LLB Law at University of Bristol, Warwick or Queen Mary University of London, QMUL.
Hi All,
I have been given conditional offers for the above three universities as well as the University of Edinburgh (which I will not be considering since it is Scots law).
I know that Bristol and Warwick have been traditionally more reputable universities as opposed to QMUL, who have only recently become well known for its law department.
In terms of meeting the conditional offers, all three are attainable and similar in terms of level of difficulty. For the particular offer I was given, Warwick is the easiest to attain.
I do not fancy living in Coventry/Leamington Spa but think that Warwick's reputation should override this as its international reputation is much stronger than the other two universities.
Right now, I am leaning towards firming Bristol due to its city life and prestige and insuring Warwick.
What do you guys think of QMUL and of my choices? any opinions would be appreciated
I have been given conditional offers for the above three universities as well as the University of Edinburgh (which I will not be considering since it is Scots law).
I know that Bristol and Warwick have been traditionally more reputable universities as opposed to QMUL, who have only recently become well known for its law department.
In terms of meeting the conditional offers, all three are attainable and similar in terms of level of difficulty. For the particular offer I was given, Warwick is the easiest to attain.
I do not fancy living in Coventry/Leamington Spa but think that Warwick's reputation should override this as its international reputation is much stronger than the other two universities.
Right now, I am leaning towards firming Bristol due to its city life and prestige and insuring Warwick.
What do you guys think of QMUL and of my choices? any opinions would be appreciated
Original post by newtotsr123
I do not fancy living in Coventry/Leamington Spa but think that Warwick's reputation should override this as its international reputation is much stronger than the other two universities.
I do not fancy living in Coventry/Leamington Spa but think that Warwick's reputation should override this as its international reputation is much stronger than the other two universities.
Not true. Warwick has a somewhat stronger international profile than Bristol for maths and finance but that is the whole of the difference. Overall, I would suppose that if one of these two has a stronger international reputation than the other then it is Bristol, the bigger and older university. Bear in mind as well that Queen Mary is a part of the University of London, which awards the degrees and has the widest name brand recognition of all three.
Original post by cambio wechsel
Not true. Warwick has a somewhat stronger international profile than Bristol for maths and finance but that is the whole of the difference. Overall, I would suppose that if one of these two has a stronger international reputation than the other then it is Bristol, the bigger and older university. Bear in mind as well that Queen Mary is a part of the University of London, which awards the degrees and has the widest name brand recognition of all three.
Which one would you choose for law out of the 3 universities?
I meant that I would much prefer finding accommodation and living in either the city of London or Bristol in 2nd and 3rd year than I would living in Coventry/Leamington Spa.
I was wondering whether the strong international reputation of Warwick should override this preference of mine?
Original post by newtotsr123
Which one would you choose for law out of the 3 universities?
I meant that I would much prefer finding accommodation and living in either the city of London or Bristol in 2nd and 3rd year than I would living in Coventry/Leamington Spa.
I was wondering whether the strong international reputation of Warwick should override this preference of mine?
I meant that I would much prefer finding accommodation and living in either the city of London or Bristol in 2nd and 3rd year than I would living in Coventry/Leamington Spa.
I was wondering whether the strong international reputation of Warwick should override this preference of mine?
As I say, I don't think that Warwick has a stronger international reputation than Bristol, except for maths and finance. And you're going to study Law...
I wonder why "international reputation" is anyway so important to you, even to the extent that it might be a determining factor in the decision making process. Are you an international student? It sensibly doesn't seem to me that you'd be significantly advantaged in applying for international jobs by having a degree from any one of these universities rather than either of the other two. In the UK I'd suppose that Bristol and Warwick are slightly better regarded than QMUL but overseas you'd likely find that the UoL name would serve you as well as would Bristol's or Warwick's.
My inclination would be to pick the one you're keenest to attend.
I guess it differs for different people but I would definitely choose QMUL because:
In my opinion it has a much better international rep than the other two (I'm looking at it from an Iranian perspective). Everyone's heard of QM (I guess cos it's university of London and more importantly it is a top ten university for law obviously)
Also, QM has higher grade requirements than the other two unis you applied for: QMUL is A*AA whilst Warwick is AAA I believe so you may have to think about that.
QM is in London hence the tutors will have lots of contacts with the city law firms for you to get work experience with
Again, being in London has another advantage which is that you can attend the SC, Royal Courts of Justice etc.
It came 6th according to the guardian league table
It's a top ten law school (but I guess you'd say so is Warwick and bristol)
However the disadvantage of a university in London is that costs can be quite expensive.
So, that's just my opinion and those are the reasons why I would much rather go to QM than Warwick or Bristol. But remember that all three unis are really good and there isn't that much difference between them in terms of law. The only uni that would make a big difference is Oxford or Cambridge. You can also go on unistats if your really unsure and compare and contrast your uni.choices there.
