Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    A 2.1 is good, but a first is better.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    My mum teaches Law at Hull and she says a 2:1 is good so well done Obviously a first is better so if you really want that then you'll have to work hard. Good Luck
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I think the OP's real question is "is a 2.1 good enough?"

    It depends what you want to do with your law degree, but as Hull is not a Russell Group university I think you should definitely go for a First if your tutors think this is possible for you. If they reckon it's a really long shot, though, you might be better off with a 2.1 and lots of relevant extra-curricular stuff instead.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DaisyEmma)
    I think the OP's real question is "is a 2.1 good enough?"

    It depends what you want to do with your law degree, but as Hull is not a Russell Group university I think you should definitely go for a First if your tutors think this is possible for you. If they reckon it's a really long shot, though, you might be better off with a 2.1 and lots of relevant extra-curricular stuff instead.
    Don't be ridiculous. Do you even know what the Russell Group is? I guess Durham students should up their game in that case, seeing as they're not part of the all important Russell group. Right?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Why so, angry, Joel? Yes, I know what the Russell Group is; perhaps I should have said "not a Russell Group or 1994 Group university" so as not to upset any lurking pedants. That wasn't really the point, as anyone with a modicum of tact would have seen.

    Do you have any advice for the OP?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Joel4fun4u)
    Don't be ridiculous. Do you even know what the Russell Group is? I guess Durham students should up their game in that case, seeing as they're not part of the all important Russell group. Right?
    Joel,

    I think you may be taking the term 'Russell Group' a little too literally. Whilst it does have a precise meaning, in everyday terms it just means the 'good and/or traditional ones that aren't Oxbridge'.

    DaisyEmma's advice to go for a first especially because Hull does not have the same reputation as some other universities seems prudent.

    To the OP,

    For my part, I went to a Russell Group (in both senses) university and had the 'decision' at the beginning of third year that I could either slog my guts out and probably get a first, or I could slack off, do lots of extra curriculars I enjoyed (debating, mooting etc) and definitely get a 2.1.

    I chose the latter option and despite mooting and debating successes, really wish I'd gone for the first, instead. Oh the 'joy' of 20:20 hindsight.

    EDIT: (comment) it seems DaisyEmma and I were writing at the same time - hence the first part of this post being somewhat redundant
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DaisyEmma)
    Why so, angry, Joel? Yes, I know what the Russell Group is; perhaps I should have said "not a Russell Group or 1994 Group university" so as not to upset any lurking pedants. That wasn't really the point, as anyone with a modicum of tact would have seen.

    Do you have any advice for the OP?
    My advice, like anyone else, is to do the best that you can. I'm not "anrgy", but it does become increasingly irritating when I see people on here suggesting that established Universities like Hull, Kent or Reading offer a lower quality degree than, say, Liverpool or Leeds.

    The great delusion, it seems, is that people think there's a measurable difference in quality of degree at different institutions, even when there's absolutely no facts to base it on. This may be very true indeed at a postgraduate level, but at undergraduate, this little theory that some people have just holds no water.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by flugestuge)
    So a legal education at Oxford or Cambridge is not measurably better than a legal education at Hull, Bolton or London South Bank ?

    Thank you for enlightening us.
    I personally know somebody (there's also another girl on here in the same situation) who has done an undergraduate degree in Law at Hull Uni and gone on to do post graduate with Oxford. Clearly Oxford consider the Hull education to be up to par.

    I wonder who is more qualified to judge the quality of education at different universities. Is it academics at Oxford or people like you on a student forum?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by flugestuge)
    A swallow does not make a summer.
    For every ex-undergraduate from Hull doing a postgraduate course at Oxford, there are 40 ex-undergraduates from Oxford / Cambridge / LSE / Imperial doing postgraduate courses at Oxford.
    If you're going to try and use numbers to 'prove' me 'wrong', then I recommend you don't make them up in your head. You either have facts to strengthen your argument, or you have no argument (which is what I expected). Unfortunately, if you can't have a debate, then I feel no need to discuss this with you. Only school children argue like that (which I wouldn't be surprised to find out you are).

    I recommend you talk to somebody at a University who has more authority to you discuss this with you than I do. Perhaps then you truly will be "enlightened". Thanks for the laughs though.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Oxford and Cambridge are undeniably more rigorous due to their smaller classes, regular one-to-one tutorials and higher workload (an essay a week, isn't it?) and it would be disingenuous to pretend otherwise. There's also a greater possibility there that your tutor/lecturer will be a world-class expert in their field, though this doesn't guarantee that they'll be any good at teaching undergrads. Other than Oxford and Cambridge, I don't think Russelland1994group universities are necessarily "better" than the others, but it doesn't matter what I or any of us think - we're not the ones handing out training contracts!

