What are the best non russel group universities for Law?

Original post by Kali.kb

I have a friend who originally wanted to apply to Cambridge and Bristol for law last year, fast forward one year later he applied to Brighton, Portsmouth, NTU and unis alike and took an unconditional from Portsmouth. By the looks of it, I feel like the year 12's will change that and aim for top unis (non Russell Group and Russell Group but we'll have to see.)

I'm sorry to hear this about your friend, what a shame. It's not like the RG is everything, there are plenty of other unis that are every bit as good as most of them, like Lancaster, or arguably better, like Bath. But it is good to aim high and where people are quite uninformed about uni, the RG branding does at least help to highlight some of the better unis. It's the same with league tables - people who are very informed know them to be flawed, and some say they are a waste of time, but I always think that at least they are something that people without any inside knowledge can use as a guideline. Not everyone gets good advice from their family or school. My own school was useless at giving people HE advice, and we didn't know a good uni from a bad one, but that was before league tables were a thing. The huge difference a school can make to students' aspirations as well as achievements is one reason why RG unis are so keen to attract applicants from the sort of school that you (and I) attended and will even make contextual offers to try to redress that imbalance

(edited 4 years ago)

Reply 42

No it isn't wrong. Singapore has stated that certain students from certain universities won't be accepted so stop spreading misinformation.

Original post by Dann.It

Wrong also regarding medicine - you are going to become a doctor regardless of which university you'd attended to gain your med degree... It's how you do during the degree which differentiates you from another candidate.

Reply 43

Are you trying to be rude by saying my suggestion is laughable because that is almost a sign of someone who is losing an argument because you know what you are saying is false. Law requires competitive universities. End of.

Original post by RV3112

I worked in law firms for almost ten years. Law does not require certain universities. Your suggestion is laughable. Stop wasting my time.

Reply 44

Of course that would definitely be true about UK universities. I did hear about some kind of compulsory work period for the NHS but I'm not sure what happened to that or if that was even true.

Reply 45

Original post by Future Physics

Are you trying to be rude by saying my suggestion is laughable because that is almost a sign of someone who is losing an argument because you know what you are saying is false. Law requires competitive universities. End of.

I can't work out if you are deliberately trolling or not. Are you even at university yet? Your comments are typical of someone still doing A-levels.

Is law even your subject? If not, why are you on a Law forum deliberately spreading misinformation. It's a disservice to other students. It's also baffling why you think you are expert in an area that you know nothing about. If you want to educate yourself, use the TSR search facility where this very issue has been discussed ad nauseum. Failing that, if you don't believe me, you could actually trying asking law firms themselves whether they "chuck out" the CV's of non-RG applicants. If you had even an elementary knowledge of the legal profession you would know that the very idea is absurd. No-one is arguing that there is no advantage to going to better universities, but the issue is not one of whether your uni is RG or Non-RG.

Reply 46

PRSOM. You're right, i'm probably just feeding the troll at this stage.

Reply 47

Original post by Future Physics

Are you trying to be rude by saying my suggestion is laughable because that is almost a sign of someone who is losing an argument because you know what you are saying is false. Law requires competitive universities. End of.

There's quite a difference between saying that law 'requires' competitive universities and saying that they simply won't accept those from non-RG universities, or those from "certain universities"

I've only just started working towards my legal career and even I know what you're saying isn't true. You're making out like university prestige is everything but that isn't necessarily true. It does give an advantage in that they're more likely to have more exposure to law firms in terms of networking events and whatnot, but it doesn't determine whether someone is going to be denied a TC or not.

Reply 48

Multi talented if he has the expertise to advise us law types too. :rolleyes:

Reply 49

Well that explains it then. .

Reply 50

I am fighting to stop the spread of misinformation and I still going to defend my position which is that getting into law is highly competitive and to have a reasonable chance at getting a job, you will need to be going to a 'good' uni. Law courses that are higher up the chain are more likely to be finely tuned but possibly not perfect and this is the same for any course not just law. I am trying to advise people because I am curious about all subjects and have seen a significant number of posts and articles that has led me to believe the reputation of your law school matters.

Original post by RV3112

I can't work out if you are deliberately trolling or not. Are you even at university yet? Your comments are typical of someone still doing A-levels.

