Choosing A'levels - what to do for law degree

[Okki]

DD is currently choosing a 6th form/ college. She currently wants to study law with French at Uni, but we know this could change.

Her preferred A levels are

French
English literature
Music
History
Law
Psychology

Obviously she can't do 6. French she has to do, but she's bilingual so we have been advised by uni admissions she should do 4 A'levels as French will be regarded as the easy option for her.

She hadn't previously considered doing Music as an A'level but is now wondering if it would give her an edge over another humanities subject as it would show a different skill set.

I haven't a clue. I didn't go to university and don't really know how to advise her. DH went to uni in France where its all different.

She's predicted 8/9 for her GCSE Literature, history and Music. She has a 9 for French. She's also on the Oxbridge pathway at school, but we know the chances are slim to non existent for her to get in, but she would like an RG uni.

Can anyone give me any tips for how to advise her. I will ask school/ colleges as well, but some real life experiences would be good too. Thank you.

When my DD did the BPTC, around 20/400 had pupillages lined up at the start of the course. Of course more obtained them in the next few years. Also dd didn’t have a first or any A star grades. Nor did she get the top level on the BPTC. However if you choose your area of law based on your strengths you can still be competitive. You won’t get the silly money but you can still be a bloody good barrister and earn well. Personal attributes and clarity of thought count for a lot. Also speed of working.

City law is very different and everyone doing law, or who wants to go into law, must evaluate who they are and what makes them tick. You need to be single minded, get every duck lined up and go for it!

There are preferred universities. I outlined a few earlier. Law outside London take more from regional law schools. London is more selective. It can afford to be. So not all RG is equal. I’ve attached the recruitment data for 2019 for top 100 law recruiters. RG is 77% of all trainees but there are noticeable differences between say, Durham and Liverpool. So when recruiters look for top 10, you can see which these are.

"cold spots" = places such as East London, Teeside, Knowsley and north Kent.

You will struggle to find amazing talent in every area of the uk. It’s not the job of recruiters to ensure these DC are well educated. They can of course advise on subjects and universities. However people then object to the advice. Or won’t take it as they want to stay local.

The universities try hard to be inclusive and diverse but recruiters recruit for their needs and in law it means DC must pass the tests and get shortlisted based on the recruiters criteria. Not the criteria of others who think everyone is equal.

The amount of effort now put into making DC aim high really has to be respected and trusted. If schools still get it wrong, they have only themselves to blame. I know someone who turned down a place at Sheffield to read Law. She preferred Bournemouth. The seaside!!! This was from a grammar school. So there are people who make odd choices everywhere!

Once you’re through the door it’s then about intellectual ability and personality. I have seen far too many trainees who look excellent on paper but are actually intellectually poor but increasingly seem to hold very “entitled” high opinions of themselves.

Obviously I defer to those that know about how to get on post-degree. But my point was about entry requirements. The Admissions advice that Cambridge publish states that Law, Psychology, Sociology, Music, Geography and several others are good choices to combine with History, Eng Lit, Languages and Maths. Are you saying this advice is wrong? Or just that academics don't follow the advice?

I did English language, French and business studies (and general studies, but everyone did that!)

I did straight law, but wish I'd done law with french.

Also agree with this. Law as a degree is pretty dry and dull. Or I certainly thought it was.

It’s on the Univ website, I have posted it earlier in the thread.

Clearly not being taught by inspired teachers like those I know at Cambridge, I guess. The value comes when a university is about the research done by it’s academics as much as it is about teaching.

Eh? I am also quoting from the website, where Law and Psychology are mentioned in the same category as Geography, Philosophy, Biology, etc, as good choices to combine with Hist,Eng Lang etc.

*Eng Lit

That’s the general page. In FAQ it hints differently

Could you link to that? Genuinely interested.

I found this where they (Cambridge, not necessarily what OP's DD even wants) outline some actual stats :

For 2017, 2018 and 2019 entry, the majority of applicants from an A Level background achieved at least grades AAA (62% of entrants). These successful applicants typically took at least one of English (Language, Language & Literature, or Literature, 86%), History, or a language. All remaining entrants took Mathematics and at least one of the ‘good choice combination subjects’ recommended by Subject Matters.* 9% of students admitted from A Level background took Law. For the same period, the majority of IB entrants attained at least 43 points overall and/or grades 777 at Higher Level.
This information is intended to give you a sense of the academic standard of our typical A Level entrants. We welcome applicants from a range of qualification backgrounds.
Ancient History, Classical Civilisation, Economics, Further Mathematics, Geography, Politics, History of Art, Law, Music, Philosophy, Psychology, Religious Studies, sciences (Biology, Chemistry or Physics) or Sociology*.

The bolding is mine...

They “welcome applicants” is absolutely not the same as them admitting those applicants, as the stats show. That’s because LNAT and interviews might well skew the A levels offered by successful candidates. As Oxbridge is now pitching for comp pupils of course they won’t exclude too many subjects. They are just the first hurdle. There are plenty more!

@TizerorFizz sorry, but what do you mean when you say LNAT might well skew the A Levels offered by successful candidates?
I believe 2023 entry is the first year Cambridge is using LNAT anyway.

Other universities have used LNAT for years. Just because someone offers Psychology, sociology and law, which are acceptable subjects, it doesn’t mean they will score highly in the LNAT. Data tends to show candidates offering traditional subjects score more highly. That’s why more of them get in. There is also a reason why Cambridge now use LNAT! To help differentiate between identical candidates maybe? It’s not all about results at A level. It’s how you think and teachability.

@TizerorFizz Cambridge previously used their own admissions test to differentiate so I'm not sure that's the reason for introducing the LNAT this year.
I'd like to see the data suggesting students offering traditional subjects score more highly in the LNAT.

I suspect it’s making it easier for candidates. One set of test results for several law ucas applications. Oxford demand the highest scores. Other universities using the tests are less choosy.

When you look at the list of subjects offered by the majority of successful candidates the same essay subjects crop up. LNAT has an essay element. You would find it far more challenging without a “hard” essay subject. I’ll try and post some info about what LNAT essay requires.

Blue is most popular subject combinations for Oxford, white for Cambridge. The subjects do not vary much! Cambridge apparently like the EPQ if you can do it to explore your interest in law. UCL and Kings are also choosy in LNAT scores, Glasgow less so of those who use it. Subjects are all about maximizing chances and the LNAT essay is a big hurdle.

sorry haven't RTFT
dd is doing law at uni. almost all her intake have done English Literature - beyond that a complete mix.

Uni courses for law also differ widely. Oxford is Jurisprudence, philosophy of law etc.
Others like Exeter (iirc) put you into "law firms" and you have mock court etc - sounds like an episode of Suits and Drama A level would be useful!

They are called Moot courts and all Law courses have them

@oshywatt I did a law degree and have no idea what A levels the other 150 people had taken. I didn't take English Literature. DS is currently studying law and has no idea what A levels his cohort of 300 took and he didn't do English Literature either.
In my experience law courses don't differ much at all. They all cover the same core subjects.

As dd didn’t do a law degree the law facilities made no odds. However debating society and Bar Society at university help. Plenty of universities never get any law grad becoming a barrister so facilities don’t mean that much.

Confidence in public speaking is always useful but not necessarily drama A level.