GCSEs needed for prestigious law universities?

Scroll to see replies

I am going to discontinue this here as you're getting too aggressive and I'm definitely not in the mood for that after such a long day. I did not come here to debate you - I only answered the first question to help the OP with their decision.

That's fine, but I wouldn't recommend a career in law if you find a few civil posts on an internet forum overwhelming. The reason I am responding is because your 'help' is misleading for the OP and others who will read this thread.

Nonetheless, whether the first year counts or not is inconsequential - firms are still going to look at that above all else.

Firms and chambers definitely do not prioritise first year marks in their selection processes.

Even if they did, this wouldn't have any bearing on what we're discussing for a mutlitude of reasons - students not wanting to go into law, not knowing about this if they do, not caring enough to discipline themselves and/or being capable enough if they do etc.

The fact is that first year Bristol law students do poorly relative to their performance in second and third year because they care more about building and engaging in a social life in a new place than scoring unnecessarily highly in a first year that won't contribute to their degree mark and because they are adjusting to the level of intellect and sheer graft required to do well on a rigorous course at a respectable university, and this is especially the case if, to go back to my original point, Bristol is admitting a higher proportion of students with relatively poor academic records (whether due to poor schooling or whatever else). It has nothing to do with marking being nonsensically more stringent in the first year than in second or third.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 21

callum_law

Original post by a noble chance

That's fine, but I wouldn't recommend a career in law if you find a few civil posts on an internet forum overwhelming.

I think being a lawyer and making significant arguments on behalf of a client is somewhat different to replying to an arsey person just looking for an argument on a topic they do not understand. From your past posts, you don't study Law, nor even study at university. Best of luck getting there, but you can't really hope to offer facts on the mentality of university students, never mind the mentality of law students at a particular university.

Perhaps you're trying to prove a point: prove you're good enough for university, after so many years of higher-education opportunity squandered. However, this is not exactly the place to do that.

Reply 22

a noble chance

Original post by callum_law

What particular advantage does a law student have in a debate assessing the probable reasons law students at a university you yourself do not attend perform poorly in their first year relative to the rest of their degree? Why does a young person have to be a law student to understand where the priorities lie for a group of young people? As it happens, I have attended university, but the 'facts' relevant here are freely available on the internet and in common life experience and common sense. You are trying to establish one-upmanship where it doesn't exist in this context, and leaning on your status as a university student instead of engaging with my arguments. If your prejudice persists then perhaps you should note the Magdalene College, Cambridge-educated law student agreeing with me above.

Perhaps you're trying to prove a point: prove you're good enough for university, after so many years of higher-education opportunity squandered. However, this is not exactly the place to do that.

Perhaps you should refrain from calling people 'arsey' and argumentative if you intend to go on by posting far more personal and ill-mannered things in a completely unprovoked and uninvited response.

The fact that I have not attended university at the age of 21 does not mean I have 'squandered' my higher education, nor does it mean that I was not good enough to have one, nor that I even attempted to have one before that age. If your reasoning skills are as crude as that I would probably steer clear of a career in law as well.

Or perhaps in your rifling through my profile you've clocked that I am also a mature applicant who is also doing an access course and who is also pursuing - but still in the running for - an Oxbridge education, and you are still nurturing a grievance from your recent Cambridge rejection, finding comfort in trying to belittle and establish non-existent one-upmanship on those that are in the same position you were once in but may yet achieve where you failed:

Magdalene sounds like the college for you (and coincidentally the one I was rejected from, yay).

http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showpost.php?p=57549975&postcount=17

I'm guessing this last one is the greatest influence on the unnecessarily embittered and hostile personality of your uninvited interjection, in which case I would readily recommend a daily dose of Jack Daniels over finding any excuse to vomit your resentments and projected insecurities onto your fellow man from behind the safe confines of a computer screen. Have a pleasant evening.

Reply 23

callum_law

Original post by a noble chance

Well, firstly, I have the advantage that law students generally do care somewhat about their first-year results because they will be using those results to apply for vac schemes, open days, and all the other fluff which is expected of them if they want to ascend to top-tier law firms. In applying to such firms, they will also have to show their individual modular results (particularly for the foundation modules, which just happen to be in the first year, mostly). Maybe you've spent hours looking at the employment prospects of history grads from Sheffield or Reading, but I do not think you have researched so intently the legal profession as law students.

Original post by a noble chance

The fact that I have not attended university at the age of 21 does not mean I have 'squandered' my higher education

This is not a fact if you have actually been to university before.

Original post by a noble chance

nor that I even attempted to have one before that age.

The fact you have attempted university, and quit for reasons unbeknownst, makes this clearly untrue. Better luck this time, eh.

Original post by a noble chance

Perhaps you should refrain from calling people 'arsey' and argumentative if you intend to go on by posting far more personal and ill-mannered things in a completely unprovoked and uninvited response.

Telling someone (the other poster) that they should not go into a law career is a completely arsey and petty way to conduct yourself. You absolutely were being arsey, which is fine, but at least admit it. I just find it hysterical as I sit here trying to figure out why someone would be like this—having an argument on something they are not invested and have no direct experience nor knowledge—and then it struck me why. The why has to be accounted for here because it just proves your points should not be engaged with, at least not in a significant way, for people who are trying to prove themselves worthy have a degree of confirmation bias.

Original post by a noble chance

nor does it mean that I was not good enough to have one

I did not say you were not cut out for university. I implied, perhaps accurately, that you were trying to prove a point to yourself that you could wrestle with current university students. Now it comes to light that you have been there and you probably weren't cut out for it, this insecurity actually makes a fair amount of sense. It's not your fault, though, so don't think I am having a go.

Original post by a noble chance

Or perhaps in your rifling through my profile you've clocked that I am also a mature applicant who is also doing an access course and who is also pursuing - but still in the running for - an Oxbridge education, and you are still nurturing a grievance from your recent Cambridge rejection

You're very much like the the GCSE student who comes to this website. They're predicted 12 A*s; they have their sights set on Oxbridge and believe they should be there, but they are not and chances are they probably won't cut the mustard. It's alright, though. Just focus on your studies, kid, and then come back to talk **** once you have something vaguely in the way of achievement. However, this may be unlikely if you couldn't even handle the first year of university last time xD

Thanks for playing though, hun.