Law vs History then conversion?

[Jon1970]

Hi, I'm trying to help support my daughter on early uni thinking and don't have any lawyers in the family to offer experience and advice. DD is in Y12 and trying to decide whether to work towards a career in Law via a Law degree, or by doing History first then a conversion course. Part of the decision is that for Law, realistically she'd be unlikely to get into Oxbridge, but for History it could be possible. If she did Law, it would probably be somewhere like York, Warwick, Bristol, Manchester. From an employability perspective would she be better going to a top uni for History, then converting to Law, or would it be ok to do Law at an upper 1/3 or upper quartile ranked Uni? Many thanks and grateful for any thoughts/advice.

Undergraduate law confers no employment advantage at all with the only downside of the conversion being the cost of an extra year's study.

It makes essentially no difference to employability for solicitors. I do graduate recruitment for trainees at my City firm and it's not something we care about. However, the law conversion course adds a significant extra cost for her. I think Oxbridge would give her a slight edge over a Russell Group university but it's pretty marginal.

I agree that I think she'd be better off going for History. She has a lifetime ahead of her to study law if she so wants and if she's interested in History, far better to do it. It also gives you so many transferable skills which will be useful in any future career.

Academic results are used to screen applications and whittle down who gets invited to the assessment day, then it's the assessment day and interview which is determinative.

@Jon1970My DD did MFLs at university and is now a barrister. So maybe her experience might help.

She was great at MFLs and a bit unsure about studying law for 3 years. So always thought conversion would be best. Many city firms pay for the conversion. The Inns of Courts have scholarships for the conversion. So look at streams of money.

The dc with jobs lined up will have done internships and mini pupillages whilst at uni. DD used conversion year to volunteer in her area of law as far as possible.

Many of her friends don’t have law degrees. However the vast majority went to unis with strong law departments where they could tap into careers advice. Therefore I’d look at uni very carefully - for history. Employers don’t always look at uni so you need all those other skills to get through to selection.

Barristers are not quite the same. They recruit 40% from Oxbridge. Durham or Bristol or UCL or Kings if not Oxbridge are good shouts. Warwick too and Manchester or Birmingham for regional law but London is the big hub. However DD networked like mad at uni with mini pupilages and they are mostly in London. Also think about where internships are and what area of law she wants. What type of career? . Several of DDs friends have done a MLaw at Cambridge after conversion and before starting work. That’s a huge advantage but not vital of course. So plan very carefully.

As a Solicitor with a Law degree I personally would recommend a Law degree if she has an interest in Law. I never understand when people say it’s boring! If you do a conversion you just do the basic requirements, whereas you can study a wide range of interesting options on a law degree. I really enjoyed Law & medical ethics for example. Some Universities will let you pick a none law module each year too (Durham do)
The well regarded Universities for law eg Bristol require lnat law aptitude test taken early yr 13 - it’s multiple choice and essay. Average score was 23/42 this year to give an idea of difficulty, students sitting with be predicted A* and A.
York is very different it’s problem based learning.
Do look at admission stats - Warwick undergraduate law offer very few law places to home none contextual students.
Where you go to university is more important than other careers. I’d focus on Oxbridge and RG.

Some of the university open days for law do a taster lecture. UCL (criminal- how to get away with murder) , Lancaster (environmental law) , Queen Mary London (tort) we visited last year did. Worth her going to some and seeing if it’s something she can see herself studying.

The whole point about not studying law is to bring other skills to practicing as a lawyer. I’m not sure anyone thinks a law degree is boring but it’s not the best route for everyone and lots of employers agree. Always play to your strengths. My DD is a family law barrister. Lots of modules in a law degree would have interested her but she relished the route she took. Many of her friends did history, classics, MFL and even music. A wide variety of skills and interests and all the better for it.

I can definitely see benefits of some first degrees, lawyers with STEM first degrees for example can really be in demand.
Open day season is starting soon, I’d go to history and law talks at a few well regarded Universities and see what appeals most to her.

Can’t see stem as being a benefit for family law. It depends what you want. It’s empathy with people, working hard and smart and advocacy skills. Stem doesn’t necessarily produce this - horses for courses.

Thanks for all your comments and advice - very helpful and much appreciated :-)

Obviously not STEM for family law @TizerorFizz - but for more technical areas like product litigation, patents or construction. Or ex-medics going into medical law fields.

Still very common. Many history grads convert and Oxbridge was an easier way to get a training contract supported by a firm. I didn't pay for my conversion course but they paid me to do it!

