The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1
I met some regional barristers who recently became tenants--one with Sports Studies from Manchest Metropolitan.

Possible? Certainly. Worth trying, considering the financial implications, without having a First? Not in a million years.

*Cue idealistic TSR contributors jumping me in dark alley with Bladed Weapons made of Deluded Expectations*
Reply 2
An extremely tough road, but not impossible with a First, some good work experience/extra-curriculars/prizes etc and/or an LLM at a 'more reputable' institution.
Reply 3
HELLOHELLOHELLO
Is it possible, I know there is some snobbery about what university you went to at the bar, but has anyone with a degree from a from a new university ever became a barrister? is it common? is it even possible???


Get a high first, then do an LLM at Oxbridge/LSE/UCL. Then you will be competing on an (almost) even keel with Oxbridge undergrads with a 2.1
Reply 4
Nyet
Get a high first, then do an LLM at Oxbridge/LSE/UCL. Then you will be competing on an (almost) even keel with Oxbridge undergrads with a 2.1
In my opinion, somebody with a high first from an ex-poly, plus a high mark in an LLM from one of those universities (especially the BCL) will be in a significantly better position than somebody who 'only' has a 2:1 from Oxbridge. To suggest that somebody who obtained a 2:1 from Oxford is better than somebody with a high mark on the BCL (with all the academic requirements that admission to that course brings) is a bit silly.
Reply 5
TommehR
In my opinion, somebody with a high first from an ex-poly, plus a high mark in an LLM from one of those universities (especially the BCL) will be in a significantly better position than somebody who 'only' has a 2:1 from Oxbridge. To suggest that somebody who obtained a 2:1 from Oxford is better than somebody with a high mark on the BCL (with all the academic requirements that admission to that course brings) is a bit silly.


I have been told that undergrad degrees come first and foremost in legal applications. A first from an ex poly is not, by all accounts, too difficult to obtain. If you got a high (66+) 2.1 from Oxbridge you are in a pretty unbeatable position afaik (provided you have the personal qualities and gift of the gab), regardless of what people from 'non-Oxbridge' or even non-LSE/UCL institutions obtain in their undergrad degrees and at postgrad. Not saying whether or not this is right, etc (that argument isn't for me, and I don't honestly care), just that it seems to be the case going on everything I have personally seen/heard/been told. But I would personally suggest that a good LLM should surely make up for a crappy undergrad institution. Logic would seem to suggest that is the case...
Reply 6
Frankly, the contention that a 66+ from Oxbridge (which are a dime a dozen) are more highly regarded than a Poly First is misguided--as Poly Firsts have not been watered down to the point where they fail to represent a level of achievement worth of at least an interview (at which point, academics begin playing only second thidle). I'm also personally insulted by your failure to include Bristol and Durham into your LSE/UCL category, but that is admittedly a secondary point:smile:
Reply 7
Evil_Genius
Frankly, the contention that a 66+ from Oxbridge (which are a dime a dozen) are more highly regarded than a Poly First is misguided--as Poly Firsts have not been watered down to the point where they fail to represent a level of achievement worth of at least an interview (at which point, academics begin playing only second thidle). I'm also personally insulted by your failure to include Bristol and Durham into your LSE/UCL category, but that is admittedly a secondary point:smile:


Are you joking? I can't tell. Obviously what you have said is completely, utterly, spectacularly wrong, but I can't tell whether you know this and are being facetious or whether you are actually this misguided. Oxbridge 66+ is dime a dozen...?
Reply 8
If I had followed through with asking TSR administrators to give me a 'sarcasm on' and 'sarcasm off' buttons above my posts, the latter would be on. If you look at the comparative statistics, there may be 5-10% of Firsts in a law course at a second-tier University and even less within an Ex Poly--a far smaller figure than that of 66+'s at Oxbridge. Uniqueness attracts attention, even if it's a case of 'big fish in a small pond'---a First from an Ex Poly will almost certainly attract a pupillage interview but the same will not be the case for a 66% from Oxbridge.
Reply 9
Evil_Genius
If I had followed through with asking TSR administrators to give me a 'sarcasm on' and 'sarcasm off' buttons above my posts, the latter would be on. If you look at the comparative statistics, there may be 5-10% of Firsts in a law course at a second-tier University and even less within an Ex Poly--a far smaller figure than that of 66+'s at Oxbridge. Uniqueness attracts attention, even if it's a case of 'big fish in a small pond'---a First from an Ex Poly will almost certainly attract a pupillage interview but the same will not be the case for a 66% from Oxbridge.


