Law Applicants 2012

I just had an email from QMUL asking for an up to date academic reference, but I withdrew my application weeks ago.

I applied having already got my results, so I've no idea what function an up to date academic reference would serve when I've not seen my tutor for 12 months anyway.

Not entirely sure whether to put it down to administrative incompetence or the fact that they are swamped. It made me smile that I'm still being considered though.

I think taking a gap year is risky depending on your circumstances - what do you plan to do on a gap year? Kent is quite a large drop from Warwick, Kings, UCL and Warwick (they're my insurance, Bristol is my firm and I think I'd take a gap year if I missed my conditional) so you have to decide what you're really want - if you are going to be spending excessive amounts of money on a degree you might as well get your moneys worth.

If you want to work, travel and get some work experience to beef up your personal statement, I think that's quite a good idea. The only worrying thing is taking your LNAT again, it's not really something you can revise so do you think you'll be able to improve on your score?

What did you get at AS? x

I think that I would go round again.

However, you need to think more deeply about this. If you had an Oxford interview, you were not rejected primarily because of your LNAT score. Clearly Warwick didn't reject you due to your LNAT score. Moreover, LNAT isn't some sort of irrelevant trial inserted into the applications process to spice it up a bit for the tutors. It is supposed to be a test of aptitude. It isn't perfect and Cambridge withdrew from it. Nevertheless the test decided you were not apt for law.

So, what do we have? You probably didn't do very well at interview for Oxford. Assuming that your A levels weren't art, needlework and PE, Warwick either didn't like your reference or your personal statement or both. The LNAT didn't like you. That is potentially a lot of negatives with a single application.

Before you apply again, you should think very carefully whether you are cut out for an academic law degree.

I think you are sending an overly and unnecessary negative attitude towards buttons06. Yes, s/he had a (just) below average LNAT score, but that does not mean s/he is not 'cut out' for an academic law degree. Indeed, you very rightly mentioned that there are several institutions which simply ignore the LNAT because it has a tendency to be rather inaccurate at times. The test didn't decide that s/he was 'not apt for law'. The test said that of those who applied, s/he performed less well than most. But remember that the average LNAT candidate's academic profile is above that of the average law student's academic profile.

The Oxford interview merely tests one's ability to study law at Oxford and by no means suggests that someone who is unsuccessful following an interview is not 'cut out' for the subject. As the Faculty of Law only offers interviews to 50% of applicants anyway, it is hard to believe that those who are unsuccessful are for some reason not capable of reading law. They are: just they are not suited to Oxford.

I know you are suggesting that is the culmination of each of these that matters, but actually I'd argue that each one of these in itself is not indicative of one's ability to read law. Do not assume that the only places you can read law are those that this person applied to - that is what your last sentence seems to imply. I know that you are fully aware of the subjectivity of the LNAT. However, I think that instead of making such black and white comments which could influence someone's future, you should instead try to convey a bit more of that subjectivity.

However, I do agree that there must obviously be something within the personal statement or reference that either was looked on unfavourably to admissions tutors, or that these were looked on less favourably than other candidates'. If you do decide to take a gap year buttons06, then you would be advised to consider that, and apply for feedback from the universities if possible so that you would be able to enter into the cycle with a stronger application.

Finally, we have also not even considered the possibility of poor GCSE scores, poor AS results or what have you. All of these are taken into account. As such, we cannot make any fully informed judgment without these details.

Edit: I realised I myself have come across rather 'black and white' as well. I know that you were only questioning. I just think that the overall impression of your post is quite negative and that buttons06 needn't be quite as concerned as the tone of your post might or might not suggest.

My posting had a negative tone and there are two reasons for that.

The first is that buttons06 is sitting on an offer from Kent. There is no point in him/her reapplying unless he/she can achieve a significantly better offer than that. Kent is a good law school whose offers are affected by the London doughnut; that like all the universities surrounding London, their offers have to be pitched lower than that of the main London schools to attract students.

Secondly, I find on TSR that there is a lack of self-awareness of aptitude for law. Law is a subject studied ab initio. The fact that someone has stellar grades for history or English or whatever does not necessarily mean they will be any good at law.

One in six students at UCL and more than one in eight at King's walk out with a 2:2 or worse. At Nottingham that rises to almost two in five. These students cannot all be dismissed as lazy. They have got the entry grades, passed the LNAT with a good score and impressed with the rest of their application. They were used to performing at a very high standard at school. Yet largely their dreams of a legal career are ended.

I think that the problem is illustrated in particular by attitudes to the LNAT and similar aptitude tests. I think most school pupils grasp that a low GCSE score in a subject, is a comment on whether they should do that subject at A level. There doesn't seem to be an understanding that a weaker LNAT score is a comment, not a perfect comment I should stress, on someone's possession of the skill set to study law academically (rather than be a practising lawyer).

What I was doing, was picking out all the negative aspects of buttons06's application, not sugaring the pill in any way, and hopefully getting him/her to think seriously about whether a law degree was for them.