Good luck!
Posted from TSR Mobile
In my opinion it has a much better international rep than the other two (I'm looking at it from an Iranian perspective). Everyone's heard of QM (I guess cos it's university of London and more importantly it is a top ten university for law obviously)
Also, QM has higher grade requirements than the other two unis you applied for: QMUL is A*AA whilst Warwick is AAA I believe so you may have to think about that.
QM is in London hence the tutors will have lots of contacts with the city law firms for you to get work experience with
Again, being in London has another advantage which is that you can attend the SC, Royal Courts of Justice etc.
It came 6th according to the guardian league table
It's a top ten law school (but I guess you'd say so is Warwick and bristol)
However the disadvantage of a university in London is that costs can be quite expensive.
So, that's just my opinion and those are the reasons why I would much rather go to QM than Warwick or Bristol. But remember that all three unis are really good and there isn't that much difference between them in terms of law. The only uni that would make a big difference is Oxford or Cambridge. You can also go on unistats if your really unsure and compare and contrast your uni.choices there.
Good luck!
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by ILoveTehran
I guess it differs for different people but I would definitely choose QMUL because:
In my opinion it has a much better international rep than the other two (I'm looking at it from an Iranian perspective). Everyone's heard of QM (I guess cos it's university of London and more importantly it is a top ten university for law obviously)
Also, QM has higher grade requirements than the other two unis you applied for: QMUL is A*AA whilst Warwick is AAA I believe so you may have to think about that.
QM is in London hence the tutors will have lots of contacts with the city law firms for you to get work experience with
Again, being in London has another advantage which is that you can attend the SC, Royal Courts of Justice etc.
It came 6th according to the guardian league table
It's a top ten law school (but I guess you'd say so is Warwick and bristol)
However the disadvantage of a university in London is that costs can be quite expensive.
So, that's just my opinion and those are the reasons why I would much rather go to QM than Warwick or Bristol. But remember that all three unis are really good and there isn't that much difference between them in terms of law. The only uni that would make a big difference is Oxford or Cambridge. You can also go on unistats if your really unsure and compare and contrast your uni.choices there.
Good luck!
Posted from TSR Mobile
In my opinion it has a much better international rep than the other two (I'm looking at it from an Iranian perspective). Everyone's heard of QM (I guess cos it's university of London and more importantly it is a top ten university for law obviously)
Also, QM has higher grade requirements than the other two unis you applied for: QMUL is A*AA whilst Warwick is AAA I believe so you may have to think about that.
QM is in London hence the tutors will have lots of contacts with the city law firms for you to get work experience with
Again, being in London has another advantage which is that you can attend the SC, Royal Courts of Justice etc.
It came 6th according to the guardian league table
It's a top ten law school (but I guess you'd say so is Warwick and bristol)
However the disadvantage of a university in London is that costs can be quite expensive.
So, that's just my opinion and those are the reasons why I would much rather go to QM than Warwick or Bristol. But remember that all three unis are really good and there isn't that much difference between them in terms of law. The only uni that would make a big difference is Oxford or Cambridge. You can also go on unistats if your really unsure and compare and contrast your uni.choices there.
Good luck!
Posted from TSR Mobile
Thanks for the reply. I have been told not to take league tables too seriously as they seem to fluctuate a lot. QM has been ranked 18th (thecompleteuniversityguide?)on some league tables whereas its been ranked 4th or 5th in other ones (Times?).
The thing that worries me most about attending QMUL is that it is still really an up-and-coming university for law and other subjects and may not be viewed as strongly as more traditional universities such as Bristol.
I would very much like to live in London despite its cost, but I was under the impression that QMUL will not be viewed as highly as the other two universities I have mentioned in employer's view. Perhaps when being compared to the likes of LSE, UCL, and KCL, Queen Mary does not have as strong of a reputation in London. I have spoken to many people and I kind of get the 'Uh, why queen mary' response from them and that they do hesitate a bit when I mention the university to them.
Original post by newtotsr123
Thanks for the reply. I have been told not to take league tables too seriously as they seem to fluctuate a lot. QM has been ranked 18th (thecompleteuniversityguide?)on some league tables whereas its been ranked 4th or 5th in other ones (Times?).
The thing that worries me most about attending QMUL is that it is still really an up-and-coming university for law and other subjects and may not be viewed as strongly as more traditional universities such as Bristol.
I would very much like to live in London despite its cost, but I was under the impression that QMUL will not be viewed as highly as the other two universities I have mentioned in employer's view. Perhaps when being compared to the likes of LSE, UCL, and KCL, Queen Mary does not have as strong of a reputation in London. I have spoken to many people and I kind of get the 'Uh, why queen mary' response from them and that they do hesitate a bit when I mention the university to them.
