Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by *Stefan*)
    Only two universities have higher standards than my university, and 3-4 others have equal. Are you telling me you went to Oxbridge?
    Someone is telling porkies. You're at an AAA uni. Cambridge, Oxford, Durham, LSE, UCL, KCL, Notts, QMUL are all higher than AAA. Oxford nominally AAA, but not really.

    But only two, you say?
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nameless Ghoul)
    Someone is telling porkies. You're at an AAA uni. Cambridge, Oxford, Durham, LSE, UCL, KCL, Notts, QMUL are all higher than AAA. Oxford nominally AAA, but not really.

    But only two, you say?
    Ah Ghoul, still the same eh?

    By standards he was referring to course standards, not entry requirements.

    And QMUL? Please... it's been in clearing every single time.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by *Stefan*)
    Ah Ghoul, still the same eh?

    By standards he was referring to course standards, not entry requirements.

    And QMUL? Please... it's been in clearing every single time.
    Oh. LSE, UCL, Durham, KCL are not superior in terms of course standards? My bad.

    I admit I added QMUL facetiously.
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nameless Ghoul)
    Oh. LSE, UCL, Durham, KCL are not superior in terms of course standards? My bad.

    I admit I added QMUL facetiously.
    Firstly, I'd like to clarify that I declined both Durham and KCL and more than met their entry requirements - I'm not trying to sway facts.

    No. It could be said by some people for LSE, but their inflated grading system more than makes up for it.

    KCL is also more coursework-focused in the first year, whilst we only have one coursework-based subject. Depends on what you like.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I hate coursework because thick lecturers mark the appearance and not the content
    • Community Assistant
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by studos)
    I hate coursework because thick lecturers mark the appearance and not the content
    Throughout a career in law, it is substance (content) that matters more than form (style). Tutors will at the level you're looking at studying, mark accordingly.

    You spend a significant amount of time writing in the profession. On your GDL you will do an extended essay of independent research, and possibly another one for your European Union module.

    All exams are essay questions too.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by *Stefan*)
    Firstly, I'd like to clarify that I declined both Durham and KCL and more than met their entry requirements - I'm not trying to sway facts.

    No. It could be said by some people for LSE, but their inflated grading system more than makes up for it.

    KCL is also more coursework-focused in the first year, whilst we only have one coursework-based subject. Depends on what you like.
    I am not saying you're not good enough for those courses. I am merely talking about the course standards. If we're talking entry standards, all those courses are superior to your own. Your possibly getting into Durham doesn't negate that. There are people who go to Sheffield with offers to Oxbridge, but we're not going to form the opinion that Sheffield is the superior course.

    According to Unistats, KCL's assessment is 22% coursework over the three years whereas yours is 33%. They have more coursework in the first year, but you more than make up for it in the successive years. And first year is least important, so your course is perhaps harder but not in the years which count.
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nameless Ghoul)
    I am not saying you're not good enough for those courses. I am merely talking about the course standards. If we're talking entry standards, all those courses are superior to your own. Your possibly getting into Durham doesn't negate that. There are people who go to Sheffield with offers to Oxbridge, but we're not going to form the opinion that Sheffield is the superior course.

    According to Unistats, KCL's assessment is 22% coursework over the three years whereas yours is 33%. They have more coursework in the first year, but you more than make up for it in the successive years. And first year is least important, so your course is perhaps harder but not in the years which count.
    He was referring to course standards, so I can't see how entry requirements are relevant here.
    But in any case, entry standards do not reflect the quality of the course, especially when it comes to top unis. Oxford asks for AAA, is it inferior to Cambridge? LSE asks AAB for Law with Anthropology - does that mean the course is "easier" compared to Law at, say, KCL? How come?

    Bristol has to fill a class of 380 people, while Durham takes about 170. Which one do you think is easier to fill? Same thing goes for UCL, Nottingham and LSE.

    That is purely anecdotal evidence. Show me a person who went to Sheffield despite having an offer from Oxford and then we'll talk. And that point that I made was meant to show my impartiality, not to strengthen my argument.

