Warwick: law and socilogy or LLB at the university of Leicester

I Want to become a barrister. I have recieved two offers, one being the conventional LLB at the university of Leicester. The other being Law and Sociology at Warwick (I was rejected from LLB and transferred to this course).

So what would be better, Staying with Leicester, or doing the other course at Warwick?

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

Origami Bullets

Can you afford £7-10k postgrad to do a GDL, and then the same again for the BPTC?

Reply 2

yothi5

Since Warwick is not an LLB, you have to choose Leicester and so super-duper well, as Leicester is not a target university for barristers.

Reply 3

Arif118

hmmmm i could afford the GDL and the BPTC, but I would rather not spend that much. However, must I achieve a first at the university of leicester, in order to continue chasing a career as a barrister?

Reply 4

victoryshinesonus

It would be completely silly to do a Law joint honours degrees which wasn't qualifying for law. I think firms would question your reasoning for doing a BA over an LLB, and if your reasoning is 'it's higher in the league tables', you need to reconsider. Go to Leicester, get a 2:i or a 1st, and you've got just as good a chance as anyone.

Reply 5

Arif118

yes, ur right. :smile:

Leicester it is then I was just confused because warwick is regarded a far better institution. Thankyou :smile:

Good luck

Original post by victoryshinesonus

I hate it when people commonly mistake that if your law degree is a BA, it is not a qualifying law degree. I just thought I'd check the Law and Sociology page at Warwick, and the degree can be taken to align with the requirements of a qualifying law degree.

If you're going to enjoy studying sociology, go for Warwick.

Reply 8

non

Go for Warwick it's a better uni even though you aren't doing the llb.

Reply 9

maminushka

If it gives you an LLB then go for Warwick. Otherwise Leicester is Ok, too. I've seen a few barristers who have gone to Leicester.

Reply 10

roh

Original post by Arif118

Depends what sort of Barrister you want to be, if you want to do commercial then, yeah you're gonna need a First and it's going to need to be high. Ideally then go do Oxford's BCL (someone in third year currently is doing that). If you want to do criminal then I know someone who got in with a low 2:1 and some decent mooting. Family probably in between.

Our mooting's pretty good, my mates just beat Cambridge in 3rd round of one of the Inns' competition.

Some good advice from a QC involved in pupillage stuff, his blog is of the Ronseal variety: http://pupillageandhowtogetit.wordpress.com/

Blog by a current Leicester student aspiring to the Bar, stick a comment on there and she'll be happy to answer any questions: http://studentblogs.le.ac.uk/law/author/harriet/

Page 45 suggests if it's not Oxbridge (maybe UCL) it's not getting you any significant advantage and you will be judged on your personal application and the uni's fairly irrelevant: http://cms.barcouncil.org.uk/assets/documents/120105%20Bar%20Barometer_05.01.12_web.pdf

I you have any Leicester qs (course or uni more generally) fire away or PM me.

This guy went to Leicester (and still comes in sometimes to lecture on life at the Bar) and he's not done too badly for himself as it goes: http://www.brickcourt.co.uk/nicholas-green-qc/full-cv.asp

Also, which do you prefer? The unis have very different atmospheres and the one you feel comfortable and happy at is where you're far more likely to achieve the grades you'll need. I had offers from both for Law and just didn't like Warwick, hence choosing Leicester. If you feel the same or the other way round go with that.

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 11

Stressworthy

Clarify whether or not it would be a qualifying law degree. If it would, and you'd be interested in the sociology modules, go for it. But I get the feeling that you wouldn't necessarily, given that you applied for solely the LLB in the first place. Leicester is still a really good uni - OK, not as good an institution as Warwick but nonetheless, still good. If you do really well there and work really hard, doing the course YOU want to do and potentially ending up where you want to, go there. It also depends on whether you actually like Leicester as a uni and can imagine yourself there: in cases like this, it's always best to actually visit and see how you feel.

Reply 12

Tsunami2011

Original post by kevin6767

Warwick is famed for its economics, maths and financial courses and as your average TSRian generally aims to be an investment banker it is the holy grail outside of Oxbridge for them. Any university student who has any dealings with companies will tell you they only target certain universities because there is a higher chance of encountering 2:1 and first students. If you are really good and go to a "lesser" university you are actually likely to come out with a better grade because your paper is marked in respect to the people on your course.

Those are the courses which gain the most recognition, it doesn't mean that they don't have any other well ranked courses. The university ranks well worldwide for social sciences and the usual suspects. From what I see, Warwick does have many other strong departments, i..e History, English, Politics, but these graduates are unlikely to aim for the high flying city job, hence the lack of recognition.

Warwick is not famed for its law department and in most league tables it barely gets close to the top 20. If you are still obsessed with the idea that league tables are the holy grail of standards then take a look at this:
http://www.thecompleteuniversityguide.co.uk/league-tables/rankings?s=Law Leicester 17th, Warwick 19th.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/table/2011/may/17/university-guide-law

Warwick is 8th, while Leicester is 15th.

http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=1777032

Warwick is 8th and Leicester isn't even in the top 25. Oh and Oxford is 6th, while Newcastle and York top the table.

