Study into Law firms preferred Universities-THE RESULTS

OP

Original post by J-SP

The reality is this is far more complicated than the report suggests.

Although this is interesting, what it doesn't show is the volume of applications from these universities in the first place.

I worked at one MC firm where nearly 25% of their applications were received from two universities, Oxford and Cambridge. Therefore even if there was completely parity in all applications, they would have recruited a disproportionate amount of trainees from those universities. You then have to take into account that people from those universities (and I hate to say it but it is true) are set up to succeed a lot better than other universities (90%+ of students getting a 2.1 or above, culture of strong extra curricular activities, college tuition system etc).

There is a group mentality that does gather in universities, especially within law schools. I know from experience that all it takes is for one highly popular person who is perceived to be the brightest, most active and most engaging student to be turned down from a firm and fewer students in their year group will then apply to that firm. It is the case of "well if they can't get through, then I don't stand a chance" mentality. Or it could be a bit of a case of bad word of mouth and fewer people apply too.

Universities targeted is not dependent purely on the law faculty. Other factors are taken into consideration - how good the careers service is, how expensive the events are, whether you can build a good relationship with the law society or other groups, how far it is to travel. Manchester is highly targeted due to the size of the university - there are so many 1000s of students and even from London it is relatively easy to get to. Going to somewhere like Exeter which is a far smaller university and is much more of a pain to get to becomes less attractive.

I would disagree with the point about York and Queen Mary being over-hyped - they are both relatively small universities compared to some of the others like Nottingham/Manchester. A smaller student population should result in fewer hirers. Also York's law school is still relatively young - it didn't exist less than a decade ago!

Liverpool isn't letting the side down either - in fact the issue they have is their entry requirements mean that their candidates are less likely to meet some law firm's requirements. They allow candidates in with ABB to apply and some firms request AAB - it means a significant proportion of their students will not be able to apply in the first place (wrongly in my opinion).

So glad you've posted I find your posts so useful. I understand your point how this report only shows one side of the story. I believe your right, ambition counts for alot, and Cambridge and Oxford grads may just be more confident in applying to top law firms which may partly explain their dominance. Also had no idea York law school was so young in that case its ranking is highly impressive.

Has to be noted that the report explains that grads from Kingston, Bangor and Aberystwyth found at US firms . Indicating successful applications into law is based on much more than university prestige which is encouraging. Here on TSR there is real obsession with law schools prestige, so it's nice to see that some less hyped universities make an appearance on this report.

Reply 4

OP

Original post by xAssassin786

probably going to Birmingham. This worries as I might not have a chance at magic circle law firms :frown:

That's the only trouble with reports like these they can make people feel worried about their university choice. Put it this way, my sisters friend who studies at Cambridge has struggled to find a training contract at a top law firm (she has one work experience in law and didn't get involved in societies). So going to a good or bad university really doesn't determine much unless along with uni you do some other extracurricular activities to bulk up your CV and perform well in interview.

Reply 5

xAssassin786

3

Original post by peachpetals

That's the only trouble with reports like these they can make people feel worried about their university choice. Put it this way, my sisters friend who studies at Cambridge has struggled to find a training contract at a top law firm (she has one work experience in law and didn't get involved in societies). So going to a good or bad university really doesn't determine much unless along with uni you do some other extracurricular activities to bulk up your CV and perform well in interview.

I guess you're right. I'm planning on joining a lot of societies such as the United Nations society. And in terms of work experience I need to get involved in commercial law since I haven't done that yet.My first year is dedicated to do as much extra curricular activities and get a 2:1 or a first. In terms of work experience I will probably do work experience at regional law firms around the Midlands because I live around about there. Afterwards ill probably apply for vacation schemes and internships. At birmingham they have this global challenge programme where you get to go abroad on a unpaid internship. So I'm pretty much sure of what I need to do for 3 years.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 6

OP

Original post by J-SP

As long as you get good grades, work hard, build up your extra curriculars, are active in pursuing opportunities for work experience/exposure to the legal profession, and can write a good application form/CV, you will be fine. All these things are far more important than the name of the institution you apply to. Some of these firms are starting university blind recruitment processes anyway.

Are blind recruitment processes effective though? Surely you can give hints to which university you went to e.g. "I was a member of Cambridge Rowing Society".

