Another Path - part IV

[321zyx]

Apologies if I've done this wrong! I seemed to have filled up the last thread, hopefully the abbreviated title is ok!

That said, if an applicant has a real desire to read say History at undergrad, then that's an excellent reason for applying for History. But it's a duff idea to apply because it's less competitive. I would say it's at least arguable that if you need to seek an alternative subject because it's less competitive then you may well not make the cut at TC or pupillage level.

@goodbyestranger I was merely responding to the poster who was in a tricky situation- I felt getting into a less competitive degree may be easier through CLEARING than law. Not implying at all that you should apply for a less competitive degree because it's easier to get into full stop.

I wish you would read the posts clearly and fully

(By the way DH has been a practising lawyer for over 24 years and has recruited many lawyers. He doesn't think there is any additional benefit for doing a law degree to practice law and this was the view shared by the teachers at school as well) . I don't think you have the same experience goodbye? Did you not work as a lawyer only for a few years?

However the only relevance of this to Mamgo's dd would be if going through clearing
Anyway Mango has not returned to the thread so perhaps she is not interested in what we have to say anyway

50% of lawyers read law. It is fine either way. Obviously you learn more law studying it for 3 years plus - rather than 1 plus 1 but it comes out in the wash eventually.

The main thing here is this situation for this girl is very complex with fees etc so it will really depend who good she is when IB results come out and secondly what the status is of the various possible choices. If they are pretty much the same and she is not bothered about another got a Oxbridge then just take the choice with the home fees loan. if that place is much worse then don't.

I was clear about what you said in your post chopc, which is why I felt it a little defeatist.

I'm not referring to a particular advantage when practising law, I was referring to the intrinsic value of a law degree in terms, in particular, of the breadth it offers re areas of law and all the background: politics, philosophy etc. Your DH takes the narrow view which is absolutely his prerogative to do - but he didn't read Law, so he's not in a brilliant place to comment about the degree.

Although you're correct that I didn't work at my particular Magic Circle firm for twenty four years, thank goodness. I left to go and live in the Mojave Desert/ have babies and the commute wouldn't have been especially practical.

It is a fair point about Oxford and the fees. One of ds’s compatriots had an “iffy” status and there was a great deal of wrangling trying to prove that she was a home student. Various people had to take her stuff home in the holidays as only international students were allowed to store things and of course she couldn’t then say can I keep my duvet here when she was supposed to be domiciled in the Uk.

I guess you win some lose some Irma.

I think it was a bit stressful keeping up the charade that she came from Newport Parnell as opposed to Timbuktu...

Hi all,
Thanks for the responses. Lots to think about. DD is adamant that she wants to study Law despite my suggestion that she might be better off applying for a different subject and studying Law later. She’s been looking at module options for her insurance choice but still doesn’t really like the look of the course compared to the options available at her firm. Anyway, an update. Choice 3 (the uni which mistakenly rejected her) have given her the option to have her fee status assessed before she decides whether or not to apply for them through UCAS Extra so we’ll see how that pans out. She really likes the course there but isn’t sure about giving up the chance of a very safe insurance option with so much uncertainty over grades this year.

If the bottom line is that the international fees for her firm are totally unaffordable (hindsight is a wonderful thing, but if the fee status hadn't been confirmed when she firmed - ? - she could have waited? We still haven't got to the deadline yet) and she is adamant that she doesn't want to go to the University she told UCAS was her preference if she didn't get into her firm, has she really got that much to lose by giving both up to apply through Extra? Assuming that the fee status decision for the '3rd choice' university is favourable and the university confirms that the place is there to be applied for, of course.

As always goodbye we will need to agree to disagree......

All the best to @mangoguava's DD. Hope it all works out for her

This is not in response to Mango's DD's situation nor aimed at any one poster but a general thought. Law is not a vocational degree such as medicine, vet medicine, engineering , nursing , dentistry etc

In fact as you progress through your career, if you are a co- operate lawyer, I think your job actually becomes less about the law and more about your charisma and the ability to win the business and manage your team

What has History got to do with accountancy? But I think there are many history graduates who are now accountants. The idea you should study something which is useful for your career is somewhat outdated in my view.

