Doing law not at a russell group.

I had a bit of a flop at a levels, I got cocky and thought I could get the grades needed for my top choice uni without working really hard. (A foolish error, that I assure you I am reaping the consequences for). I was left with low grades and an offer to go to manchester metropolitan to study law. Believing I would be left without any university I jumped on the chance. However after reading a few student room articles, I see MMU get a lot of hate along with any university that isn't russell group.
Is it worth doing law at a university that isn't Russell group?

Was it my posts on the Law Hopefuls Thread that gave you that suspicion? I am being criticized too for having 2 non Russell Group uni's on my choices list. I think, don't worry about what others think. Go to MMU and make the most of it, get a first, and see where that takes you! There is nothing stopping you getting you where you want to be in life. And, a law degree is extremely transferrable, you don't have to work in the legal profession at all. A managerial role in a high profile company can be achieved with a law degree, along with a wide range of other high class jobs. Good luck!

Criticised is a bit harsh :/ If anything, others are seeing more potential in you than you do in yourself & you come across as a sort of glass is half empty guy, where we see your glass as half full! :P

Though I agree with everything you've said up there - OP, university is what you make of it. Knuckle down, get a first, and if you really want to go somewhere prestigious, there's always the option for a Masters somewhere to add to your CV. Just get involved and apply for vacation schemes. Your first year REALLY does count in terms of securing vacation schemes for the summer after your first year, which then makes it easier in 2nd year, which is when one should be looking to secure a training contract.

I could talk about this all day... Do you want to be a commercial solicitor practising in London? If so, do not bother going to Man Met you will be laughed out the application pile. As per another post with the same link I will put below, the Oxbridge/Russell Group bias is still prevalent.

http://www.chambersstudent.co.uk/media/1067/what_is_a_good_university.pdf

If you wish to practise anything other than commercial law in the city, a non RG degree gives you more hope as outside London firms are not as bothered about having an Oxbridge/Russell Group degree

You're really being quite snooty with this attitude now. OP will not be 'laughed at' - there are several law firms now that are much more accepting of strong applicants from nontraditional universities. It is a great shame that you make it your mission to put down others when your research into the very career you endorse is quite limited. Indeed, I spent some time at Clifford Chance, and there were a wide array of trainees there from all sorts of universities. The same has been said about Herbert Smith, Freshfields etc etc..

It is not the end of the world for OP if they went to Man Met, but it would obviously make things easier if they decided to retake and went to a more traditional uni.

Posted from TSR Mobile

This diversity you mention is not quite as prevalent as you think. The thing with taking people from non traditional unis is that they nearly all do not have good grades prior to uni. I do not mean just straight A*s etc when I say that. Not having strong grades goes against the pretty obvious prerequisites for a lawyer, academic ability. At non traditional unis, degrees are not as rigorous so a 1st from Man Met is significantly easier to achieve compared to a 1st from Exeter for example. I have fellow Russell Group law student friends who have visited lots of top firms and found no non RG/Oxbridge amongst the trainee intakes. If you scour the pages of the trainees on the firms websites/Linkedin you will see a similar pattern. Law firm campus ambassador roles are also only available at the traditional universities. If they wanted to be diverse I am sure they would have an ambassador at a non traditional uni, but then that would give people at non traditional unis who do not have the right grades this idea that these top firms would be interested in them, which they never will be, so they do not. Please tell me a valid reason why there are not campus ambassador positions for firms at these non traditional unis. There is still an awful amount of evidence that firms really are not as diversifying as you think they have just switched to being...

Why not spend some time at a law firm first *and speak to people before giving out what seems to be half-researched advice.**

This diversity you mention is not quite as prevalent as you think. The thing with taking people from non traditional unis is that they nearly all do not have good grades prior to uni. I do not mean just straight A*s etc when I say that. Not having strong grades goes against the pretty obvious prerequisites for a lawyer, academic ability. At non traditional unis, degrees are not as rigorous so a 1st from Man Met is significantly easier to achieve compared to a 1st from Exeter for example. I have fellow Russell Group law student friends who have visited lots of top firms and found no non RG/Oxbridge amongst the trainee intakes. If you scour the pages of the trainees on the firms websites/Linkedin you will see a similar pattern. Law firm campus ambassador roles are also only available at the traditional universities. If they wanted to be diverse I am sure they would have an ambassador at a non traditional uni, but then that would give people at non traditional unis who do not have the right grades this idea that these top firms would be interested in them, which they never will be, so they do not. Please tell me a valid reason why there are not campus ambassador positions for firms at these non traditional unis.

You will have seen comments on posts of people claiming to have been told by MC and top city grad recruitment they do not focus or care about university attended. Imagine if just went around saying they said that they do take it into account, it would spread like wildfire and people would not apply due to an elitist view. So they save the uni discrimination to reviewing applications when nobody is going to know how they pick who to interview etc. There is still a lot amount of evidence that firms really are not as diversifying as you think they have switched to being... Law is cutthroat, deal with it.

I know what I know from my fellow Russell Group law friends who are a year ahead who have visited many firms.... They have visited all the MC and elite US firms. I am starting my degree this year hence why I haven't visited any yet.

gaining a degree at a russell group uni doesnt ensure youl get a job, just like any other university

Uh huh, so you know what you know from other somewhat snobby students themselves who have only just started thinking about law careers.

The fact of the matter is, a lot of mainstream firms are no longer being quite as strict about prestige. There are contextual recruitment processes, uni blind processes and firms departing away from a-level grade requirements. This is resulting in achieving a vac scheme place or a TC for high achieving nontraditional uni students becoming much more of a possibility.

For reference, I know people from Westminster, Greenwich, Man Met, NTU, and various other universities which you so obnoxiously quoted as 'being laughed at' who are all currently training at some of the best firms in the country and in the world.

My aggression against you isn't about the general gist (you have a better chance coming from a good RG/non-RG, that is, of course, true) it is with regards to your understanding of how recruiting works and your borderline condescending attitude towards universities outside of that group. I'd suggest maybe toning that down, because it won't pose well when you inevitably come across people from those unis at whatever firm you end up in (if you even end up at a firm).

All this talk of 'omg theoretically tho if someone had a first from UCL but a first from Coventry, the Oxford fellow would win out' and 'ermagherd ma statistics', isn't gonna change the above.

That's all I wanted to say really.

Posted from TSR Mobile