The Student Room Group

Law degree vs Non-law degree

I'm not sure if this is the right place to post.

Basically, I've had my heart set on becoming a lawyer for a while and I've done some legal work experience with the intention of applying for a law degree.

However, I've recently been told by various people that you're better off doing another degree and then doing the GDL. They said that the best lawyers rarely do law degrees and that you actually have less chance of becoming a lawyer if you do a law degree rather than for example a history degree and then the GDL. They also say a law degree is more work than other Arts degrees and more dull but less rewarding.

This was not great to hear considering my entire preparation for my university application was based around law? Is this true? Is a law degree useless and dull? Is it too late to do anything else at uni? Thanks for your help.
Reply 1
Bump
It definitely is more work than other Arts degrees. It could be dry at times, but if you are interested in it you will find it rewarding.

If you already have your heart set, I dont see why you shouldn't go for it.
Saying that the chance of being a lawyer is slimmer if you do it at an undergraduate level is a bit of a sweeping generalisation- you get to learn about the law, understand the profession and be more prepared for it at a younger age. By all means, go for it now if you are sure that being a lawyer is what you want.

I dont think success in a legal profession depends much on when you receive your law education than your level of experience. You probably have more time to engage in different extra curricular activities and social events that are law related, like mooting and stand a better shot for internship placements at bigger firms like the Big Four, all of which helps in preparing you for your legal profession earlier.

Just my opinion, hope this helps and good luck in realising your goal. :smile:
(edited 11 years ago)
Reply 3
Original post by ladyliberty
It definitely is more work than other Arts degrees. It could be dry at times, but if you are interested in it you will find it rewarding.

If you already have your heart set, I dont see why you shouldn't go for it.
Saying that the chance of being a lawyer is slimmer if you do it at an undergraduate level is a bit of a sweeping generalisation- you get to learn about the law, understand the profession and be more prepared for it at a younger age. By all means, go for it now if you are sure that being a lawyer is what you want.

I dont think success in a legal profession depends much on when you receive your law education than your level of experience. You probably have more time to engage in different extra curricular activities and social events that are law related, like mooting and stand a better shot for internship placements at bigger firms like the Big Four, all of which helps in preparing you for your legal profession earlier.

Just my opinion, hope this helps and good luck in realising your goal. :smile:

Thanks for your insight. :smile:
Original post by tengentoppa
They said that the best lawyers rarely do law degrees and that you actually have less chance of becoming a lawyer if you do a law degree rather than for example a history degree and then the GDL.


Whether the best lawyers do law degrees is a matter of opinion. In the dim and distant past (pre-war particularly) the strongest students did not read law. That is where the idea originally comes from.

Jonathan Sumption (a Supreme Court justice and professional historian) is strongly of this view but his career (first man in 60 years to go straight from the bar to the highest court) is so untypical that one can ignore it.

My own experience is that non-law degree graduates know less black letter law and this remains the case for a very long time. However, black letter law is only one component is being a lawyer.

To say that someone with a non-law degree stands a better chance of becoming a lawyer is just a mishandling of statistics.

The city law firms frequently quote that they take 50/50 law and non-law graduates. I used to answer that by pointing out that well over 70% of new solicitors who had done training contracts were law graduates. Later figures showed a substantial drop in this. March 2011 to Feb 2012 admissions were 64% law graduates and March 2012 to Feb 2013 were 63% law graduates. Therefore one can say just under two thirds of people completing training contracts had law degrees.

The fallacy in the statistics is that people usually compare at different parts of the process. The comparison is made between the proportion of law graduates who become solicitors and the proportion of GDL graduates who become solicitors but nobody counts (because there is no way of counting) all the thousands of non-law graduates who would like to be solicitors but due to academic performance or lack of money never do a GDL. Therefore one counts the thousands of financially or academically non-viable law graduates but one doesn't count the thousands of non-viable non-law graduates. A sensible comparison only exists once people have embarked on the LPC and I am not aware of any statistics which show that non-law LPC students are more likely to qualify as solicitors than law graduate LPC students.


They also say a law degree is more work than other Arts degrees and more dull but less rewarding.


The point about heavier workload is broadly true. The point about less rewarding is that many arts degrees have very wide-ranging options. You can find an English degree in which it is possible never to touch Shakespeare. You can do a history and never touch the Tudors. You can't find a qualifying law degree in which it is possible to avoid contract or land law. More than any other arts degree, law students have to do things they don't like and may not be good at.
Reply 5
Original post by tengentoppa
However, I've recently been told by various people that you're better off doing another degree and then doing the GDL. They said that the best lawyers rarely do law degrees and that you actually have less chance of becoming a lawyer if you do a law degree rather than for example a history degree and then the GDL. They also say a law degree is more work than other Arts degrees and more dull but less rewarding.

This was not great to hear considering my entire preparation for my university application was based around law? Is this true? Is a law degree useless and dull? Is it too late to do anything else at uni? Thanks for your help.


This is honestly the biggest load of bull**** ever. There are only a select few degrees that I would consider worthy of combining with the GDL, over an LL.B.
Reply 6
To make a career in law, doing a law or non-law degree is irrelevant. What all current trainee solicitors and barristers have in common is that they have fantastic backgrounds, they won loads of awards and commendations at university and strongly demonstrated their interest to work in the legal profession.

You can do a law degree or a history degree or an English degree or a degree in Sports medicine, but if you don't have a strong 2:1/1st, the chances of making a legal career are slim to none (at a good City firm/set that is).

