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

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Just wondering how much GDL results are considered against degree results when it comes to applying for pupillage or training contracts.

    I have a high 2.1 from a good university with a solid background of legal work experience but managed to get a Pass on the GDL just short of the Commendation grade I was hoping for.

    I'm worried about not getting many interviews if I were to apply for anything in the future; can anyone shed some light?

    Thanks a lot guys,

    HG
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    If you've already completed your GDL and haven't got a TC, I imagine most of the firms you'll be applying to are quite small firms? I say this because the larger firms generally recruit two years in advance, so you would have had to apply during your final year of uni. If you are applying to the smaller firms, I think they tend to focus slightly less on grades than the big firms, so hopefully it shouldn't be too much of a problem.

    I could be totally wrong about this, so take my advice with a pinch of salt. Hopefully someone with a bit more knowledge can give their opinion
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    As far as I have seen, firms care more about your degree grade then your GDL grade. You have a 2:1, which is the main thing. Having said that, firms do look at GDL (and A-level grades) when filtering applications. Where is your degree from, a decent uni?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Thanks MM and I_E; degree is from a Redbrick with AAA at A-Level.

    I was leaning towards the Bar based on previous mini-pupillages and debating experience but now feel as if I've completely messed up my chances of becoming a barrister because of the Pass.

    If this has the very real potential of hampering any quest for pupillage I was considering cutting loose and trying to get a TC instead. I've decided to have a gap year to work out what to do next but don't really know where I stand anymore.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    This happened to me, and I was told it wouldn't make much difference at the bar, particularly if you can show that it was just a blip (I was in hospital and leaving in the day to take exams and returning when they were over. It wasn't a great studying environment)

    A friend of mine has just had two offers from fairly top criminal sets with a GDL pass.

    You can always do the LLB that most (all?) providers offer which can go some way to masking the pass - although it's a fair bit of money, I think it's what I may do now, just in case.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I too have heard a recruiter say that a good GDL grade is important as, obviously, it demonstrates grasp of the law.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Escobedo)
    I've heard the opposite.. that firms are interested in both but more interested in your GDL grade.

    Makes sense really... any doofus can get a 2:1 in some bland arts subject from a 'good' Uni but it takes real talent to get a distinction on the GDL which is basically two years of an LLB squashed into one.

    Least, that's what a recruiter at a top Manchester firm told me.
    What sort of degree have you done? I find it hard to believe that you have attempted an arts degree at a good uni when you display such ignorance... if you haven't please don't make comments about things you know nothing about.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Any doofus can get a 2:1 in some bland arts subject from a 'good' Uni but it takes real talent to get a distinction on the GDL
    From the people in my GDL class, the two people who got distinctions on the GDL also happened to have got firsts "in some bland arts subject from a 'good Uni".

    make of that what you will
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    The 2:1 just tells them that you're not illiterate but it's the GDL grade that tells them if you have any affinity or talent for law.
    So, how come many firms recruit non-lawyers in the final year of their degree or before they get their GDL grades? If GDL grades really determined this, firms would wait and see.

    I think the GDL is just a hoop to be jumped through which proves very little about your "affinity or talent for law". It just shows that you have been prepared to work reasonably consistently and have the capacity to regurgitate a load of stuff from your short term memory. All of which you have probably already demonstrated at GCSE and A level.

    I agree that there's a big difference between what it takes to get a first and a 2.1.

    I'm much prouder of my first than my distinction and I think it played a big role in helping me get me a TC. But at the end of the day no single factor will secure you a TC. You need the full package: academics, ECs, work experience, application and interview technique, good timing and a modicum of luck.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Escobedo)
    "A friend of mine has just had two offers from fairly top criminal sets with a GDL pass."

    I don't believe that a top criminal set would take someone on with just a GDL pass which shows a pretty poor grasp of the law.

    More likely they are connected in some way and it is nepotism.
    I have to wonder, why have you resurrected a year-old thread to accuse sets of nepotism (without having seen the candidate, his/her CV, and interview)?

    It's worth noting that most people can't, and don't, achieve 2:is in arts subjects at university--barely half of university students in Scotland attained a 2:i or better this year. When you consider the people who did not go to university, this suggests that getting a 2:i is still nothing to sniff at. You also have to differentiate between 2:is: scraping a 60 requires a different level of engagement from achieving a 68. The university matters, and so does the course.

    I'm inclined to agree with you to a certain extent--there are people who get 2:is who can barely string two thoughts together. But this is by no means universally the case. And there's no need to **** off huge swathes of the graduate population, or slander sets without any knowledge of the particular cases. It would perhaps be better to say that the vast majority of people who get pupillage will have achieved a commendation in the GDL. A person with a pass who gets a pupillage is the exception, not the rule.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Escobedo)
    Not ****ging off. 'Large swathes' of the graduate population shouldn't exist, degrees have been hugely devalued, that's just my opinion and you can disagree with it. A degree used to carry far more currency than it does now... this is evidenced by employers almost across the board requiring a minimum of a 2:1. A 2:1, 20 years ago when I was first a student was quite a serious grade and only a small percentage attained it from a much smaller pool of graduates. Getting a Desmond then was like getting a 2:1 now as far as employment was concerned. I'm '****ging off' the qualification not the students who attain it.


    How dramatic. It's hardly slander (libel actually, on here) to observe that a mere pass on the GDL is nowhere near the kind of standard usually accepted by a top set. I know of nepotism where TCs are concerned, the Bar is riddled with it. Someone on my course got pupillage purely based on who they knew and their background.



