Daughter has law offers - which should she choose?

[scattysue]

My daughter applied to Bristol, Warwick, King's, UCL and Nottingham for law. She got 34 in the LNAT which is apparently great (state school student with no help). 8.2 in essay. She has got offers from all 5 unis but her school now suggest she should turn them all down and apply next year to Oxford (NB: she did not apply to Oxbridge this year). What do you think?

DS is at UCL and loving it… but it would not have been my choice. It’s v expensive! But DS has a decent job too which helps.

Id suggest she accepts the uni which she likes the most. Just one word in support of the school - if she really wants Oxbridge and has a plan for next year, she could reapply (if she gets all A*) and she might be successful. 2 of DS’ friends did that and it worked for them (both state school).

Can she not go to one of the others and apply for Oxford at the same time? Then she could repeat year 1 at Oxford if she gets in and stay at her first choice if she doesn’t or doesn’t want to move.

Oxford wouldn't be hugely impressed by that approach. So the DD would either have to lie about what she was doing in her year off (extremely bad idea) or any thoughts of an offer from Oxford might well be scuppered.

I see absolutely nothing wrong at all with the advice. The Oxford Law degree is exceptional and exceptionally well taught. It's an excellent currency in the job market and the city is a beautiful one to spend three years in.

OP UCL would be at the top of my list by some way but UCL is extremely likely to re-offer next year. Would your DD have any interest in the four year Law degree at Oxford? https://www.ox.ac.uk/admissions/undergraduate/courses/course-listing/law-jurisprudence
If so, she could use her year to improve her MFL - that would be a great use of her time and probably very enjoyable.
34 is a very good score. If she got that first time around there's every reason to think that she'd score similarly next time around. I would advise her to give it very serious thought. The fact that some applicants don't get in with four A* is entirely irrelevant to your DD. Some applicants get in with way less and emerge with first class degrees.
Of course if she's no interest in Oxford then what I've said is irrelevant too :) But I'm guessing that she is wondering about it, given that you've taken the trouble to post.

This is a state school. Some schools genuinely try to do the best for their students as individuals. The idea that everything goes back to self-interest is probably a bit unfair on the teacher or teachers trying to encourage a student with clear potential to aim for one of the best law schools in the UK - especially since Y14 applications involve additional work for the school.

That’s interesting. Why wouldn’t they be interested in a student positioning herself to be the best candidate for their course? I’d call them and talk about it.

Do you mean why wouldn't they like a application from someone who's already taken a place elsewhere?

Well this is the Cambridge approach: https://www.undergraduate.study.cam.ac.uk/apply/before/entry-requirements
And Oxford is the same:
https://www.ox.ac.uk/admissions/undergraduate/courses/admission-requirements/uk-qualifications
It's unfair on the original uni for a big starters.
This DD wouldn't have exceptional circumstances; she'd be hedging her bets - very different and very definitely frowned upon.
There's not much to talk about - they'll tell the DD exactly what they say so clearly on their website.

Very definitely not in the best interest of the student. What you described as “hedging your bets” is really just a candidate who wants to get on with their academic work and not lose a year to an application process. Revolting behaviour from the universities. I would imagine it’s yet another barrier to the less well off accessing Oxbridge, especially as the reason this child didn’t apply in the first place is clearly that her school were not able to identify her potential.

It's absolutely fair and those who it will disadvantage are the well off, not the less well off.

Very boring outlook to want to repeat the first year of a law degree. Also very expensive in terms of the student loan. Also taking away a place from another applicant who might have used the place at the original university profitably. Disruptive socially.

To say that it's 'revolting' is extraordinary. If this DD likes the idea of Oxford then she should do something way more constructive and way less expensive than squatting at UCL (or wherever) with mixed feelings about it.

Would she want to try for Oxbridge? It might open more doors for training contracts but is a very particular environment and the course quite dry. What would she do with her gap year? She might feel more at home in one of the others, all of which are well regarded. Is she a city girl at heart, has she visited and met teaching staff, do any of those have specialisms or teach modules which really interest her?

This is not allowed. Oxford will not make an offer in this situation.

So an able candidate who was missed by her school so did not apply should take a year out and apply for Oxford rather than study the subject she wants and apply in the next round for Oxford? I think this is a university attitude problem and will mean they miss disadvantaged students year on year. They will of course keep getting those who come from schools and backgrounds that recognise able students and advise them early to try but what a shame for those that come from less clued up schools/families and can’t afford to gamble a year. Nobody loses from the best students getting the education they deserve. This child has risen to the top in an unfavourable school, unrecognised till too late. Everyone surrounding the application process should be making their path to success clear and as obstacle free as possible. So, yes, the idea that they couldn’t do a first year elsewhere while applying IS revolting.