    Do you actually know what you're talking about? Who said the uni with more coursework-based subjects is easier? I said it depended on one's preference. Bristol, like all other unis, allows you to choose whether you'd like to take coursework-based or exam-based subjects from second year onwards. These statistics are meaningless.

    And the first year is majorly important for your career progression. Can't see where you're getting this.

    EDIT: Your use of "your" is wrong - you need a subject there, so only "you" can be used.
    • Community Assistant
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by *Stefan*)
    That is purely anecdotal evidence. Show me a person who went to Sheffield despite having an offer from Oxford and then we'll talk. And that point that I made was meant to show my impartiality, not to strengthen my argument.
    I went to Manchester to study Medicine, with the offer from Oxford Teddy Hall being my second choice Does that count?
    Yes I'm postgraduate Law now so I can have a say.

    Do you actually know what you're talking about? Who said the uni with more coursework-based subjects is easier? I said it depended on one's preference. Bristol, like all other unis, allows you to choose whether you'd like to take coursework-based or exam-based subjects from second year onwards. These statistics are meaningless.
    Handbags away. The degree you get is, to a certain level, regulated by the SRA so must reach certain standards. In a way, they're all as hard as each other.

    First year isn't majorly important for your career progression. Some firms like to see your entire transcript and will look, therefore, at your grades from first year. But if you only intend to apply for training contracts or pupilages when doing the LPC/BPTC then your first year marks don't matter at all.

    They certainly don't matter once you've graduated
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by *Stefan*)
    He was referring to course standards, so I can't see how entry requirements are relevant here.
    But in any case, entry standards do not reflect the quality of the course, especially when it comes to top unis. Oxford asks for AAA, is it inferior to Cambridge? LSE asks AAB for Law with Anthropology - does that mean the course is "easier" compared to Law at, say, KCL? How come?

    Bristol has to fill a class of 380 people, while Durham takes about 170. Which one do you think is easier to fill? Same thing goes for UCL, Nottingham and LSE.

    That is purely anecdotal evidence. Show me a person who went to Sheffield despite having an offer from Oxford and then we'll talk. And that point that I made was meant to show my impartiality, not to strengthen my argument.

    Do you actually know what you're talking about? Who said the uni with more coursework-based subjects is easier? I said it depended on one's preference. Bristol, like all other unis, allows you to choose whether you'd like to take coursework-based or exam-based subjects from second year onwards. These statistics are meaningless.

    And the first year is majorly important for your career progression. Can't see where you're getting this.
    You always start spewing out these facts/excuses when someone challenges a point you made about your own uni. I am not attacking Bristol; it is very good. I simply disagree with the point you made about only two unis being better than it. You can stop with the number of people the Bristol course takes in -- a point you're now making for the umpteenth time.

    And I wasn't saying coursework was easier. I said perhaps for that very reason. I was responding to your point which seemed to say your course was harder than KCL's because yours had less coursework in the first year. Apologies if I misread your argument, but that was the only way coursework would be relevant to the discussion, so I made that unfortunate assumption.

    It is important. Not as important as second year, if you're applying for TCs. If you're going for the Bar, your whole academic performance becomes relevant across the three years, especially the latter two.

    What use of your? I used your about three times.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mimir)
    But if you only intend to apply for training contracts or pupilages when doing the LPC/BPTC then your first year marks don't matter at all.
    I wouldn't say that. They do count and therefore they do matter - how much do is dependent on the rest of the form and the firm in question. But it's especially true for a fair number of firms who look at contract and tort quite carefully and these are often taught in 1st year.




    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mimir)
    I went to Manchester to study Medicine, with the offer from Oxford Teddy Hall being my second choice Does that count?
    Yes I'm postgraduate Law now so I can have a say.
    Well, not really :P Medicine is a case of its own, of course.

    (Original post by Mimir)
    Handbags away. The degree you get is, to a certain level, regulated by the SRA so must reach certain standards. In a way, they're all as hard as each other.
    Of course - the thing is that these subjects you do not get to choose anyway - I'm taking four of them this year. I believe they're doing three at KCL in the first year, but contract and criminal iirc are combined.

