Law Applicants 2012

I think either's acceptable. It wouldn't be important, anyway. Content is worth far more than strict etiquette like that.

I think either's acceptable. It wouldn't be important, anyway. Content is worth far more than strict etiquette like that.

Any chance you could clear a bit of space in your inbox so that I can PM you?

Yep, done

I passed my Access course with 54 Distinctions (out of 54) and am predicted an A* on my English GCSE resit. However my LNAT was awful and I only got 19 (it was a bad day). What do you reckon?

Hi guys, 2013 applicant here so I hope you don't mind me intruding to ask a quick question! I have been stalking the thread for months aha.

I'm beginning my personal statement at the moment, and what I've got so far seems alright, but it's just lacking the "killer blow" at the moment; I feel like what I'm writing is very "middle of the road" and the kind of thing that all other applicants will be saying too.

Do you guys have any tips you could pass on regarding what makes a good law personal statement? Dos and Don'ts?

Cheers in advance, would really appreciate some advice!

They probably all cringed when you opened up with a quote. One of the biggest personal statement clichés of all.

What grades did you get? AS/ A2 predictions and gcses?
and well done on your scholarship!

I'm not being nosy but what was your LNAT score and AL subjects - grades?
You had a wonderful personal statement, weird you did not get accepted.

From my point of view it's safer to do another degree at a respected uni for a course which has lower entry requirements and then do the GDL, in case you decide you really want to be a lawyer.

Congratulations You got 3 more credits at Distinction than me :P

Have you spoken to Durham?

I couldn't call them yesterday, so sent an email to which they haven't replied, think I should call them anyway? Don't want to sound pushy! lol

You got into Kings! What was your LNAT like? So disappointed in mine, in hindsight I shouldn't have re-read it once I was finished and started second guessing my original answers. Live and learn! Edit: Just saw your LNAT in your blog...30? Well done sir!

As for the personal statement and even my uni choices actually... if I was applying through UCAS now, after a year back in education (as opposed to within the first three weeks at college), I would have done so many things differently! I can't bear to read my PS now, it just makes me cringe. As does thinking about my Cambridge interview experience.

From my point of view it's safer to do another degree at a respected uni for a course which has lower entry requirements and then do the GDL, in case you decide you really want to be a lawyer.

Sorry I'm a bit confused, are you saying that if our grades are not good enough for a russel/respected university then we should consider doing another course at said university?


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

With respect, I would very strongly disagree. The GDL is for high-powered graduates to get a gloss of law before they go into a sponsored traineeship - as I understand. Perhaps it might be a good idea to wait until 21, do some different law jobs, see if one still wants to do it, and apply later as a mature student, perhaps having taken a diploma or two such as the Birkbeck Legal Method course?

If someone really wants to be a lawyer, then surely it's better to get the deeper understanding an LLB can give, than the great cram which a GDL consists of? And I think the thought someone should do a degree they're not in love with, absolutely appalling: life is short - if you do a degree which you don't like, that's a recipe for depression. The price of doing a second degree makes it even more important to choose the first properly for what it is, not what it *might* lead to.

I might be completely wrong about some of this - take with pinch of salt - but I do think I'm right about the GDL being less in-depth than an LLB, and 3 years of life needing to be spent doing something you really like.

In my experience of dealing with university admissions departments, a phone call gets an answer within a day or two, but an email takes weeks (if you ever get a response).

My biggest regret about my PS was that I don't think I engaged with the law at a high enough level; I showed interest by analysing and evaluating a couple of areas, but what I said wasn't particularly insightful, and I got rejections from LSE/UCL as a result (not that it made any difference in the end).

If I could turn back the clock to give myself one piece of advice, it would be to read a more in depth introduction to law, something like Brownsword's "Understanding Law", and to engage with something from that. The more comprehensive an introduction you've had to studying law, the better you'll be able to articulate your reasons for wanting to pursue it.

Also, I didn't read the personal statement posted above, but including a quote is unwise. Using other people's words does nothing to sell you, and is a waste of valuable characters.

In my experience of dealing with university admissions departments, a phone call gets an answer within a day or two, but an email takes weeks (if you ever get a response).

If Durham have spaces left on their LLB, they'll fall over themselves for a candidate of your calibre. They just wont trawl through the thousands of unread emails in their inbox to find you

Fwiw, I prepared for the lnat as if my life depended on it

Thanks a lot for your reply.

I understand what you mean about regretting not engaging with a higher level of law, but I'm struggling to gauge what constitutes that. On my draft, I've given a paragraph to talking about the Hart-Devlin debate, and why I disagree with a number of the views put forward in the latter's "The Enforcement of Morals"; however I've only chosen to write about that because it's a topic which I find interesting and links with my EPQ. I'd presume that that's not exactly insightful enough, but what kind of thing would be?

I've ordered Brownsword's "Understanding Law" - cheers for the recommendation!

Haha... that's definitely where I went wrong, I did next to nothing in preparation, I just relied on the fact that they said you couldn't really prepare for it and went in blind. Stupid, stupid thing to do!

Thanks for the kind words! I took your advice and spent the day on the phone to them... now all I need is for them to pick up! lol

I also realised that as I've made my choices, it won't simply be a case of withdrawing and going into Extra, I'd have to write to both my Firm and Insurance and ask them to withdraw me (some uni's can require exceptional circumstances to do this, as officially I'm committed to them, but from what I've read on the forums, Exeter and Lancaster are generally OK with this.) If they allow me to withdraw, I can try for Durham. If not, there is Adjustment. I'm not sure how this works if you're taking an untraditional pathway and already have your results and can provide evidence two weeks earlier? But I've asked on the 'UCAS' forum so hopefully someone will have a better idea than me, if not I'll see what Durham say as to whether my application is favourable and if it is I'll call UCAS tomorrow and see what they say.

Ultimately I'm happy with Exeter, but I can at least give Durham a shot, it won't hurt me if they say no!

My biggest regret about my PS was that I don't think I engaged with the law at a high enough level; I showed interest by analysing and evaluating a couple of areas, but what I said wasn't particularly insightful, and I got rejections from LSE/UCL as a result (not that it made any difference in the end).

If I could turn back the clock to give myself one piece of advice, it would be to read a more in depth introduction to law, something like Brownsword's "Understanding Law", and to engage with something from that. The more comprehensive an introduction you've had to studying law, the better you'll be able to articulate your reasons for wanting to pursue it.

I don't think you did anything wrong in analysing and evaluating a couple of areas of law. For myself, although I was rejected by UCL, I received offers from KCL, LSE and QMUL for law. In my PS, I analysed specific areas of law - like you did - and linked them all to my interests in law. That is why I don't think something as introductory and as widely known as "Understanding Law" would place your PS at an edge, but rather, a solid analysis of something that no other candidate would write would give your PS an edge.

Principally, your PS needs to show both your interest in law and your capacity for studying it. The Hart-Devlin debate looks to me like it provides a wide scope to talk about what law is, why it's how it is, and whether that's a good thing. If you can use what you write to explain your interest in the subject, and provide evidence for that via your EPQ more's the better. Admissions tutors will be trying to ascertain your promise from how you engage with your chosen subject(s). It's a little tricky for someone in my position to quantify how best to do this, but the more you read around the subject, the more apt your observations are likely to be.

Out of interest, is Hart-Devlin part of the A Level law syllabus? If so, it's likely that admissions tutors will see another 3 dozen statements that reference it, so be wary of that.