Reply 7

ORW

10

I found this guide very useful when I found it and although it does clearly show Oxbridge dominance, it is fair in its conclusions at the end. It lists all the universities you would expect as good options for studying at if you wish to work for certain types of firm, notably big city firms. However Leicester was listed as good which I did not expect until I did some more reading into their reputation for Law and generally. I found upon research that the big firms do like Leicester despite it not being a Russell Group uni. I personally am going to Manchester to do Law, and although I knew it is a good university and in the Russell Group, I never knew how prominent it was until I saw the graphs in this guide by Chambers student. That is not to say there is not better unis than Manchester because there definitely is. Yet Manchester has a good Law society and law fair sponsored and visited by all the MC/major city firms and if you look on Linkedin you will find many Manchester graduates at top firms. I found this encouraging but at the end of the day it is also down to what the individual has done as well as what university they attended. No doubt the prestige of the university does come into play. For example, a firm may/likely look at a high 2:1 from Warwick better than a high 2:1 from Surrey.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 8

_Fergo

Original post by ORW

I found this guide very useful when I found it and although it does clearly show Oxbridge dominance, it is fair in its conclusions at the end. It lists all the universities you would expect as good options for studying at if you wish to work for certain types of firm, notably big city firms. However Leicester was listed as good which I did not expect until I did some more reading into their reputation for Law and generally. I found upon research that the big firms do like Leicester despite it not being a Russell Group uni. I personally am going to Manchester to do Law, and although I knew it is a good university and in the Russell Group, I never knew how prominent it was until I saw the graphs in this guide by Chambers student. That is not to say there is not better unis than Manchester because there definitely is. Yet Manchester has a good Law society and law fair sponsored and visited by all the MC/major city firms and if you look on Linkedin you will find many Manchester graduates at top firms. I found this encouraging but at the end of the day it is also down to what the individual has done as well as what university they attended. No doubt the prestige of the university does come into play. For example, a firm may/likely look at a high 2:1 from Warwick better than a high 2:1 from Surrey.

The thing with Nottingham/Manchester and UCL, however, is that they are literally giants in terms of student enrollment. All three easily sit in the 30k range. This is important considering that non-law students can also apply for TCs, and you'll often find that circa 30-45% of graduates at big firms are non-law students. This gives the aforementioned unis a clear advantage over the likes of Durham and particularly LSE.

Obviously this is not conclusive since we don't know the exact numbers applying from each uni, but a uni with 36k students will inevitably have more applicants than one with 9k students (referring to LSE).

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 9

OP

Original post by *Stefan*

The thing with Nottingham/Manchester and UCL, however, is that they are literally giants in terms of student enrollment. All three easily sit in the 30k range. This is important considering that non-law students can also apply for TCs, and you'll often find that circa 30-45% of graduates at big firms are non-law students. This gives the aforementioned unis a clear advantage over the likes of Durham and particularly LSE.

Obviously this is not conclusive since we don't know the exact numbers applying from each uni, but a uni with 36k students will inevitably have more applicants than one with 9k students (referring to LSE).

Posted from TSR Mobile

Yes you make a good point. But number of undergrads i don't believe is that important as Manchester Met, Leeds Beckett, Greenwich also have high numbers of undergrads but they don't feature what so ever in top 25. You can't just say Manchester, Nottingham and UCL do better purely on student size, their graduates actually have to be decent to get a job. clearly some credit must be given that those universities are attracting and producing top quality students. Nottingham can have all the graduates it likes but if its students arent a high calibre they won't get the jobs. Just because there is a chance of larger amounts of applications from Nottingham, Manchester, Warwick etc doesn't necessarily mean a higher chance of those applications being successful.

I believe LSE has just over 10,000 undergraduates and postgraduates; a tiny number. The fact that it features so highly in this report says alot about its graduates. I suspect they would have the most successful application to offer ratio

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 10

_Fergo

Original post by peachpetals

Yes you make a good point. But number of undergrads i don't believe is that important as Manchester Met, Leeds Beckett, Greenwich also have high numbers of undergrads but they don't feature what so ever in top 25. You can't just say Manchester, Nottingham and UCL do better purely on student size, their graduates actually have to be decent to get a job. clearly some credit must be given that those universities are attracting and producing top quality students. Nottingham can have all the graduates it likes but if its students arent a high calibre they won't get the jobs. Just because there is a chance of larger amounts of applications from Nottingham, Manchester, Warwick etc doesn't necessarily mean a higher chance of those applications being successful.

I believe LSE has just over 10,000 undergraduates and postgraduates; a tiny number. The fact that it features so highly in this report says alot about its graduates. I suspect they would have the most successful application to offer ratio

As JSP says above, you have to compare like with like. Obviously those at Manchester Met won't have the same qualifications as those at UCL. The point is that, if we are to consider the student numbers, UCL/Manchester/Nottinghan have an advantage over, say, Durham, LSE, Bristol and even Oxbridge (but that's obviously a very different category).

While this is not definitive, it may indicate why Manchester, for instance, features so prominently.

I was actually more impressed with Durham, considering iirc that they have 16k students yet and are pretty close to Cambridge.