I have never, ever in all my time at Cambridge, heard of someone applying for a job-of whatever kind, whether it be banking, law, finance (with the exception of political consultancies and the FCO) with a 65% average not being invited for an interview. Never. Obviously I know plenty who got the interview and then flunked it, and been passed over in favour of someone from a 'lesser' (yet still decent-think Durham, etc) candidate with similar grades. But never failing to get an interview. And your reasoning re grades at different institutions is deeply flawed. about 50% of the people who take further maths a level get an A. About 5% of people doing media studies get an A, and about 10% doing psychology get an A. Think about the implications of this.
Well, we obviously have had exposure to very different types of people with Oxbridge 65%+. Seriously, you do realise that there are so many Oxbridge applicants relative to the number of top sets that merely the name of University and a fairly dull 66+-short-of-70% does not stand out in itself. My sample of 65+ is focused exclusively on those Oxbridge students applying for pupillage--yours is evidently far wider and thus less relevant to this discussion.

I was aware you'd deploy the grading-incongruence argument--as all firsts are externally marked, usually by top professors at the foremost universities (at least that's what our dean tells me...) in that discipline, there is a definite lack of standards as far as 2:1's are concerned (so I wouldn't suggest a 69% from Oxford= 69% from Oxford Brookes), but not with regard to Firsts.
Reply 11
Evil_Genius
A First from an Ex Poly will almost certainly attract a pupillage interview but the same will not be the case for a 66% from Oxbridge.


E_G just to pick up on this point - having been through the OLPAS mill myself with rather better academic achievements than those you propose here - I think you are grossly over-estimating the likelihood of securing an interview with these sorts of results.

I'm not suggesting that it is impossible, but it is wholly incorrect to say that a first from an ex poly would "almost certainly" attract a pupillage interview. I'm not sure on what basis you have formed this impression.
It is difficult, but not impossible. I think you do need the first. I am not sure you need anything else. If you did the BCL that would help. Few other postgraduate degrees are worth it from the perspective of obtaining a pupillage.

Nowhere near 'most' barristers are from Oxbridge and I am getting a little weary of pointing this out. If people actually did some research (try looking people up on Chambers' websites) instead of mouthing off it would say more about their own abilities.

I agree that most Oxbridge 2:1s will get an interview. That is because standards are high there and most will have had sustained academic success. I also think most 1sts, from anywhere, will also get an interview. Mini-pupillages at the place to which you are applying, which have gone well, will achieve the same thing.

Finally, I wouldn't be so quick to attribute failure to 'snobbery at the bar' if I were you. In most places it doesn't exist, but that isn't the main reason. Cultivating the habit of putting in place an excuse for failure which involves blaming other people is neither attractive, nor desirable in a barrister. The first question I would ask if you applied is why you ended up at an ex-poly. There are some good reasons, but the most likely explanation is that you failed to do well enough in your A-levels. In other words, if you fail to get a pupillage it may - shock horror - be down to you.
Reply 13
Nyet
I have been told that undergrad degrees come first and foremost in legal applications. A first from an ex poly is not, by all accounts, too difficult to obtain. If you got a high (66+) 2.1 from Oxbridge you are in a pretty unbeatable position afaik (provided you have the personal qualities and gift of the gab), regardless of what people from 'non-Oxbridge' or even non-LSE/UCL institutions obtain in their undergrad degrees and at postgrad. Not saying whether or not this is right, etc (that argument isn't for me, and I don't honestly care), just that it seems to be the case going on everything I have personally seen/heard/been told. But I would personally suggest that a good LLM should surely make up for a crappy undergrad institution. Logic would seem to suggest that is the case...
My point was that if you have secured a place on the BCL, regardless of which university you went to, you have been recognised as being extremely academically gifted and having consistently achieved highly in your undergraduate degree.