The thing that worries me most about attending QMUL is that it is still really an up-and-coming university for law and other subjects and may not be viewed as strongly as more traditional universities such as Bristol.
I would very much like to live in London despite its cost, but I was under the impression that QMUL will not be viewed as highly as the other two universities I have mentioned in employer's view. Perhaps when being compared to the likes of LSE, UCL, and KCL, Queen Mary does not have as strong of a reputation in London. I have spoken to many people and I kind of get the 'Uh, why queen mary' response from them and that they do hesitate a bit when I mention the university to them.
QM isn't particularly well known for any subjects outside Law (unless you count BSMS as part of QM proper) which might affect it and you're right, it's reputation has come in the last few years due to a bit hiring binge within the Law dept.
Whether it's significantly different to Warwick or Bristol in an employer's view will very much depend on the employer, if the recruiter is a 50 odd year old who still views unis through the prism of their own uni days then Warwick may simply be some bog in the West Midlands which breeds raging commies whilst Bristol would be viewed as a university which very much educates the right sort of chap. From the perspective of recruitment Warwick is still fairly nouveau in terms of being viewed as an elite uni.
In short, don't stress 'reputation' too much, stress where you might actually want to live and study for 3 years of your life.
Original post by ILoveTehran
I guess it differs for different people but I would definitely choose QMUL because:
In my opinion it has a much better international rep than the other two (I'm looking at it from an Iranian perspective). Everyone's heard of QM (I guess cos it's university of London and more importantly it is a top ten university for law obviously)
Also, QM has higher grade requirements than the other two unis you applied for: QMUL is A*AA whilst Warwick is AAA I believe so you may have to think about that.
QM is in London hence the tutors will have lots of contacts with the city law firms for you to get work experience with
Again, being in London has another advantage which is that you can attend the SC, Royal Courts of Justice etc.
It came 6th according to the guardian league table
It's a top ten law school (but I guess you'd say so is Warwick and bristol)
However the disadvantage of a university in London is that costs can be quite expensive.
So, that's just my opinion and those are the reasons why I would much rather go to QM than Warwick or Bristol. But remember that all three unis are really good and there isn't that much difference between them in terms of law. The only uni that would make a big difference is Oxford or Cambridge. You can also go on unistats if your really unsure and compare and contrast your uni.choices there.
Good luck!
Posted from TSR Mobile
In my opinion it has a much better international rep than the other two (I'm looking at it from an Iranian perspective). Everyone's heard of QM (I guess cos it's university of London and more importantly it is a top ten university for law obviously)
Also, QM has higher grade requirements than the other two unis you applied for: QMUL is A*AA whilst Warwick is AAA I believe so you may have to think about that.
QM is in London hence the tutors will have lots of contacts with the city law firms for you to get work experience with
Again, being in London has another advantage which is that you can attend the SC, Royal Courts of Justice etc.
It came 6th according to the guardian league table
It's a top ten law school (but I guess you'd say so is Warwick and bristol)
However the disadvantage of a university in London is that costs can be quite expensive.
So, that's just my opinion and those are the reasons why I would much rather go to QM than Warwick or Bristol. But remember that all three unis are really good and there isn't that much difference between them in terms of law. The only uni that would make a big difference is Oxford or Cambridge. You can also go on unistats if your really unsure and compare and contrast your uni.choices there.
Good luck!
Posted from TSR Mobile
Anywhere can have those grade requirements on paper, but they mean very little if come Clearing you're begging for AAB students, like a certain uni in Mile End were last year....
Most Law tutors have contacts in the profession from their uni days, QM's tutors are no more likely to know City lawyers than elsewhere (why would they have any need to have contact with them other than personal?). Where QM does benefit is that its Pro Bono group has a lot of links to City firms.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by newtotsr123
Thanks for the reply. I have been told not to take league tables too seriously as they seem to fluctuate a lot. QM has been ranked 18th (thecompleteuniversityguide?)on some league tables whereas its been ranked 4th or 5th in other ones (Times?).
The thing that worries me most about attending QMUL is that it is still really an up-and-coming university for law and other subjects and may not be viewed as strongly as more traditional universities such as Bristol.
I would very much like to live in London despite its cost, but I was under the impression that QMUL will not be viewed as highly as the other two universities I have mentioned in employer's view. Perhaps when being compared to the likes of LSE, UCL, and KCL, Queen Mary does not have as strong of a reputation in London. I have spoken to many people and I kind of get the 'Uh, why queen mary' response from them and that they do hesitate a bit when I mention the university to them.