Not sure where you got the idea that Warwick BARELY makes the top 20 for Law

Doesn't this show you how flawed the table rankings are?

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 13

roh

Original post by Tsunami2011

Those are the courses which gain the most recognition, it doesn't mean that they don't have any other well ranked courses. The university ranks well worldwide for social sciences and the usual suspects. From what I see, Warwick does have many other strong departments, i..e History, English, Politics, but these graduates are unlikely to aim for the high flying city job, hence the lack of recognition.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/table/2011/may/17/university-guide-law

Warwick is 8th, while Leicester is 15th.

http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=1777032

Warwick is 8th and Leicester isn't even in the top 25. Oh and Oxford is 6th, while Newcastle and York top the table.

Not sure where you got the idea that Warwick BARELY makes the top 20 for Law

Doesn't this show you how flawed the table rankings are?

League tables undoubtedly are regularly rubbish and you can usually dig one out to support your viewpoint unless you're arguing Bolton has more prestige than Oxford.
Facts seem to suggest that if OP is determined to be a barrister the difference is negligible. They're not going to Oxbridge and they seem to be the only unis which offer any advantage at the Bar, so OP might as well go somewhere they'll be happy and just try and amass prizes for mooting and academics, because that can make a difference. If you look at those unis inn the stats UWE and Leeds Met feature but LSE doesn't, which can be put down to the small numbers making it, outside Oxbridge and UCL, meaning 1 or 2 more is a huge swing.

Reply 14

Tsunami2011

Original post by kevin6767

I would agree.. depends on how you define 'one of the best' if that's limited to 5 then I'd agree, if limited to 10, I wouldn't.

The guardian rankings are the most inaccurate on the market because of their emphasis on student satisfaction which of course is subjective. You defence of Warwick sounds like you have some connection to the institution. No offence was intended towards Warwick graduates or current students.

I don't...just a lowly applicant. I just thought it was neccessary to pull you up on your claim that it barely makes the top 20 in the majority of law league tables.

Reply 15

Tsunami2011

Original post by roh

Yeah I share your views. A LLB Law imo is stronger than a Law + Soc degree, especially considering the OP wants to be a barrister. The more academic the better.

Reply 16

roh

Original post by Tsunami2011

Yeah I share your views. A LLB Law imo is stronger than a Law + Soc degree, especially considering the OP wants to be a barrister. The more academic the better.

Depends, I reckon you could sell it half decently. Law at Warwick is taught from that sort of perspective anyway so if you just claim that's why you chose Warwick and you just wanted to emphasise that aspect they'd probably buy it. More plausible than claiming you were struck by the glories of Coventry anyway :tongue:

Saying that chambers will probably quite like a lot of jurisprudence/other hard thinking ones in there so LLB might help. If it's not qualifying then definitely not a great idea as you're just going to spend 9k learning 5 subjects you already know and two you don't. Unless money's no object for OP and they like the idea of a year at Birmingham pretending they're a fresher again, but this time with Broad Street to go at rather than just the Union, Leam and Cov.

Reply 17

non

Original post by kevin6767

The point about flawed league tables was the one I was generally trying to make. I never said Warwick wasn't a good institution I was merely pointing out it isn't one of the best law schools out there and if the Op wanted a qualifying law degree they should go with Leicester.

On a side note about your comment of social science department graduates not aiming for city careers; I meet with delegates from over 60 top companies on a regular basis including Barclays, HSBC, Goldman sachs, Bank of America, major printing firms and the big 4 accounting and consultancy firms, over 50% of their work force are social science and humanities graduates and 40% are business and economics majors. You are likely to work for Deloitte if you have a degree in History, English or Politics than you are any other degree.

The guardian rankings are the most inaccurate on the market because of their emphasis on student satisfaction which of course is subjective. You defence of Warwick sounds like you have some connection to the institution. No offence was intended towards Warwick graduates or current students.

wow we don't have experts on TSR often. why is politics, english and history the most popular degree for Deloitte. also if you don't mind saying what is your career and what degree did you do and which university were you at. thanks.

Reply 18

*Hakz*

Original post by kevin6767

I fail to see why they would favour them over graduates with maths, economics, engineering degrees?
Considering different graduates applying to the same job have similar excellent extra-curriculars and experience, would they specifically really favour these degrees over others? I highly doubt it.

Reply 19

*Hakz*

Original post by kevin6767

Please read what I said. I never said they prefer these graduates. It all comes down to how you present yourself and social science people tend have to prove themselves more as they don't have the degree specific to job. If you look at the websites or speak to the representatives you will see most of the jobs they offer do not require a specific degree.

I am currently working predominantly with Deloitte right now and as you can see from this list:
http://mycareer.deloitte.com/uk/en/student/apply-now/academic-requirements

Only 4 of the 27 professional areas require a specific degree, only 2 require something specific to maths or economics and this is one of the largest accountancy firms on the planet.