Your average Oxbridge 2:1er would be unlikely to secure a place on that course. I would agree that for solicitors in particular, a masters will not normally add that much to an application, but the BCL is seen as being in a class of its own as far as legal postgraduate courses are concerned. And at the Bar where academic ability is paramount, the BCL applicant (regardless of undergraduate university) would likely be interviewed in preference to a person with a only 2:1 from Oxbridge.
I think Simon's post supports my view to the extent that any sort of First will very likely lead to an interview. Those with 'fluff' Firsts from Polies would then, whenever appropriate, be differentiated from more able candidates from institutions with higher standards.

I suppose you may well have been an exception---could your OLPAS form have been flawed in some way, perhaps indicating an interest in the academic side of things rather more than the Bar?
Reply 15
Evil_Genius
Well, we obviously have had exposure to very different types of people with Oxbridge 65%+. Seriously, you do realise that there are so many Oxbridge applicants relative to the number of top sets that merely the name of University and a fairly dull 66+-short-of-70% does not stand out in itself. My sample of 65+ is focused exclusively on those Oxbridge students applying for pupillage--yours is evidently far wider and thus less relevant to this discussion.

I was aware you'd deploy the grading-incongruence argument--as all firsts are externally marked, usually by top professors at the foremost universities (at least that's what our dean tells me...) in that discipline, there is a definite lack of standards as far as 2:1's are concerned (so I wouldn't suggest a 69% from Oxford= 69% from Oxford Brookes), but not with regard to Firsts.


Go and have a look at the external examiners reports on the Cambridge History and Law webpages, for part 1 and part 2. I will give you my access code if you like. Tell me how many times you see an external examiner-in this case, they come from places like Warwick, Durham, Manchester, Exeter-suggest that work given a 'high 2.1,' ranging from 66 upwards, would have been awarded a First at their (incidentally rather good) home university. If I showed this to everybody who plays the 'a first from a.n. other uni is at least as good as an Oxbridge 2.1' card, I think the arguments would cease, somehow.
Reply 16
Evil_Genius
I think Simon's post supports my view to the extent that any sort of First will very likely lead to an interview. Those with 'fluff' Firsts from Polies would then, whenever appropriate, be differentiated from more able candidates from institutions with higher standards.

I suppose you may well have been an exception---could your OLPAS form have been flawed in some way, perhaps indicating an interest in the academic side of things rather more than the Bar?


With respect, I don't believe so and my experience accords with that of my peers on the BVC.
So now your argument stealthily changed to '2:1 from Oxbridge is better than first from elsewhere'? Heh, good luck trying to keep up with your leaps of logic.

Speaking of leaps, it seems that you based the preposition "there is a huge gap in marking standards" on the evidence "there are not many Oxbridge external markers"--which just doesn't follow.
ninon
With respect, I don't believe so and my experience accords with that of my peers on the BVC.


Perhaps I'm wrong. It's been known to happen. But your motley collection of empirical evidence does nothing to convince me that I am. Would you care to tell me more about your background?

How bad a Uni are we talking about, and how good the First? What type of Chambers did you choose? How many non-OLPAS apps?
HELLOHELLOHELLO
Is it possible, I know there is some snobbery about what university you went to at the bar, but has anyone with a degree from a from a new university ever became a barrister? is it common? is it even possible???


Yes it is perfectly possible but if your reasons for becoming a barrister have anything to do with the potential pay and prestige associated with the job then forget about it. I'm saying this because your chances of getting into one of the prestigious London chambers where you could potentially earn well well above the national average salary are virtually zero. Chances are that you will only be able to make it to a much less prestigious set of chambers where your pay would probably not ever go above 40k. A lot of barristers never make much more than teachers. I know this sounds harsh but it will be next to impossible to get into any of the highly regarded chambers with a degree from an ex poly when you're competing with Oxbridge 1sts. If you are after money and prestige at all (not saying that you are) then you are better off looking elsewhere.