    (Original post by Mimir)
    First year isn't majorly important for your career progression. Some firms like to see your entire transcript and will look, therefore, at your grades from first year. But if you only intend to apply for training contracts or pupilages when doing the LPC/BPTC then your first year marks don't matter at all.

    They certainly don't matter once you've graduated
    I would like to disagree entirely here. I, as most other people, will be applying for vac schemes and TCs at the end of the second year. This means you have your A-Levels, first year and second year in terms of academic achievements. If first year grades are not good, 33% of your academia is not good, basically.

    It is different for you because you did Medicine first, but for us it matters a lot.
    • Community Assistant
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by *Stefan*)
    I would like to disagree entirely here. I, as most other people, will be applying for vac schemes and TCs at the end of the second year. This means you have your A-Levels, first year and second year in terms of academic achievements. If first year grades are not good, 33% of your academia is not good, basically.

    It is different for you because you did Medicine first, but for us it matters a lot.
    Leaving my academic and professional history aside, a word for the wise - your applications for VS/TC are unnotable if they show purely excellent academics.

    I felt compelled to post because you said your first year grades are important career progression, which is of course complete nonsense. With regard to applications, it is important, but not as much as you make out.

    I guarantee that most people applying for TC in second year will not succeed despite having excellent academics.

    I have a Bail Application to write, so cannot be of more help tonight, sorry.
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nameless Ghoul)
    You always start spewing out these facts/excuses when someone challenges a point you made about your own uni. I am not attacking Bristol; it is very good. I simply disagree with the point you made about only two unis being better than it. You can stop with the number of people the Bristol course takes in -- a point you're now making for the umpteenth time.

    And I wasn't saying coursework was easier. I said perhaps for that very reason. I was responding to your point which seemed to say your course was harder than KCL's because yours had less coursework in the first year. Apologies if I misread your argument, but that was the only way coursework would be relevant to the discussion, so I made that unfortunate assumption.

    It is important. Not as important as second year, if you're applying for TCs. If you're going for the Bar, your whole academic performance becomes relevant across the three years, especially the latter two.

    What use of your? I used your about three times.
    Excuse me, but what is wrong with doing that? You want to base this argument on hypothetical events? Where does that lead us?

    Mate, what you're saying is incomprehensible. You swooped in with something entirely irrelevant (entry requirements). I told you how entry requirements are defined and how they will of course differ for a uni that takes 380 students and a uni that takes 170 (if you can't, go back to elementary). The fact that I said this before doesn't mean anything - all you do by stating that is to avoid the question. Why? It addresses your question directly.

    You also failed to answer my questions. If you truly believe that say Durham has higher course standards than Bristol because they require A*AA instead of AAA, then prove it and I will gladly take it up from there. Until then, no point making empty assertions.

    Apology accepted

    It is just as important as the second year - I don't see where you got that from. As JSP very well said, commercial-based subject are also taught in the first year in the majority of cases.

    'Your possibly getting into Durham..." - the verb needs a subject here.

    ALSO, talk about stalking - knowing exactly what I said. Should I be flattered now too?
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mimir)
    Leaving my academic and professional history aside, a word for the wise - your applications for VS/TC are unnotable if they show purely excellent academics.

    I felt compelled to post because you said your first year grades are important career progression, which is of course complete nonsense. With regard to applications, it is important, but not as much as you make out.

    I guarantee that most people applying for TC in second year will not succeed despite having excellent academics.

    I have a Bail Application to write, so cannot be of more help tonight, sorry.
    And I agree- your point being? Of course work experience and interviews/tests are very important.

    Well, let me disagree here, then, until you provide info that disputes what firms themselves are saying.

    That is a very floaty point. And I can guarantee that most people with thirds in their first year will fail - is that a good point now?
    • Community Assistant
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by *Stefan*)
    Well, let me disagree here, then, until your provide info that disputes what firms themselves are saying.
    Res ipsa loquitur.
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mimir)
    Res ipsa loquitur.
    Actori incubit probatio - basic stuff.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by *Stefan*)
    'Your possibly getting into Durham..." - the verb needs a subject here.
    It's a gerundive noun phrase which serves as the subject itself of the verb does. Don't try to be clever; it doesn't suit you.