The thing that worries me most about attending QMUL is that it is still really an up-and-coming university for law and other subjects and may not be viewed as strongly as more traditional universities such as Bristol.
I would very much like to live in London despite its cost, but I was under the impression that QMUL will not be viewed as highly as the other two universities I have mentioned in employer's view. Perhaps when being compared to the likes of LSE, UCL, and KCL, Queen Mary does not have as strong of a reputation in London. I have spoken to many people and I kind of get the 'Uh, why queen mary' response from them and that they do hesitate a bit when I mention the university to them.
That's true, league tables can't be reliable however QMUL will still be recognized as a top ten law school in the country so in terms of the employer's view: I don't see (like I said before) QM having that much of a difference to Bristol for example. That's just my opinion. What a lot of law students would advise (which they advised to me) was that it all depends on what you make of it whilst at university. If you go to LSE and get a low 2:1 the employers won't care that you've gone to a prestigious university. They mostly care about grades and so if you can get into a good university-whether in your case it's QM or Bristol, and get top marks then your definitely going to be offered lots of opportunities in whatever area of law it is that you wish to continue.
QMUL's strongest department is for law so it differs a lot compared to the other subjects it offers such as engineering for example. Hence in my opinion, I believe QM is not 'up and coming' for law but yes it can be for other subjects.
If reputation is a big deal for you then I suppose you should take a gap year and apply to more prestigious university's such as LSE and you might even have a chance at Oxbridge.
But like I said, just see which uni you'd be really happy to go to. This is a subjective matter because I applied to Warwick too yet I firmed QM yesterday
Posted from TSR Mobile
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by roh
QM isn't particularly well known for any subjects outside Law (unless you count BSMS as part of QM proper) which might affect it and you're right, it's reputation has come in the last few years due to a bit hiring binge within the Law dept.
Whether it's significantly different to Warwick or Bristol in an employer's view will very much depend on the employer, if the recruiter is a 50 odd year old who still views unis through the prism of their own uni days then Warwick may simply be some bog in the West Midlands which breeds raging commies whilst Bristol would be viewed as a university which very much educates the right sort of chap. From the perspective of recruitment Warwick is still fairly nouveau in terms of being viewed as an elite uni.
In short, don't stress 'reputation' too much, stress where you might actually want to live and study for 3 years of your life.
Anywhere can have those grade requirements on paper, but they mean very little if come Clearing you're begging for AAB students, like a certain uni in Mile End were last year....
Most Law tutors have contacts in the profession from their uni days, QM's tutors are no more likely to know City lawyers than elsewhere (why would they have any need to have contact with them other than personal?). Where QM does benefit is that its Pro Bono group has a lot of links to City firms.
Whether it's significantly different to Warwick or Bristol in an employer's view will very much depend on the employer, if the recruiter is a 50 odd year old who still views unis through the prism of their own uni days then Warwick may simply be some bog in the West Midlands which breeds raging commies whilst Bristol would be viewed as a university which very much educates the right sort of chap. From the perspective of recruitment Warwick is still fairly nouveau in terms of being viewed as an elite uni.
In short, don't stress 'reputation' too much, stress where you might actually want to live and study for 3 years of your life.
Anywhere can have those grade requirements on paper, but they mean very little if come Clearing you're begging for AAB students, like a certain uni in Mile End were last year....
Most Law tutors have contacts in the profession from their uni days, QM's tutors are no more likely to know City lawyers than elsewhere (why would they have any need to have contact with them other than personal?). Where QM does benefit is that its Pro Bono group has a lot of links to City firms.
Didn't Durham with such 'high prestige' go through adjustment last year? A lot of good universitities went through clearing and adjustment last year since there was such a high fall in A snd A* A-level grades
And surely if AAB is enough for QM then why would they reject people who are predicted A*AA or AAA? I don't know ...
Yeah but surely they would have a lot more easier access to them won't they? I thought they would.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by ILoveTehran
Didn't Durham with such 'high prestige' go through adjustment last year? A lot of good universitities went through clearing and adjustment last year since there was such a high fall in A snd A* A-level grades
And surely if AAB is enough for QM then why would they reject people who are predicted A*AA or AAA? I don't know ...
Yeah but surely they would have a lot more easier access to them won't they? I thought they would.
Posted from TSR Mobile
And surely if AAB is enough for QM then why would they reject people who are predicted A*AA or AAA? I don't know ...
Yeah but surely they would have a lot more easier access to them won't they? I thought they would.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Yes, but they were still on their original grades (A*AA), QM was in clearing, generally a more demeaning affair for unis, two grades lower. Most unis go into Adjustment just to keep UCAS happy. My point was more that what grades a uni asks for in its prospectus doesn't really have a huge baring on its quality, Oxford only asks for AAA for instance.
