Employment prospects: Law degree or Non-law degree from KCL?

I have offers for Law and French (French Law) at Cardiff Uni, Uni of Sheffield, Uni of Leeds and an offer for French and Management at KCL... so unsure on which to firm!
I know I want to go into Commercial Law after having graduated but just don't know whether the rep of KCL and being in London outweighs my other offers.
Any advice would be appreciated! :smile:

Reply 1

EdCohen

12

Original post by elizanissim

I have offers for Law and French (French Law) at Cardiff Uni, Uni of Sheffield, Uni of Leeds and an offer for French and Management at KCL... so unsure on which to firm!
I know I want to go into Commercial Law after having graduated but just don't know whether the rep of KCL and being in London outweighs my other offers.
Any advice would be appreciated! :smile:

If you want a career in commercial law, especially at Magic Circle law firms in London with high salaries.

A degree from Kings in French and Management will put you in far greater stead than a degree from Cardiff, Sheffield and Leeds. Unfortunately, snobbery is inseparable from professions such as law. Kings is very well-known and respected by firms not only by UK firms, but, also, by firms from the US.

Most notable firms recruit 50/50 from law and non-law backgrounds. So you won't have an advantage with a degree which focuses more heavily on law.

But if you don't care much about the salary or don't have any preferences about the firms you want to apply to in your penultimate year, and think you will be far more happier in somewhere other than London, then, of course, reject Kings.

If not, then you'd be making a big mistake by declining the offer from KCL.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 2

typonaut

17

It generally does not matter if you hold a law degree - except that to go any further you are going to have to do a GDL, and probably pay for that yourself.

KCL is a highly rated institution, having a good degree from there will probably see you through the paper sift at most firms.

Reply 3

typonaut

17

Original post by J-SP

Law at Cardiff, Sheffield or Leeds will also get through any "sift". There's plenty of lawyers at top firms who studied at those institutions.

I think we just need to look at the TES global rankings to see how KCL might be viewed differently to Cardiff, Sheffield or Leeds.

http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/2014-15/world-ranking

KCL is at 40, Sheffield is at 121, Leeds is at 146 and Cardiff is at 204. Make your own choices.

Reply 4

emmings

12

I agree with JSP that students vastly overestimate the importance that law firms attach to university rankings. I can guarantee you that neither the person doing the sift nor the partner reviewing the CVs that made it through will have the faintest idea where each of those universities came in the TES rankings or probably even what the TES rankings are. All RG or other traditional well respected university CVs will get a tick.

(I am a solicitor and have had some minor involvement in recruitment before anyone challenges my opinion.)

The op should do the degree they most want to do and think they will do well at.

Reply 5

typonaut

17

Can I recommend that the original poster reads this article at Legal Cheek (and looks at a few other articles on that site that have similar information):

http://www.legalcheek.com/2015/01/research-77-rookie-tenants-top-30-chambers-went-oxbridge/

Then uses this tool to see how different institutions might be ranked:

http://www.indx.co.uk/pupilbase/

Although this is a bit coarse, it gives an idea of a hierarchy between Oxbridge, other Russell Group universities and the rest of the world. Ask yourself if this hierarchy really exists at the bar, then why would solicitors be exempt from choosing based on similar hierarchies.

Then ask yourself whether a hierarchy might also exist between the remaining Russell Group (sans Oxbridge)?

Go to the web sites of some top ranking barrister's chambers and solicitors, look at the profiles of the juniors (under five years), see where they did their degrees, whether they have postgraduate qualifications, whether they topped-up at Oxbridge, etc.

Now ask yourself whether it makes a difference or not where you get your degree.

It is naive in the extreme to suggest that anyone looking at applications has no built-in prejudice ranking different universities. They may not formalise it with a look at the TES list, but they certainly have it.

Reply 6

typonaut

17

Original post by J-SP

Many law firms recognise that academics are a useless indicator of performance on the job

I wouldn't debate the sentiment, but the reality is not quite the same. Take for instance the number of training contract applications that want to know how many UCAS points you have - and actually won't let you progress through the form unless you meet their criteria on that point.

That seems to me to complete madness: a) is what someone did at A-level really relevant after three years at university? b) is it relevant at all to mature candidates?

Many also recruit internationally, and so can't know what the ranking/prestige of every institution in the world.

They can still have a prejudice, one way or the other.

"in-built"

Oxford says:

built-in
adjective
...(of a characteristic) inherent; innate : the system has a built-in resistance to change.

KCL all day everyday

OP

Original post by queen-bee

KCL all day everyday

did you study there? x

Reply 9

queen-bee

19

Original post by elizanissim

did you study there? x

Yes! I studied biomedical science

Reply 10

Underscorebirm

Original post by EdCohen

If you want a career in commercial law, especially at Magic Circle law firms in London with high salaries.

A degree from Kings in French and Management will put you in far greater stead than a degree from Cardiff, Sheffield and Leeds. Unfortunately, snobbery is inseparable from professions such as law. Kings is very well-known and respected by firms not only by UK firms, but, also, by firms from the US.

Most notable firms recruit 50/50 from law and non-law backgrounds. So you won't have an advantage with a degree which focuses more heavily on law.

But if you don't care much about the salary or don't have any preferences about the firms you want to apply to in your penultimate year, and think you will be far more happier in somewhere other than London, then, of course, reject Kings.

If not, then you'd be making a big mistake by declining the offer from KCL.

Extremely well said 🥶

Reply 11

AMac86

11

Assuming we're talking about a career as a solicitor in London.

Agree with what Emmings has said - a "good" university is an important tick box on the application to move you through to (hopefully!) interview stage, but don't obsess over individual global uni rankings, or where *exactly* a university sits in a ranking table.

From a typical recruiters perspective in a large london law firm, any russell group (or similarly well regarded uni) more than ticks that box. You do not need to go to KCL if you want to work in such a firm firm (including the MC), Leeds, Sheffield or Cardiff will stand you in roughly equal stead. I went to uni in the north at a comparable uni and many of my peers went into MC/SC training contracts. Recruiters are looking at your whole CV, a commitment to law, relevant work experience, confidence & performance at interview. They are not looking at precise uni rankings.

I would recommend picking the university you like the feel of best, what course content you'll think you'll enjoy the most, and the city that you think you'd enjoy studying and living the most in. I live and work in London now but definitely enjoyed being in a much smaller city as a student.

Employment prospects: Law degree or Non-law degree from KCL?

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you