Universities don’t like the hedging your bet approach because it wastes a year of student finance, which can screw the student over later down the line if they need to resit a year - it’s not in the best interest of the student to allow this approach.

UCL is excellent but very expensive if not able to commute. However there are grants available for those from lower income families and also there are well paid internships available in London.

I think the school don’t have your daughter’s best interests at stake.
Of course they want your daughter to apply to Oxbridge. Schools like to state how many of their students went there.

The term revolting is hyperbole. It's also not an appropriate term to use in this context.

We have no idea that the school 'missed' anything. Perhaps the DD in question chose not to apply for Oxbridge for reasons of her own and was surprised by her strong LNAT result.

This is most certainly not a widening participation issue. We also don't know that the DD is in a disadvantaged category unless you believe that all state schoolers are disadvantaged (which would of course be nonsense).

What were her GCSE results OP?

Thank you, @Sapienza and @AelinAG , for clarifying that DD cannot apply to Oxford whilst attending another university. I agree changing the regulation would be likely to harm (many) more students than it helps.

I think it is more in the school’s interest than DD’s that she take a gap year. Really not impressed. She has fine options. With the ability she has shown, she is potentially a first class student. For this reason I think she should research career outcomes and only choose between the universities that can demonstrably support her dreams and goals.

I am also writing to confirm that one must take the LNAT again for each new UCAS application.

As Far as I’m aware “revolting” is an accurate descriptor for my own feelings reading this scenario. By all means do choose your own to describe my feelings but they are unlikely to be more accurate.

Many state schools aren’t great at identifying strong candidates who might want to apply for Oxford/bridge to suggest that they receive the same support in this process to those at public school is laughable. It very much IS a widening participation issue. Processes that exclude “late to the table” applicants do little to widen participation, anyone can see that. A single congested path to any destination is heavily weighted towards those who are shepherded by expert guides, or follow those known to them.

@scattysue Not sure if anyone has asked but what does DC want to do after a degree, as that might sway things.

with offers like that, she should go to whichever is considered to be the best one to have on her CV. Assuming she visits first and doesn't hate it on sight of course

Amazing offers. Congratulations. Presumably she didn’t apply to Oxbridge as didn’t fancy it. I’d not follow school’s advice. Quite different university experiences, which offer day did she like best, presumably she has a preference. Is finance an issue - London needs careful consideration.
League table wise I’d look at complete university guide and times.
We did open days for kings and ucl law and I personally preferred Kings (I’ve a law degree I thought the kings optional modules were best we saw)
At end of day she can’t go wrong with any of those choices.
Oxbridge is 1 in 12 acceptance for law. She’d need to resit lnat. The teaching style isn’t everyone’s cup of tea.

@Ohthatsabitshit , @Auchencar and others:

In this case the LNAT awakened everyone to DD’s potential, and the LNAT organiser practices a double standard.

They release scores for all exams taken by mid October within 24 hrs of the last of these (by 21 Oct last year) to universities only, and release scores from later attempts to universities within 24 hrs of each exam.

Scores are only released to applicants twice a year, the first time is in Feb.

It is reasonable that applicants would use the LNAT score to assess whether they should apply to Oxbridge. If LNAT timings were adjusted so that scores for early exams were released to everyone in time to make an Oxbridge application, this quandry wouldn’t have happened. It isn’t a marking issue as scores are already being released to universities.

This would be an easy way to widen participation.

Do school have any idea how prestigious a ucl law offer is? It’s same acceptance odds as Oxbridge over 4000 for 200 ish places. In complete uni guide league tables it’s higher placed than Oxford.

I think it is a great option

I would say that UCL is the best option here.

It is as good an offer as Oxbridge for Law.

My son is at UCL, for another subject, and loves it.

Great offers, all really good universities and well regarded for law!

I wouldn't bother with Oxford at this point unless she's desperately keen. I got a training contract at a top City firm and did vacation placements at several others including magic circle, and while the Oxbridge alumni cohort was noticeable all the universities your DD has offers for were very well represented so I think it comes down to what your DD wants from the university experience. I personally found London too full on/hectic and too expensive when I worked there as a trainee solicitor and junior so wouldn't be keen on UCL or Kings. Warwick is a campus so that's also a factor. For me it'd be between Bristol and Nottingham as both are amazing cities to be in as a student (I went to Bristol - not to study law though - and loved it enough that I'm back there now as a qualified solicitor).

Your DD is bound to have a great time whatever she chooses so congrats to her!