    It addresses your question directly.
    I never asked a question. I said those unis have higher entry. That does not impliedly ask a question of you, nor does it invite you to provide excuses for why this is the case. Merely it asserts that your point was wrong, if "course standards" were based on entry. You clarified it wasn't, but in the same sentence you said this you also said "but I got into Durham" as if it refuted my point about Durham having higher entry. Clearly one example of a Durham-tier student in Bristol does not necessitate that all or the majority of students at Bristol are Durham-tier. You then spewed your customary line "Bristol has loads of students and this is why we're only AAA!"

    Then you started saying that KCL has less coursework, as if that refuted my (general) claim that KCL is the superior course. You promptly got upset because I hinted that there might be an association with course difficulty/standards and percentage of coursework.

    I am not the person here who is making no sense. You are drafting silly replies which have nothing to do with the thread and getting annoyed because people respond to what it reasonably seems your points might mean. Hint, be specific in the future and people won't have to guess what on earth you're banging on about.
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nameless Ghoul)
    It's a gerundive noun phrase which serves as the subject itself of the verb does. Don't try to be clever; it doesn't suit you.
    Loooool - did you literally just say that? Did you really?

    First of all, gerundives do NOT exist in English. That is a Latin construction. It's a gerund.

    Secondly, who told you that? Link me the grammar book you took this from.

    (Original post by Nameless Ghoul)
    I never asked a question. I said those unis have higher entry. That does not impliedly ask a question of you, nor does it invite you to provide excuses for why this is the case. Merely it asserts that your point was wrong, if "course standards" were based on entry. You clarified it wasn't, but in the same sentence you said this you also said "but I got into Durham" as if it refuted my point about Durham having higher entry. Clearly one example of a Durham-tier student in Bristol does not necessitate that all or the majority of students at Bristol are Durham-tier. You then spewed your customary line "Bristol has loads of students and this is why we're only AAA!"
    Ahh, poor thing. I (ME) asked you how entry requirements were relevant. Is it so difficult to follow? And as I said, you did not answer, so please do.

    Mate, you're becoming tiresome now. I don't just have to argue with you, I have to explain everything at least three times, every time. It's the first time this has ever happened to me.

    I referred to the point about Durham to state that I was impartial in what I said - it has nothing to do with your argument. How else do I have to say it for your to understand?

    And the last sentence is a factual truth - to which you've only answered with immature things like "you've said that before, stop doing it". Well, if you think it's so easy to address, do address it and stop acting like a baby.

    (Original post by Nameless Ghoul)
    Then you started saying that KCL has less coursework, as if that refuted my (general) claim that KCL is the superior course. You promptly got upset because I hinted that there might be an association with course difficulty/standards and percentage of coursework.
    I used KCL as an example - if I really thought KCL had a superior course, don't you think I'd have chosen it instead? I don't get why you always have to make this personal. Are you trying to inflate your ego or prove something?

    I also said apology accepted to that point, which you recognised was idiotic JUST BEFORE. Why do you use it again then? Jeez...

    (Original post by Nameless Ghoul)
    I am not the person here who is making no sense. You are drafting silly replies which have nothing to do with the thread and getting annoyed because people respond to what it reasonably seems your points might mean. Hint, be specific in the future and people won't have to guess what on earth you're banging on about.
    Just before you complained that I used facts, which are inherently specific on the topic. Now you say that I have to be specific so that you don't have to guess what I'm talking about, even though you are the one making empty assertions on purely hypothetical events. The irony here is very strong.

    Finally, YOU replied to me first, so saying I am making silly replies which are irrelevant to the thread just shows your intellect.

    As I said before, you don't have to prove anything - we get it, your thinking is limited, and we do accept it

    [Out of interest, what are you studying and where?]
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by *Stefan*)
    .]
    PRSOM.
 
 
 
Poll
Is the Big Bang theory correct?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.