build a career in law.

She's done so well to get there - well done her!

@msmith501 the criteria for those tables are not the same as employers use. The complete university guide is using research, grades , experience etc . Law firms are looking more at the rigour of the course . Durham is definitely ranked higher , somewhere on mumsnet someone has posted a table of which universities most trainees attended .

You are absolutely right. Maybe this is of use? What does seem true is that the same names do keep cropping up. I also agree that it's time to get on and study... years off sometimes don't work out as well as hopes (and I had a year off)

blog.simplylawjobs.com/best-law-schools-uk/

... and I'm happy to be told that this table doesn't help but the penultimate column talked about job prospects. I actually think the grade attained and the attitude of the student goes a long way to securing a good job.

www.chambersstudent.co.uk/where-to-start/newsletter/law-firms-preferred-universities-2019

Link to survey on preferred universities

Good chart. Surprised LSE is low and also dropping. Wonder what causes the fluctuations?

I know she's disappointed, but honestly Oxbridge is not all that. My two most successful law school contemporaries are now (in their early 40s): head of practice group at massive US firm, easily on +2mil a year 2:1 KCL and managing partner of City firm 2:2 Exeter. Once you start working ability is far more important than where you go to uni. And actually at interview stage a first from a good uni is now a better differentiator than an Oxbridge 2:1.

@burnoutbabe I studied at Nottingham, I can assure you that most of the high flying degrees, so Law, any Science degree, IS 9-5 Mon-Fri. It’s a fucking slog to say the least.

Oxford lean very much towards interview preformance its not all about grades. I have a family member studying law there and their grade requirement was lower than other Unis.
The workload is incredibly high you have to be very strong to keep up

I can believe science and medicine are 9-5 courses but seems odd for law. It's supposed to be self study and a ton of reading. I mean it's ideal if they do all the reading for you 9-5 each day but that's not the norm.

I mean it's ideal if they do all the reading for you 9-5 each day but that's not the norm.

Yes, it would be nice, wouldn't it? But sadly, it seems not to be the norm at Nottingham either, these days:

Typical timetable

The undergraduate timetable varies from year to year and option to option. Typically, you will have 8-10 hours of lectures and two hours of seminars/tutorials per week. In addition to these contact hours, you should expect to undertake a substantial amount of private study per week.

So, probably a bit more than, say, History or English, but nothing like the attendance hours (as opposed to amount of hours in total one is actually required to devote to study in an average week) of the average Science undergraduate.

www.nottingham.ac.uk/law/study/undergraduate/teaching-learning/index.aspx

Law isn't a 9-5 timetable, it was about 12 hours a week when I was at uni.

Pharmacy was 9-5 (maybe with Wed afternoon off, not sure now)

If the OP's daughter wants to be a lawyer she won't be in any way disadvantaged by having a degree from Durham rather than Oxbridge. She'll have a similar lifestyle and uni experience as she would have done in Oxford, too. I'd go for the bird in the hand if it were me.

As PPs have said, Oxford interviews a far smaller percentage of candidates than Cambridge does. The score on her test will have counted for a lot. How were her GCSE grades? They matter a lot too, especially for DC from selective independent schools where a row of unbroken A*s is the norm.

But if she;s set her heart on it, I would definitely suggest she has another shot at it. Why not? Aim for three A*s at A level. Do some work in a solicitor's office, follow a case at the Old Bailey via the public gallery. Rewrite a blinding PS. Maybe research individual colleges more and look for one where her own legal interests coincide with the tutor's (not essential but could make for more interesting chat if called to interview.)

Another perspective that was offered by an Oxbridge tutor some years ago when we were looking: a lot of very good people won't get in to Oxbridge first time round. Go somewhere else, work hard, get a good degree and if you still feel you really want the Oxbridge experience, come back as a postgrad for a Masters or a PhD.
Worth noting that there are a huge number of Oxbridge dons who didn't go to Oxford or Cambridge for their first degrees.

After his GDL and BPTC, DDs boyfriend did the LLM at Cambridge before starting pupillage. That’s the route for many high flyers.

He did his first degree at Durham I should have added.

My husband studied law at oxford and was a solicitor for a top firm. He said they now almost prefer candidates that did not study law as an undergraduate. Does she have any other interests she could pursue? Or would want to? She should study law if that what she is passionate about but it's not a requirement. I friend's son missed out on a place at Cambridge (he got three A stars) and is quite happy at Durham.

He said they now almost prefer candidates that did not study law as an undergraduate

That's very unusual. The top firms publish their stats and although there is and always has been a mix.none are showing this,

Please tell your daughter first that it's totally natural to be disappointed, but, secondly, that in reality there is no need to be. I just missed my Cambridge offer, just missed getting a 1st, didn't get my preferred NQ job, was passed over for partnership first time round, got equity later than I wanted. Each & every time I beat myself up. But I've got a job I love, with fantastic clients and a decent work life balance, nicely paid.... it's all fine.

Disappointment is the flip side of ambition, she just needs to roll with it and look forward to the next challenge.

He said they now almost prefer candidates that did not study law as an undergraduate

they don't prefer, but they are happy to take trainees with a different background. Especially for intellectual property teams, if you have a science background it's good for understanding patent law. But they definitely don't prefer it, and it's also a barrier to entry to the profession as they would then be insisting on another year to do the conversion course which is very expensive. The big firms are only too aware of diversity issues.

@nicolepanizza

Durham, UCL and Kings!

These are all amazing universities. I'm applying for law at Oxford this year and I didn't apply to Kings out of fear of not getting in because of its prestige and amazing course!

I would say, pick one of those amazing options instead.

Umm! Kings more prestigious than Oxford? No it’s not. Nor more prestigious than Durham or UCL.

Oxford doesn’t suit anyone. If they’ve decided she’s not the right fit for them based on her LNAT score and other factors then it might be a blessing in disguise. I know a couple of people who have dropped out from there because they found the pressure and level immense. Clearly she has the scores to do well at Durham which is also top rated and if they’ve made a reduced offer then they really are keen to secure her.

In terms of a future legal career, Oxbridge doesn’t equate to success as a lawyer. It shows a certain level of IQ but not EQ. You need shit loads of that too in order to succeed long term.

Plus she can always consider a post grad at Oxford. This doesn’t have to be the end of her dream to go there, it just may not be the right time for her.