Is law even your subject? If not, why are you on a Law forum deliberately spreading misinformation. It's a disservice to other students. It's also baffling why you think you are expert in an area that you know nothing about. If you want to educate yourself, use the TSR search facility where this very issue has been discussed ad nauseum. Failing that, if you don't believe me, you could actually trying asking law firms themselves whether they "chuck out" the CV's of non-RG applicants. If you had even an elementary knowledge of the legal profession you would know that the very idea is absurd. No-one is arguing that there is no advantage to going to better universities, but the issue is not one of whether your uni is RG or Non-RG.

I am a 21 year old, not a 17 year old and why are you being rude and judgmental? Does it matter what stage I am at or how old I am? Are you doing this because you are immature and insecure of your position in this debate?

Okay so now people are misinterpreting what I saying/making out. No I am not a 'troll'. You are jumping to conclusions so quickly and being so judgmental against someone you don't even know.

1st post - I agree with the first half of the first sentence and I'm sorry if I implied that people from non RG uni's won't be able to get a job and this isn't true, they should be able to get a job.

Oh I'm sorry if I'm making out that prestige is everything. That is not what I meant, I just meant that law is competitive so I thought it was important to go to a 'good' law school.

2nd post - MidgetFever -
no need to be judgmental, I am trying to help out as many people as possible to make the right decisions about their future because I had 0 guidance on university and was led to believe that everyone at uni was rich and posh and that I would never be able to go but I am thankful to anyone who is willing to help me understand topics but only in a respectful manner. If anything I have said is in any way disrespectful then help me to change and become more mature.

Reply 51

Notoriety

22

This is why law students are just the most annoying sort in the world.

Reply 52

Original post by Future Physics

I am fighting to stop the spread of misinformation and I still going to defend my position which is that getting into law is highly competitive and to have a reasonable chance at getting a job, you will need to be going to a 'good' uni. Law courses that are higher up the chain are more likely to be finely tuned but possibly not perfect and this is the same for any course not just law. I am trying to advise people because I am curious about all subjects and have seen a significant number of posts and articles that has led me to believe the reputation of your law school matters.

I am a 21 year old, not a 17 year old and why are you being rude and judgmental? Does it matter what stage I am at or how old I am? Are you doing this because you are immature and insecure of your position in this debate?

Okay so now people are misinterpreting what I saying/making out. No I am not a 'troll'. You are jumping to conclusions so quickly and being so judgmental against someone you don't even know.

1st post - I agree with the first half of the first sentence and I'm sorry if I implied that people from non RG uni's won't be able to get a job and this isn't true, they should be able to get a job.

Oh I'm sorry if I'm making out that prestige is everything. That is not what I meant, I just meant that law is competitive so I thought it was important to go to a 'good' law school.

2nd post - MidgetFever -
no need to be judgmental, I am trying to help out as many people as possible to make the right decisions about their future because I had 0 guidance on university and was led to believe that everyone at uni was rich and posh and that I would never be able to go but I am thankful to anyone who is willing to help me understand topics but only in a respectful manner. If anything I have said is in any way disrespectful then help me to change and become more mature.

I'm not being judgemental, I just don't like the fact that although you're trying to help people (which I respect) the information you're providing isn't necessarily correct and can be quite misleading to those applying for law courses.

Honestly, I've just learnt to keep my mouth shut the majority of the time on the law forums. Most law students are insufferable (myself included) and will try and destroy your statements like one of their mock cases.

Reply 53

Oh, I'm sorry maybe it was me who saw your post as being judgmental rather than you trying to be rude. So why is it people are saying that specifically for law and not really for any other courses that the reputation of the uni will count when getting a job? I haven't really seen this for computer science, engineering, physics or pretty much most subjects.

I wouldn't say your insufferable judging from most of your posts and I have seen you around and I'd say your quite friendly.

Original post by MidgetFever

I'm not being judgemental, I just don't like the fact that although you're trying to help people (which I respect) the information you're providing isn't necessarily correct and can be quite misleading to those applying for law courses.

Honestly, I've just learnt to keep my mouth shut the majority of the time on the law forums. Most law students are insufferable (myself included) and will try and destroy your statements like one of their mock cases.