However if you are studying something because you truly love the subject - you can't go far wrong

A schoolfriend of mine has reached the very top echelons of Magic Circle Law. She got a first class Oxbridge History degree and did a law conversion course. She has never regretted it and it certainly hasn't held her back.

Depends how you practise law I suppose. I am updating a law book today. I am reading cases. I do loads of law and what I learned on a 3 year law degree and the Finals year after remains useful. However lots of people who do the law conversion course to fine too and end up in some cases doing a lot of legal research and law day in day out. That is why we say it does not matter and why 50% of new lawyers read law and 50% don't.

Sounds like from the update choice 3 are being reasonable and it will be best to see how things go, what the IB exam results are etc. Most people apply to Oxbridge have 4 other extremely good choice and of which would be fine for a legal career which is her aim. eg 3 of mine rejected Durham and went to Bristol (and didn't try Oxbridge). Durham, Warwick, Exeter etc all on their lists would all have been very good too.

opoponax one of my own DSs also has an Oxford first class degree in History and also seems to be doing fine at a Magic Circle firm (in that he just won £750 and a magnum of very nice brand champagne from the partners for showing most promise or something). I've no idea what chopc current beef is about, since I haven't said that I think that those reading Law have any particular edge over those reading eg History, once in practice. What I did say (although quite how chopc can take issue with either of these, not having read Law herself and not even having a DH who read Law) was: a) that a Law degree allows those inclined towards law as a career to explore far more areas than the conversion course allows and b) it's very lame to opt for a different subject on the basis of it being less competitive, and an applicant who takes that defeatist approach may well not be up to bagging a decent TC or pupillage. Loving a different subject is totally different, although it has to be said, it doesn't show much intellectual curiosity for academic law, which seems a shame.

So GS, if you are saying that Chopc cannot take issue with your assertions about the wider value of a law degree because she hasn't read Law herself, then surely by extension that means that you can't take issue with her views regarding, for example, all Medicine degrees being equal, because you haven't studied or worked in Medicine and she is a doctor. Agreed?

chopc can take all the issue she likes opoponax. She seems to be on fairly weak ground, but she can issue away :)

To be clear no, not agreed. Your premise is extraordinarily weak.

Only applying your 'logic' GS

No you are absolutely not applying my logic opoponax but you're welcome to think that you are.

Opponax is applying your logic goodbye - but you are so set on your opinions and not willing to deviate that you cannot admit it. Some of your statements are even contradictory but you just need to show that you are right.

Anyway it doesn't matter. The info and opinions are on here for people to do their own research and conclude

The more important question is what should the poor girl do with all these complications over when fees will be charged, this dreadful covid 19 year for A level/IB and the rest. The July IB results may be the decisive factor - if very good may be take the year out and do Oxbridge again and get absolute clarity in advance by September on the fee issue for all 5 2021/22 choices.

@Xenia each university decides what fee status they will offer. It's not something that can be known in advance. Or perhaps it is I don't know. May the UCAS advisors on here will know more.

You can give the same information to different Unis and they may give different decisions.

chopc I've only made two points here (apart from saying maybe mangoguava's DD could have another go at Oxford, given her LNAT score):

a) that Law degrees allow a much more varied and a far more in depth understanding of law generally than the conversion course does.

I'm not clear how that could possibly be wrong....

b) applying for a less competitive course than Law with a view to then going on to law as a career is a little defeatist and doesn't suggest the type of ability calculated to bag a decent TC or pupillage.

Again, I'm not clear how it isn't defeatist. I mean, if you're smart and interested in law, why not apply for Law? I've included the caveat about a real wish to study another subject at a higher level at least twice, but since your advice was based on the competitiveness of Law, it seems fair to say that that's quite a lame approach. If you can show me what's not lame about it, I'd welcome that.

I'm not at all clear that it's me who fails to read/ understand other posters' posts ....

And also no, she isn't applying my logic and her premise is false.

In terms of fee status you can also make a stronger case for home status, producing extra evidence etc if you have the luxury of time required to overturn the initial decision, which was exactly the point made by a couple of us, and one advantage to re-applying for 2022.