Also, law is challenging, but it varies from person to person. Taking one person's opinion on it is tantamount to idiocy.
Original post by arrowhead
To make a career in law, doing a law or non-law degree is irrelevant. What all current trainee solicitors and barristers have in common is that they have fantastic backgrounds, they won loads of awards and commendations at university and strongly demonstrated their interest to work in the legal profession.

You can do a law degree or a history degree or an English degree or a degree in Sports medicine, but if you don't have a strong 2:1/1st, the chances of making a legal career are slim to none (at a good City firm/set that is).

Also, law is challenging, but it varies from person to person. Taking one person's opinion on it is tantamount to idiocy.


Original post by arrowhead
To make a career in law, doing a law or non-law degree is irrelevant. What all current trainee solicitors and barristers have in common is that they have fantastic backgrounds, they won loads of awards and commendations at university and strongly demonstrated their interest to work in the legal profession.


Fist of all, it is pointless comparing the bar to the solicitors profession. The bar is a tiny profession, a significant proportion of whose entrants are second career people.

In the case of trainee solicitors, most of them don't have fantastic backgrounds. They haven't won loads of awards. Most of them are people with solid 2:1s from good universities who demonstrate aptitude for the work of a solicitor in assessment exercises and have good inter-personal skills demonstrated at interview. They have demonstrated their interest in working in the legal profession but probably to no greater extent than most graduates do in entering their chosen fields.



You can do a law degree or a history degree or an English degree or a degree in Sports medicine, but if you don't have a strong 2:1/1st, the chances of making a legal career are slim to none (at a good City firm/set that is).


With respect the words highlighted demonstrate you have taken fright. You have suddenly questioned whether the comments you have made are actually applicable to the whole of the two professions and so you have decided to qualify them, by what you think you know about.

If you look at the solicitors profession, the points you made above are not more representative of City firms. You don't need loads of awards. You don't need to have shown an exceptional level of interest in the work. Arguably the City perhaps expects a lower level of prior interest than many other types of law. What you need is to demonstrate a strong but not exceptional academic performance, an aptitude for the sort of work City solicitors do and the level and type of interpersonal skills that a City firm expects.

On the other hand the top of end of the bar demands a first rate academic background above all else.


Also, law is challenging, but it varies from person to person. Taking one person's opinion on it is tantamount to idiocy.


I agree with you on this.
Original post by Rybee
This is honestly the biggest load of bull**** ever. There are only a select few degrees that I would consider worthy of combining with the GDL, over an LL.B.


And why should we pay attention to your consideration? Are you a recruiter?


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by tengentoppa
I'm not sure if this is the right place to post.

Basically, I've had my heart set on becoming a lawyer for a while and I've done some legal work experience with the intention of applying for a law degree.

However, I've recently been told by various people that you're better off doing another degree and then doing the GDL. They said that the best lawyers rarely do law degrees and that you actually have less chance of becoming a lawyer if you do a law degree rather than for example a history degree and then the GDL. They also say a law degree is more work than other Arts degrees and more dull but less rewarding.

This was not great to hear considering my entire preparation for my university application was based around law? Is this true? Is a law degree useless and dull? Is it too late to do anything else at uni? Thanks for your help.


I think the most important questions are:

1) which would you prefer to study; and (therefore)
2) which would you perform more strongly at?

I see both sides of the argument. I also don't particularly like the way Sumption's argument is misrepresented and dismissed. He was not simply saying "non-law>law". He was pointing out that numerate/science grads and SOME arts grads (depending on theoretical approach) are taught to think more analytically than your standard LLB graduate.

I can only really draw on my own observations:

I did IR&Politics and then converted. I
found that those of us who did
the GDL had greater recall of the core subjects that the law students who maybe hadn't given them any thought since 1st year.

On the other hand, the law grads had other legal knowledge that they could draw upon (and will be able to in practice). I suppose this might make them more aware of things in a TC, although I question the utility if some of the stuff they learned as a lot of it sounds theoretical and abstract.

Ultimately, I suspect it doesn't matter too much. My training principle has often said he struggles to tell us apart, and that everyone generally shows up knowing **** all which is relevant to the job and legal practice anyway. He says he finds non-law grads more interesting to interview because there is more variety in terms of what can be talked about.

Don't underestimate the relative difficulty of a law degree either. It is far easier to get a 1st in English, Politics, Geography or History.

In addition, you are likely to have much more time to build your ECs and may get the option of doing a practical project for your dissertation which will involve actual consultation with an outside client. These will be incredibly useful when it comes to applications. My LLB friends cannot believe how much stuff we were able to do whilst still getting high 2:1s and 1sts.



Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 10
Original post by LexiswasmyNexis
And why should we pay attention to your consideration? Are you a recruiter?


Posted from TSR Mobile


Stats don't lie.
Original post by Rybee
Stats don't lie.


Describe stats


Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 12

Original post by nulli tertius
.


Thank you very much. Your posts were both really helpful. :smile:
Doing the gdl now, and finding it a lot of work. Really should have done more earlier in the year. Lot more work than my arts degree, which was phil/pol. That came in useful for the constitutional aspects of the gdl though.
also should add that my friends who did law degrees were always working in the library, and said that they were totally bored by it. I found the gdl v interesting over just 1 year, so that's definitely a bonus of doing a non-law degree. You get to study more of what you're interested in and not get bored by too much law

Quick Reply

Latest