Posted from TSR Mobile

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 11

OP

Original post by *Stefan*

As JSP says above, you have to compare like with like. Obviously those at Manchester Met won't have the same qualifications as those at UCL. The point is that, if we are to consider the student numbers, UCL/Manchester/Nottinghan have an advantage over, say, Durham, LSE, Bristol and even Oxbridge (but that's obviously a very different category).

While this is not definitive, it may indicate why Manchester, for instance, features so prominently.

I was actually more impressed with Durham, considering iirc that they have 16k students yet and are pretty close to Cambridge.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Ok let me make a fairer comparison say Birmingham vs Manchester. Similarly large student populations, both ask for AAA, both have well regarded career services, easy to reach to by law firms. What then is it that makes Birmingham appear significantly less? Just curious on thoughts.

Reply 12

_Fergo

Original post by peachpetals

Ok let me make a fairer comparison say Birmingham vs Manchester. Similarly large student populations, both ask for AAA, both have well regarded career services, easy to reach to by law firms. What then is it that makes Birmingham appear significantly less? Just curious on thoughts.

We'll never find out, I guess, but I wouldn't say it's because Manchester is better regarded than Birmingham.

On another note, the former still has 4k more students than the latter :P

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 13

DougallnDougall

13

Original post by J-SP

The other thing about Oxbridge grads is that the over whelming majority want to work in London/the City, so they are less likely as a group to apply to regional firms.

In contrast you go to some universities that have a stronger reputation for bringing in students from the local catchment area. Sheffield is a good example. It's far more likely that their students will not apply for Firms based in London, but will apply to those in Manchester/Yorkshire.

Interestingly St Andrews isn't listed there but I bet money on it having one of the strongest application to offer ratios of most of the unis. However, it's location means it makes it very difficult to attend events there, it's a very small uni and it has no law faculty, so I am not surprised it is represented.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Original post by J-SP

The other thing about Oxbridge grads is that the over whelming majority want to work in London/the City, so they are less likely as a group to apply to regional firms.

In contrast you go to some universities that have a stronger reputation for bringing in students from the local catchment area. Sheffield is a good example. It's far more likely that their students will not apply for Firms based in London, but will apply to those in Manchester/Yorkshire.

Interestingly St Andrews isn't listed there but I bet money on it having one of the strongest application to offer ratios of most of the unis. However, it's location means it makes it very difficult to attend events there, it's a very small uni and it has no law faculty, so I am not surprised it is represented.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Err! That might be because St Andrews law school transferred to Dundee University when it became a university as a separate entity from St Andrews

Reply 14

nulli tertius

21

Another thing is that you have to bear in mind the limitations of the survey.

If you take any region and look at the firms in the "True Picture" review which is where the data comes from for the Chambers survey and then compare it with the Legal 500 ratings for that region, you will see that there is very little connection particularly if you drill down a little deeper away from Corporate (and Legal 500 really does mean Corporate in those reviews-Commercial Property, Finance, Construction law and other work for businesses are separate review sections).

If you look at the Midlands (which covers both East and West), Chambers have 13 firms but only one of those firms (Higgs & Sons) has offices only in the Midlands and only seven of them would be regarded as historically Midlands firms.

Chambers have interviewed 2300 people over 3 years for the survey. That is about 12% of the trainee market. In terms of sheer numbers that is very high, much higher than in a typical survey, but that is not a representative 12%. If you look at the major players in a number of sectors; they simply aren't there.

Reply 15

ORW

10

I echo J-SP here in reply to peachpetals post. I do not see why some people get so hung up that firms are being elitist by preferring Oxbridge and the Russell Group universities. As J-SP says, the entry requirements of Manchester Met, Nottingham Trent etc do not have the entry requirement of Oxbridge/RG universities which the firms want. The majority of those at Man Met etc will have BBB and lower. This is not acceptable academic prowess to firms, and firms apply strict filters on A level grades, usually AAB as mentioned. Why would major law firms waste their time going to a sub standard university where the majority/nearly all students will not have the academic ability and grades they want, when they could go to Oxbridge/Russell Group unis (minus Liverpool which is ABB) and have a huge bunch of students who nearly all have the grades. I know people doing the University of Law (ULaw) LLB and they had no big firms at their law fair. ULaw requires ABB-BBB for their LLB so the firms noticed this and stayed away from them and talked to those on the GDL/LPC who went to respectable universities. Makes me glad I'll be doing Law at a RG uni (University of Manchester)! Although it seems unfair that Oxbridge and the Russell Group HEAVILY dominate trainee intakes at major law firms, less so when you go to very regional areas, it is because the students there have all the academic prerequisites firms want, and so the firms target their universities. The reputation is of course considered too. People looking to go into Law just need to accept this competition. Law is a tough profession to enter, so if you want to do it just go to a good university (Oxbridge/Russell Group), it helps getting your foot in the door then once you have done that you can just focus on what you have done as an individual/can offer in order to really sell yourself to firms.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 16

Conzy210