They would have access to them, but why would they? They don't want a job in the City, they've deliberately opted out of that route in spite of having the grades for it, so have little to no interest in networking with City lawyers, besides those they already know from their undergrad days. Like I said it's very useful having those big firms involved in Pro Bono for QM, but the tutors themselves are not going to be particularly fussed about the careers side of things unless its their job.
Original post by roh
Yes, but they were still on their original grades (A*AA), QM was in clearing, generally a more demeaning affair for unis, two grades lower. Most unis go into Adjustment just to keep UCAS happy. My point was more that what grades a uni asks for in its prospectus doesn't really have a huge baring on its quality, Oxford only asks for AAA for instance.
They would have access to them, but why would they? They don't want a job in the City, they've deliberately opted out of that route in spite of having the grades for it, so have little to no interest in networking with City lawyers, besides those they already know from their undergrad days. Like I said it's very useful having those big firms involved in Pro Bono for QM, but the tutors themselves are not going to be particularly fussed about the careers side of things unless its their job.
They would have access to them, but why would they? They don't want a job in the City, they've deliberately opted out of that route in spite of having the grades for it, so have little to no interest in networking with City lawyers, besides those they already know from their undergrad days. Like I said it's very useful having those big firms involved in Pro Bono for QM, but the tutors themselves are not going to be particularly fussed about the careers side of things unless its their job.
I don't think it's correct to be that judgemental about this issue. There are some students who are offered to study at UCL, or KCL who were allowed in with AAB-ABB. Does that make UCL or KCL less prestigious than Manchester or Reading?
The reason why QMUL as well as other prestigious universities went to clearing was because a number of Russell Group universities had vacancies left due to a drop in applicant numbers (after the increase in fees), demographic fall in the number of 18 year olds, and other factors such as drop in A* and A grades in A-levels. Hence, going through clearing has nothing to do with the reputation of the department. QM is still known to be a top ten law school of the country. Hmm, I don't think uni's would go through adjustment just to keep 'UCAS happy'. I mean, LSE never goes into adjustment. Surely they would like to keep UCAS happy too won't they?
But I don't know Well yes they would have access to them and why not? They actually do have a lot of network with City Lawyers- I think that is one of the huge advantages of studying at QMUL. And the tutors are really fussed about the careers side of things.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by ILoveTehran
.
I don't think it's correct to be that judgemental about this issue. There are some students who are offered to study at UCL, or KCL who were allowed in with AAB-ABB. Does that make UCL or KCL less prestigious than Manchester or Reading?
The reason why QMUL as well as other prestigious universities went to clearing was because a number of Russell Group universities had vacancies left due to a drop in applicant numbers (after the increase in fees), demographic fall in the number of 18 year olds, and other factors such as drop in A* and A grades in A-levels. Hence, going through clearing has nothing to do with the reputation of the department. QM is still known to be a top ten law school of the country. Hmm, I don't think uni's would go through adjustment just to keep 'UCAS happy'. I mean, LSE never goes into adjustment. Surely they would like to keep UCAS happy too won't they? But I don't know
Well yes they would have access to them and why not? They actually do have a lot of network with City Lawyers- I think that is one of the huge advantages of studying at QMUL. And the tutors are really fussed about the careers side of things.
I don't think it's correct to be that judgemental about this issue. There are some students who are offered to study at UCL, or KCL who were allowed in with AAB-ABB. Does that make UCL or KCL less prestigious than Manchester or Reading?
The reason why QMUL as well as other prestigious universities went to clearing was because a number of Russell Group universities had vacancies left due to a drop in applicant numbers (after the increase in fees), demographic fall in the number of 18 year olds, and other factors such as drop in A* and A grades in A-levels. Hence, going through clearing has nothing to do with the reputation of the department. QM is still known to be a top ten law school of the country. Hmm, I don't think uni's would go through adjustment just to keep 'UCAS happy'. I mean, LSE never goes into adjustment. Surely they would like to keep UCAS happy too won't they?
But I don't know Well yes they would have access to them and why not? They actually do have a lot of network with City Lawyers- I think that is one of the huge advantages of studying at QMUL. And the tutors are really fussed about the careers side of things.
Know, I was using it to show why not be judgemental purely based on grades generally!
Oxbridge, LSE and Imperial don't go into Adjustment usually and UCAS isn't happy about it, every year they beseech them to do so instead of taking the odd student who misses the grades to fill any remaining places and every year so far they haven't. Durham presumably figure they have enough places they could fill through Adjustment and it helps get UCAS off their backs about it. Ultimately UCAS can't punish them, but they can be a pain in the backside about it on one of the biggest days of the year so the student recruitment head and finance head may decide to go in just to save themselves hassle.