Reply 54

Original post by Future Physics

I am fighting to stop the spread of misinformation and I still going to defend my position which is that getting into law is highly competitive and to have a reasonable chance at getting a job, you will need to be going to a 'good' uni. Law courses that are higher up the chain are more likely to be finely tuned but possibly not perfect and this is the same for any course not just law. I am trying to advise people because I am curious about all subjects and have seen a significant number of posts and articles that has led me to believe the reputation of your law school matters.

Okay so now people are misinterpreting what I saying/making out. No I am not a 'troll'. You are jumping to conclusions so quickly and being so judgmental against someone you don't even know.

1st post - I agree with the first half of the first sentence and I'm sorry if I implied that people from non RG uni's won't be able to get a job and this isn't true, they should be able to get a job.

Oh I'm sorry if I'm making out that prestige is everything. That is not what I meant, I just meant that law is competitive so I thought it was important to go to a 'good' law school.

2nd post - MidgetFever -
no need to be judgmental, I am trying to help out as many people as possible to make the right decisions about their future because I had 0 guidance on university and was led to believe that everyone at uni was rich and posh and that I would never be able to go but I am thankful to anyone who is willing to help me understand topics but only in a respectful manner. If anything I have said is in any way disrespectful then help me to change and become more mature.

This is the post of mine that you took issue with.

"You don't debate with people trying to scaremonger students from lower ranked unis. Anyone who does a scintilla of research could tell you that graduates from non-RG universities obtain training contracts all the time. Getting a TC has nothing to do with graduating from a RG uni. There must be dozens of threads on this forum discussing the same issue."

No-one is misinterpreting you. You are trying to change your argument because you have realised that your statement that "Law works differently and does require certain universities" was wholly incorrect. There is no point in trying to defend your position. It is a fact that non-RG graduates obtain TC's. Of course it is important to go to a good law school. This is not what you have been saying,

It's admirable that you are trying to help other students, but with all due respect, you are speaking about a subject you know nothing about. I would never go onto the medicine forum and start spouting nonsense in there. However, you are trying to argue with people who have actually worked in firms and actually lecture in law schools. You do not know better than them just because you have read a few articles.

Reply 55

1 - I meant that was how I saw you coming across as.
2 - Insult for no apparent reason. You are proving the point that law students are insufferable.
3 - This won't always be true for everyone and I do consider this to be judgmental but I've used that a lot by this point.
4 - Okay fair point I have to give you credit for that since I could have made a clear point on that.
5 - Similar to 4

I would have said end of is the wrong phrase to use but I see your point. I agree I don't know the ins and outs of the legal profession so fair enough.

Reply 56

harrysbar

The law forum is a scary place @Future Physics.

Eventually you will get used to it and the insults will be like water off a duck's back. They are very good at arguing (or debating as they call it) - just be grateful you're not going to Law school :wink:

Reply 57

Middle paragraph - I was not trying to change my argument, I was trying to be reasonable and mature about this new information about law. That is what I have been saying and is what I am trying to get across I mean my main point was that it was important to go to a good school.

I never said I did know better then others just because I've read a few articles and at the end of the day people should be using multiple sources of information when making these overwhelming life choices.

Either way I am grateful to you calling me out and helping me to clear up a misunderstanding about law. After all I do honestly truly want to help people make decisions about uni though I probably should reevaluate the scope of that task.

Original post by RV3112

This is the post of mine that you took issue with.

"You don't debate with people trying to scaremonger students from lower ranked unis. Anyone who does a scintilla of research could tell you that graduates from non-RG universities obtain training contracts all the time. Getting a TC has nothing to do with graduating from a RG uni. There must be dozens of threads on this forum discussing the same issue."

No-one is misinterpreting you. You are trying to change your argument because you have realised that your statement that "Law works differently and does require certain universities" was wholly incorrect. There is no point in trying to defend your position. It is a fact that non-RG graduates obtain TC's. Of course it is important to go to a good law school. This is not what you have been saying,

It's admirable that you are trying to help other students, but with all due respect, you are speaking about a subject you know nothing about. I would never go onto the medicine forum and start spouting nonsense in there. However, you are trying to argue with people who have actually worked in firms and actually lecture in law schools. You do not know better than them just because you have read a few articles.

Reply 58

Yeah I shouldn't be surprised considering it is law

Original post by harrysbar

The law forum is a scary place @Future Physics.

Eventually you will get used to it and the insults will be like water off a duck's back. They are very good at arguing (or debating as they call it) - just be grateful you're not going to Law school :wink:

Reply 59