Woah, woah, woah - let's consider what you just said: 'It isn't perfect and Cambridge withdrew from it'
Like you so rightly pointed out, the test is subjective and button may have attained his score for any number of reasons..
There are unis that do not use the LNAT and they seem to produce capable lawyers (lse, Warwick, leeds, Glasgow- to name a varied few - I could go on). My point is just because button got 18 (which was the national avg btw) does not mean he is not cut out for law...to say such a thing is quite drastic dont you think? I certainly think so.
I imagine button is just devastated given the choices he/she originally applied to.

Woah, woah, woah - let's consider what you just said: 'It isn't perfect and Cambridge withdrew from it'
Like you so rightly pointed out, the test is subjective and button may have attained his score for any number of reasons..
There are unis that do not use the LNAT and they seem to produce capable lawyers (lse, Warwick, leeds, Glasgow- to name a varied few - I could go on). My point is just because button got 18 (which was the national avg btw) does not mean he is not cut out for law...to say such a thing is quite drastic dont you think? I certainly think so.
I imagine button is just devastated given the choices he/she originally applied to.

I think taking a gap year is risky depending on your circumstances - what do you plan to do on a gap year? Kent is quite a large drop from Warwick, Kings, UCL and Warwick (they're my insurance, Bristol is my firm and I think I'd take a gap year if I missed my conditional) so you have to decide what you're really want - if you are going to be spending excessive amounts of money on a degree you might as well get your moneys worth.

If you want to work, travel and get some work experience to beef up your personal statement, I think that's quite a good idea. The only worrying thing is taking your LNAT again, it's not really something you can revise so do you think you'll be able to improve on your score?

What did you get at AS? x

Not to sound like a prick, but Im going to use you as a subject for a mini rant, if you dont mind.
Why do TSR people always use these quasi-pep talk/apology posts merely as an oppurtunity to indirectly gloat about their individual achievements( in your case your breathtaking offer from Bristol)...? Now whilst I understand you probably didnt intend that at all Soph, think about it for a moment, button is feeling dejected and you've more or less rubbed dirt in the wound :/
If trying to give helpful advice, which here you havent really because what's explicitly implicit in your post is that you believe Kent uni is not a good one - which is quite untrue, you should refrain from critical opinions...especially when you intend to 'console' a fellow student

I find it quite humorous that QM have taken this long to do something with your application, and in that time you've got an unconditional offer from King's

I am however, still waiting on QM. No matter how great York is, QM sits just ahead in my eyes. Fingers crossed I get an offer.

Be warned, a QMUL offer is likely to be at 80% as a girl in my class last year got this offer and failed to meet it.

Not to sound like a prick, but Im going to use you as a subject for a mini rant, if you dont mind.
Why do TSR people always use these quasi-pep talk/apology posts merely as an oppurtunity to indirectly gloat about their individual achievements( in your case your breathtaking offer from Bristol)...? Now whilst I understand you probably didnt intend that at all Soph, think about it for a moment, button is feeling dejected and you've more or less rubbed dirt in the wound :/
If trying to give helpful advice, which here you havent really because what's explicitly implicit in your post is that you believe Kent uni is not a good one - which is quite untrue, you should refrain from critical opinions...especially when you intend to 'console' a fellow student

I find it quite humorous that QM have taken this long to do something with your application, and in that time you've got an unconditional offer from King's

I am however, still waiting on QM. No matter how great York is, QM sits just ahead in my eyes. Fingers crossed I get an offer.

I don't get what's the meaning of "80%", can you kindly explain it to me?
I am an international student so please forgive my ignorance. lol

Be warned, a QMUL offer is likely to be at 80% as a girl in my class last year got this offer and failed to meet it.

Haha, if they'd got back to me 6 weeks ago I'd have given them due consideration; there's definitely arguments to be had for choosing mile end over the strand. By leaving it so long they made it easy for me though.

Woah now.

I wasn't gloating in the slightest. I actually got 16 in my LNAT and have very below par GCSEs, if it wasn't for the lack of applicants to Bristol this year then I'm sure I wouldn't of got in. I'm not 'rubbing dirt in the wound' at all because I know how he feels after myself getting rejected from a good few unis - I don't really understand the glamour in gloating about any offers is all about on TSR - we don't know each other so does it matter?

I wasn't saying that Kent isn't a good law school in the slightest, I applied there after a lot of research into how good it was as an insurance. Saying that, there is no denying that Kent is a slight drop from Oxford and the London Unis, is there? If he/she is applying to top tier universities (I'm talking top 5, looking at their choices), and has the capability of gaining a place there, which I'm sure is achievable with his/her predicted grades, why would they go to Kent if they could just take a gap year and try again next year? Kent is a good law school, yes, but looking at the person's post, they are looking at extremely prestigious universities.

I'm sorry you misunderstood where I was coming from - I didn't mean it in a negative way in the slightest.

King's Politics/Phil/Law rejection. Looks like I'm staying in Canada.

King's Politics/Phil/Law rejection. Looks like I'm staying in Canada.

sorry to hear that.
btw QMUL still haven't replied me
I suppose they won't work on Saturdays so today should be the last day