Because it isn't their job would seem the obvious answer, if you're not being paid for it and don't enjoy it there's no real incentive to do something. Maybe QM are the one exception to this but most people I know have found their tutors are more than happy to write references and help put them in contact with personal friends but they aren't going to go out and find new contacts just for the students' sake, they figure (pretty reasonably I think) that's the students' job.
Bristol has never been in adjustment or clearing... Ever... Just the same as Oxford et al
What does this detail... That regardless of somewhat fickle teenagers emote.. As to prestige or percieved prestige... The numbers speak for themselves... Even with offering 100's of more places last year then in previous years...
I am a recent Bristol grad so I do have a dog in this fight as it were... But having said that... The overstated Bristol demise baffles me...
Am I happy with my education at Bristol, absolutely, could there have been improvements in the course, absolutely I would challenge anyone to claim that their course couldn't be run somewhat better...
My lecturers were leaders in their field, and regularly write papers in the most highly regarded journals et al... Though in full disclosure, the RAE number could have been higher...
Do I believe Bristol will hinder me because I didn't choose to go to KCL, UCL, or Oxbridge... Not in the slightest... Are the former and these unis Warwick, Durham, Exeter etc on the same prestige level is mostly irrelevant (With Oxbridge being a slightly different kettle of fish due to cache and name recognition), and only good for stroking one's ego... Firms and chambers will most likely group most unis (again Oxbridge being most likely an exception to this rule) in similar bands and concentrate more on degree classification and "fit"
What does this detail... That regardless of somewhat fickle teenagers emote.. As to prestige or percieved prestige... The numbers speak for themselves... Even with offering 100's of more places last year then in previous years...
I am a recent Bristol grad so I do have a dog in this fight as it were... But having said that... The overstated Bristol demise baffles me...
Am I happy with my education at Bristol, absolutely, could there have been improvements in the course, absolutely I would challenge anyone to claim that their course couldn't be run somewhat better...
My lecturers were leaders in their field, and regularly write papers in the most highly regarded journals et al... Though in full disclosure, the RAE number could have been higher...
Do I believe Bristol will hinder me because I didn't choose to go to KCL, UCL, or Oxbridge... Not in the slightest... Are the former and these unis Warwick, Durham, Exeter etc on the same prestige level is mostly irrelevant (With Oxbridge being a slightly different kettle of fish due to cache and name recognition), and only good for stroking one's ego... Firms and chambers will most likely group most unis (again Oxbridge being most likely an exception to this rule) in similar bands and concentrate more on degree classification and "fit"
Original post by roh
Know, I was using it to show why not be judgemental purely based on grades generally!
Oxbridge, LSE and Imperial don't go into Adjustment usually and UCAS isn't happy about it, every year they beseech them to do so instead of taking the odd student who misses the grades to fill any remaining places and every year so far they haven't. Durham presumably figure they have enough places they could fill through Adjustment and it helps get UCAS off their backs about it. Ultimately UCAS can't punish them, but they can be a pain in the backside about it on one of the biggest days of the year so the student recruitment head and finance head may decide to go in just to save themselves hassle.
Because it isn't their job would seem the obvious answer, if you're not being paid for it and don't enjoy it there's no real incentive to do something. Maybe QM are the one exception to this but most people I know have found their tutors are more than happy to write references and help put them in contact with personal friends but they aren't going to go out and find new contacts just for the students' sake, they figure (pretty reasonably I think) that's the students' job.
Oxbridge, LSE and Imperial don't go into Adjustment usually and UCAS isn't happy about it, every year they beseech them to do so instead of taking the odd student who misses the grades to fill any remaining places and every year so far they haven't. Durham presumably figure they have enough places they could fill through Adjustment and it helps get UCAS off their backs about it. Ultimately UCAS can't punish them, but they can be a pain in the backside about it on one of the biggest days of the year so the student recruitment head and finance head may decide to go in just to save themselves hassle.
Because it isn't their job would seem the obvious answer, if you're not being paid for it and don't enjoy it there's no real incentive to do something. Maybe QM are the one exception to this but most people I know have found their tutors are more than happy to write references and help put them in contact with personal friends but they aren't going to go out and find new contacts just for the students' sake, they figure (pretty reasonably I think) that's the students' job.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by vnupe
Bristol has never been in adjustment or clearing... Ever... Just the same as Oxford et al
What does this detail... That regardless of somewhat fickle teenagers emote.. As to prestige or percieved prestige... The numbers speak for themselves... Even with offering 100's of more places last year then in previous years...
I am a recent Bristol grad so I do have a dog in this fight as it were... But having said that... The overstated Bristol demise baffles me...
Am I happy with my education at Bristol, absolutely, could there have been improvements in the course, absolutely I would challenge anyone to claim that their course couldn't be run somewhat better...