    Arguing about the relative quality of different universities' degrees completely misses the point, especially in the context of job prospects for graduates. For the most part, there are too many variables to make a meaningful judgment, but regardless of what happens when you get there, Russelland1994group universities are harder to get into. There's tougher competition for places and the best candidates get them - so there is a much higher concentration of academic high-flyers at these institutions, people with a fistful of A's and strong extra-curriculars. Recruiters focus on these universities because they feel they're more likely to find lots of good candidates there: having got into one is an endorsement of their achievement and potential, at least at the time when they applied to uni.

    Yes, there are good people at the newer unis too, but they will have more to prove. If you're not at one of the "top" universities, and you want to compete with those graduates in the job market, you may have to achieve something extra during your undergraduate years to show that you are on a par with people who excelled earlier on. If, like law, your subject is directly relevant to your chosen career, it's worth trying for a First. If not, it may be more impressive to get a 2.1 and start a successful business in your spare time (for example).
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DaisyEmma)
    ...
    Hull isn't new or ex poly. It's been around since the 1920's and is a traditional University. Just thought I'd mention that, as it looked like you were saying otherwise.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Have edited my post slightly for clarity... but we're really splitting hairs here.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DaisyEmma)
    Have edited my post slightly for clarity... but we're really splitting hairs here.
    It's not splitting hairs. You're confusing a University that has been around since the 1920's with ex poly's. That shows an incredible lack of basic knowledge and understanding. My advice to you is to only comment on things which you have actual knowledge on, and don't try to just 'wing it'.

    Also, quote people when you respond to them.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Your tone is uncalled for, Joel. Pop your dummy back in and keep your "advice" (could you be more pompous?) for those who need it, whoever they may be. You are not the ruler of this forum, and posters here may quote as and when they please. Personally, I don't bother when I'm posting right underneath the post I'm answering, as intelligent people can follow a discussion thread without having to read the same posts more than once. I enjoyed your meticulous use of [...] above, though. Great quoting there!

    The only confusion here is yours - you have missed the point of the OP's question, and hijacked it to bang your own lonely drum in defence of the dear old skool. I have not confused Hull with an ex-poly; the giant chip on your shoulder caused you to infer this from my previous post, so I edited to make it clearer for you (anything for a quiet life). Somehow, this has triggered another rant... it's not worth getting so cross!

    I don't actually give a tiny rat's ass whether Hull University is an ex-poly, the new Cambridge or an entirely bogus institution that you run out of your mum's garden shed. As I have already said, it doesn't matter what I think, but what recruiters think - hence the advice I have given to the OP and to you, if only you were smart enough to see it.

    Rather than berating me for not acknowledging Hull's noble academic history (though I think you may have a few facts wrong; according to its own website, Hull did not exist in its present independent form until the 1950s), you should be thinking about the number of HR people who may be similarly absent-minded when they come to read your job applications and planning how to make yourself stand out. Hull is not in the Russell Group or the 1994 Group, and that isn't a good sign. Should any recruiter care enough to lay aside their stacks of applications from russelland1994group grads and look up Hull in, for example, the Times Good University Guide, they would see that it has a fairly mediocre rating. It's not a terrible uni (in fact, it may well be underrated), and I am not saying that people there are failures or that you personally won't get a job. However, you may have to do something special for your CV to shine next to those of people who have already showed their calibre by getting into more prestigious universities, particularly if you intend to target areas and companies where grads from these unis traditionally end up. I'm sorry if that upsets you, but don't shoot the messenger. I actually gave you the benefit of the doubt and assumed you are/will be one of Hull's high-fliers - your writing, while immature, is reasonably clear - but your bizarre habit of pouncing on irrelevant details and your failure to respond to the main points being discussed suggest otherwise. Still, if you put as much effort into your studies, extra-Cs and job search as you do into picking fights, you should be OK, at least until you get to interview stage! But you'll probably have grown up and calmed down a bit by then.

    Sheesh, I'm done. If you don't get it by now, you never will, and I think the OP's long gone! Good luck
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DaisyEmma)
    ...
    I can't be bothered to read your essay. You've proven your 'value' to this discussion already.

    And quote people if you want them to read your posts, otherwise they usually won't respond. That's a guarantee.

    This is my last post to you. I don't have any more time to waste talking to a fool.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Joel4fun4u)
    I can't be bothered to read your essay. You've proven your 'value' to this discussion already.

    And quote people if you want them to read your posts, otherwise they usually won't respond. That's a guarantee.

    This is my last post to you. I don't have any more time to waste talking to a fool.
    Possibly not your best post. I think you're on good ground if you want to defend Hull. However, this isn't the best way to do it.

    Come on, re-engage the brain and come up with some better arguments! Disregard the laughable "faux-poly" jibes above and respond!
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Quit the flame war please, people, and make sensible contributions only.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DaisyEmma)
    Oxford and Cambridge are undeniably more rigorous due to their smaller classes, regular one-to-one tutorials and higher workload (an essay a week, isn't it?)
    No, it is more than that.
    In Law the minimum is 3 essays a fortnight.
    Some colleges ( Merton comes to mind ) ask for 2 or more essays a week.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Hi
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
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.