It's still true today. Previous trainee was a history grad who had been paid to convert to law. I currently have another trainee who is pure law grad. Different challenges in terms of professional skills being developed.

Oxbridge is still a good ticket for getting into a tip law firm. If they like you a few thousand over couple of years to train you up is literally beans to them so don't let money be a factor.

If your daughter can get into Oxford to read History then I would choose that. I was a city lawyer and now teach on a law postgraduate course and Oxford was and still is a passport at least to interview level. Many big City firms actually prefer non law degrees and as a PP has pointed out, will pay for the conversion course plus give a living grant.
History will give her fantastic critical thinking skills and Oxford is a brilliant place to live and study for three years!

Many of the big firms pay for conversion and pay you as you are an employee! Grads are recruited direct from uni. Thats why students need to decide what type of law they want fairly early. As discussed above, stem can be useful, economics in particular, but there are many areas of law where a bright history grad will flourish. The conversion courses were around £9000 when dd did it. BPTC was £18,000 but they’ve changed that now I think. With scholarships DD didn’t pay any fees though. If you are employed as a solicitor, I think they pay course fees too although lots do conversion with no job lined up. Lots do BPTC with no pupilage. On DDs course it was 95% . They apply during that year.

However the big challenge is getting the job or pupillage. History at Oxford has around 28% success rate. DD would need to decide if she wants regional law or London law. If regional, Manchester is a good shout. If London, the unis I listed earlier because there will be a cohort wanting law in London and getting the jobs.

Speaking from the experience of teaching on the course which ALL potential lawyers have to pass…
If your daughter doesn’t get into Oxford for History, then a History degree at Durham/Edinburgh/St Andrews will give her a better advantage than a Law degree from say York.
The university is more important than the subject.
There are huge numbers of graduates seeking training contracts and so WHERE your degree is from is far more important than what it is.

Due to all the upheaval with solicitor qualification you need to be really careful that advice is up to date and remember that things are changing very fast at the moment.

Personally I was in your daughter's position and chose a law degree. I wish I had done history.

The key is the best uni and the best final grade.

Conversion isn't a big deal and with SQE doesn't even delay qualification much. Also many firms will sponsor it.

Agree that uni is very important for law. Doing the LPC at the College of Law some years ago, one of the top London law firms had a recruitment day (I think anedotally that they needed more trainees at short notice for a large case) - the notice / flyer was that if you had attended Oxbridge (for any degree) you were invited for interview.

They are unlikely to target unis like that now as it’s not fair access. Most firms want applicants from more unis now and initially recruit blind.

However I disagree about St Andrews and Edinburgh. They tend to feed Scottish law professional practices and don’t have so many wanting law jobs in London. Therefore not sure if London based firms actively recruit from Scotland.

The London/USA firms recruit up to 1/3 Oxbridge. Some barristers 100% Oxbridge. RG plus a few others account for another huge slice. Firsts are now more common so widening access has seemingly produced another filter with degree class. Top unis for London are Oxbridge, Durham, Bristol, Warwick, Nottingham and Exeter. Latest info I could find. However area of law wanted really matters regarding what attributes matter the most. Academics is one filter. Not the only one.

@TizerorFizz from personal experience, you'd be surprised at the inner workings of some law firms!

@Africa2go I would hope just wanting Oxbridge was a while ago though. As Oxbridge rejects some outstanding people being blinkered isn’t always going to get the right people. I agree Oxbridge is no hindrance and employment tests still seem to get the same results! Career changers are a broader group I think. Not sure I would be surprised but one hopes for the best practices.

I also assume that, as it’s easy to find out which chambers don’t have non Oxbridge pupils, other grads don’t bother applying. So self selecting by historical data. Or they put other applicants straight in the bin.

I meant a History degree from Edinburgh/St Andrews not a Law degree from there as obviously a different system from England and Wales

For me. Id like at the course content. I don't think the conversion courses cover like the really cool areas of law (as in the academic sections). Like I don't think a conversion course will cover legal philosophy

@Rainydayinlondon I know you did. My point is more about networking and careers fairs. The unis I have mentioned are more likely to have students wanting to be London lawyers irrespective of degree. If you want to study non law, it’s still very useful to mix with law students, take part in debates and take advantage of law careers fairs. Maybe the London firms do go en masse to Scotland but it’s easier if at one of the unis I have listed. That is not to say the Scottish unis aren’t world class. It’s just that they aren’t featuring in English law recruitment tables. Neither does LSE. I tend to think law is a bit of a lemming career - everyone is like minded in quite large numbers.