My lecturers were leaders in their field, and regularly write papers in the most highly regarded journals et al... Though in full disclosure, the RAE number could have been higher...
Do I believe Bristol will hinder me because I didn't choose to go to KCL, UCL, or Oxbridge... Not in the slightest... Are the former and these unis Warwick, Durham, Exeter etc on the same prestige level is mostly irrelevant (With Oxbridge being a slightly different kettle of fish due to cache and name recognition), and only good for stroking one's ego... Firms and chambers will most likely group most unis (again Oxbridge being most likely an exception to this rule) in similar bands and concentrate more on degree classification and "fit"
What does this detail... That regardless of somewhat fickle teenagers emote.. As to prestige or percieved prestige... The numbers speak for themselves... Even with offering 100's of more places last year then in previous years...
I am a recent Bristol grad so I do have a dog in this fight as it were... But having said that... The overstated Bristol demise baffles me...
Am I happy with my education at Bristol, absolutely, could there have been improvements in the course, absolutely I would challenge anyone to claim that their course couldn't be run somewhat better...
My lecturers were leaders in their field, and regularly write papers in the most highly regarded journals et al... Though in full disclosure, the RAE number could have been higher...
Do I believe Bristol will hinder me because I didn't choose to go to KCL, UCL, or Oxbridge... Not in the slightest... Are the former and these unis Warwick, Durham, Exeter etc on the same prestige level is mostly irrelevant (With Oxbridge being a slightly different kettle of fish due to cache and name recognition), and only good for stroking one's ego... Firms and chambers will most likely group most unis (again Oxbridge being most likely an exception to this rule) in similar bands and concentrate more on degree classification and "fit"
are you sure Bristol's never been in clearing or adjustment? I'm pretty sure I knew someone who got there through adjustment last year?
Also, they say on their website that they aren't likely to enter UCAS Extra as they're oversubscribed but yet they have?
I'm not trying to start a debate or anything, was just wondering because I was hoping to go to Bristol via adjustment
I stand corrected, apparently there were a couple of spots due to adjustment, even with offering 100s of extra spots...
But again this is secondary to the post...
But again this is secondary to the post...
Original post by millie-rose
are you sure Bristol's never been in clearing or adjustment? I'm pretty sure I knew someone who got there through adjustment last year?
Also, they say on their website that they aren't likely to enter UCAS Extra as they're oversubscribed but yet they have?
I'm not trying to start a debate or anything, was just wondering because I was hoping to go to Bristol via adjustment
Also, they say on their website that they aren't likely to enter UCAS Extra as they're oversubscribed but yet they have?
I'm not trying to start a debate or anything, was just wondering because I was hoping to go to Bristol via adjustment
Original post by vnupe
Bristol has never been in adjustment or clearing... Ever... Just the same as Oxford et al
Bristol was in clearing in 1994 for maths and engineering.
(I haven't looked at every old clearing list so these are merely samples)
(edited 11 years ago)
Again I stand corrected...
I perhaps in hind site should not have been as absolutist... Especially amongst lawyers...
I perhaps in hind site should not have been as absolutist... Especially amongst lawyers...
Original post by nulli tertius
Bristol was in clearing in 1994 for maths and engineering.
It cleared for inter alia law in 1989
(I haven't looked at every old clearing list so these are merely samples)
It cleared for inter alia law in 1989
(I haven't looked at every old clearing list so these are merely samples)
Original post by vnupe
Bristol has never been in adjustment or clearing... Ever... Just the same as Oxford et al
What does this detail... That regardless of somewhat fickle teenagers emote.. As to prestige or percieved prestige... The numbers speak for themselves... Even with offering 100's of more places last year then in previous years...
I am a recent Bristol grad so I do have a dog in this fight as it were... But having said that... The overstated Bristol demise baffles me...
Am I happy with my education at Bristol, absolutely, could there have been improvements in the course, absolutely I would challenge anyone to claim that their course couldn't be run somewhat better...
My lecturers were leaders in their field, and regularly write papers in the most highly regarded journals et al... Though in full disclosure, the RAE number could have been higher...
Do I believe Bristol will hinder me because I didn't choose to go to KCL, UCL, or Oxbridge... Not in the slightest... Are the former and these unis Warwick, Durham, Exeter etc on the same prestige level is mostly irrelevant (With Oxbridge being a slightly different kettle of fish due to cache and name recognition), and only good for stroking one's ego... Firms and chambers will most likely group most unis (again Oxbridge being most likely an exception to this rule) in similar bands and concentrate more on degree classification and "fit"
What does this detail... That regardless of somewhat fickle teenagers emote.. As to prestige or percieved prestige... The numbers speak for themselves... Even with offering 100's of more places last year then in previous years...
I am a recent Bristol grad so I do have a dog in this fight as it were... But having said that... The overstated Bristol demise baffles me...
Am I happy with my education at Bristol, absolutely, could there have been improvements in the course, absolutely I would challenge anyone to claim that their course couldn't be run somewhat better...
My lecturers were leaders in their field, and regularly write papers in the most highly regarded journals et al... Though in full disclosure, the RAE number could have been higher...
Do I believe Bristol will hinder me because I didn't choose to go to KCL, UCL, or Oxbridge... Not in the slightest... Are the former and these unis Warwick, Durham, Exeter etc on the same prestige level is mostly irrelevant (With Oxbridge being a slightly different kettle of fish due to cache and name recognition), and only good for stroking one's ego... Firms and chambers will most likely group most unis (again Oxbridge being most likely an exception to this rule) in similar bands and concentrate more on degree classification and "fit"
Hi, thanks for your reply.
I was leaning towards Bristol over QMUL and Warwick. However, I noticed that they were in UCAS extra, whereas the law (M100) course at the latter two universities were not.
What do you think this says about the law course at Bristol?
Does this mean that it is not as good as I thought it would be?
Original post by newtotsr123
Hi, thanks for your reply.
I was leaning towards Bristol over QMUL and Warwick. However, I noticed that they were in UCAS extra, whereas the law (M100) course at the latter two universities were not.
What do you think this says about the law course at Bristol?
Does this mean that it is not as good as I thought it would be?
I was leaning towards Bristol over QMUL and Warwick. However, I noticed that they were in UCAS extra, whereas the law (M100) course at the latter two universities were not.
What do you think this says about the law course at Bristol?
Does this mean that it is not as good as I thought it would be?
I would advise you not to read anything into UCAS Extra. They were on it for about a day, and I don't think they were actually accepting applications on there. Apparently you have to opt out afterwards as I noticed LSE was on there too, only for them to disappear a few hours later.
I chose to accept Bristol over Warwick for many reasons.
Of all the barristers and solicitors I spoke to they said out of the universities I applied to (including Warwick) Bristol was by far the one to go for. Nevertheless, at the end of the day which university you go to isn't the most important factor. Just pick which university you believe you would be happiest at, otherwise you may regret it in years to come.
Remember each law degree is structured slightly differently - so look at course structure and assessments to help make your final decision.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by newtotsr123
Hi, thanks for your reply.
I was leaning towards Bristol over QMUL and Warwick. However, I noticed that they were in UCAS extra, whereas the law (M100) course at the latter two universities were not.
What do you think this says about the law course at Bristol?
Does this mean that it is not as good as I thought it would be?
I was leaning towards Bristol over QMUL and Warwick. However, I noticed that they were in UCAS extra, whereas the law (M100) course at the latter two universities were not.
What do you think this says about the law course at Bristol?
Does this mean that it is not as good as I thought it would be?
Read clearly what UCAS Extra means... this can be done here http://www.ucas.ac.uk/students/offers/extra
Bristol unlike Oxbridge but like UCL followed the UCAS mandate and allowed 600 extra spots this year, thus increasing its overall intake by 20% university wide (UCL allowed 300). That said, they were still not in clearing, but did allow a few people to be accepted through adjustment.
Having read what Extra entails, one possible explanation is:
1. you could have possibly done much better than you were predicted (which is a concept I can never fully wrap my head around, predictive grading) and have decided to eschew your five choices (or however many it is) and gamble on a separate new choice.
2. It also could mean that you have not gotten into any of your choices and are searching for somewhere to go...
Based on Bristol's academic profile and the tariff it requires, which is the more likely of the two scenarios...
Ultimately it is your decision as to where you matriculate, and choosing anyone of the three or however many you are choosing from, will most likely get you to where you want to go (provided you attain a certain degree of academic excellence). I am simply advocating for Bristol (and needlessly so if I may add) as an alumnus and more importantly a person who values the legal education that I received there... after all education like most things are what you make of it...
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Philosophy vs Law If I want to get Into Law
- QMUL for Law or try again next year?
- law 2024 offer
- The Official QMUL Applicants for 2024 Entry Thread
- QMUL vs University of Manchester Law
- Official Queen Mary University of London Offer Holders Thread for 2024 entry
- Would you rather attend...?
- City vs Royal Holloway for Law?
- Law Application Choices
- Best UK universities to study law
- LLB Law at UoM or QMUL
- Confused between choosing a uni
- Law Applicants 2023 Thread
- 2023 International University Applicants
- Bristol or queen mary for law?
- Official QMUL 2023 Applicants Thread
- Masters of Law Offers 2024
- Law Applicants 2023 entry - discussion thread
- LLM Queen Mary or ULaw
- Law offers 2024