    Sorry, I didn't even look at the date, I was just looking at GDL threads, it's quite fresh for me as I have just finished mine... what's your excuse?
    So how long is it since you either did or had anything to do with an undergraduate degree? Where do you get the idea that it is suddenly easy to get a 2.1? The media? The lecturers at my university certainly didn't hand out 2.1 grades like sweets and were probably educated at a similar time to you... many of my lecturers had previously lectured at Oxford and Cambridge where it is universally agreed that it is not easy to get a 2.1- I'm not under the impression that they lowered their standards for us at Manchester. I worked so hard on my degree and achieved a 68 (high 2.1). I don't appreciate people assuming it was easy or that I could be a doofus.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by curlpower)
    So how long is it since you either did or had anything to do with an undergraduate degree? Where do you get the idea that it is suddenly easy to get a 2.1? The media? The lecturers at my university certainly didn't hand out 2.1 grades like sweets and were probably educated at a similar time to you... many of my lecturers had previously lectured at Oxford and Cambridge where it is universally agreed that it is not easy to get a 2.1- I'm not under the impression that they lowered their standards for us at Manchester. I worked so hard on my degree and achieved a 68 (high 2.1). I don't appreciate people assuming it was easy or that I could be a doofus.
    I think the issue is that a 2.1 can cover a very wide margin, even though a first in many places is 70% or above, whilst a 2.1 is 60-69%.

    For example, at Glasgow, my 2.1 consists of 3As and 3Bs at honours, meaning I missed out on a first by one A grade, or 2 slightly higher B grades (my GPA at the finish was 17.2, and I needed 17.5 for a first). On the other hand, someone else who graduated with me with a 2.1 could well have been sitting with 14.5 GPA (i.e. 3Bs and 3Cs). The difference in quality is substantial when grades are looked at, but on the tin, they are the same degree.

    Of course, Glasgow doesn't use percentages, but if they did, my GPA would work out at 78% (i.e. 17.2 divided by 22, as Glasgow uses a 22 point marking scale), and yet is still 2.1, wheras the person with the 14.5 above would be 65% and still hit the minimum threshold for a 2.1.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MickJB1989)
    I think the issue is that a 2.1 can cover a very wide margin, even though a first in many places is 70% or above, whilst a 2.1 is 60-69%.

    For example, at Glasgow, my 2.1 consists of 3As and 3Bs at honours, meaning I missed out on a first by one A grade, or 2 slightly higher B grades (my GPA at the finish was 17.2, and I needed 17.5 for a first). On the other hand, someone else who graduated with me with a 2.1 could well have been sitting with 14.5 GPA (i.e. 3Bs and 3Cs). The difference in quality is substantial when grades are looked at, but on the tin, they are the same degree.

    Of course, Glasgow doesn't use percentages, but if they did, my GPA would work out at 78% (i.e. 17.2 divided by 22, as Glasgow uses a 22 point marking scale), and yet is still 2.1, wheras the person with the 14.5 above would be 65% and still hit the minimum threshold for a 2.1.
    I know what you mean but I still think you have to be fairly intelligent and hard-working to get any form of a 2.1- research, understanding and synthesising complex information, articulating that information, formulating and structuring a convincing and concise argument, etc- there's a lot more to it than not being illiterate and being able to copy out information from books, it winds me up when people try to undermine the achievement of an arts degree!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Escobedo)
    Not ****ging off. 'Large swathes' of the graduate population shouldn't exist, degrees have been hugely devalued, that's just my opinion and you can disagree with it. A degree used to carry far more currency than it does now... this is evidenced by employers almost across the board requiring a minimum of a 2:1. A 2:1, 20 years ago when I was first a student was quite a serious grade and only a small percentage attained it from a much smaller pool of graduates. Getting a Desmond then was like getting a 2:1 now as far as employment was concerned. I'm '****ging off' the qualification not the students who attain it.
    "That's just my opinion and you can disagree with it" has always struck me as a cop-out. You actually have ****ged off large swathes of the graduate population now by saying that they should never have been permitted to attend university. You are actually ****ging off the qualification and the students who attain it.

    (Original post by Escobedo)
    How dramatic. It's hardly slander (libel actually, on here) to observe that a mere pass on the GDL is nowhere near the kind of standard usually accepted by a top set. I know of nepotism where TCs are concerned, the Bar is riddled with it. Someone on my course got pupillage purely based on who they knew and their background.
    Do you wish to name the set and barristers involved? Simon Myerson, a member of this forum and of the Bar Standards Board, has repeatedly offered to look into allegations of the sort you are making. Thus far no one has actually taken him up on the offer. Nepotism is a serious allegation.

    You don't know the criminal sets in question mentioned earlier in the thread, nor the person who has been offered a pupillage. Your statements lack the specificity to be libellous, but they are, for this reason, unfounded. An observation that a pass is rarely sufficient would have been one thing. You went beyond that observation to state that there *must* have been nepotism, yet you have no evidence to support that contention.


    (Original post by Escobedo)
    Sorry, I didn't even look at the date, I was just looking at GDL threads, it's quite fresh for me as I have just finished mine... what's your excuse?
    I didn't resurrect the thread. I wasn't willing to let some of the things you said stand. It's one thing to question the value of a 2:i (as I said, I can sympathise with the sentiment). It's another thing entirely to allege nepotism, which is quite a serious breach of the ethical standards to which barristers are held. Provide some evidence for your allegations, or refrain from making them.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Escobedo)
    No I didn't, I used the words 'more likely'... Do you not understand the substantial semantic difference between 'must' and 'more likely'? Your misrepresentation of what I actually wrote is libellous. You obviously don't know the difference between libel and slander so your other confusion is understandable.

    I have no specific allegation to make as I don't know which criminal set was being mentioned, it is purely an opinion based on personal experiences and is meant about the Bar as a whole, - This isn't a courtroom, it's a student talkboard where people like you can thrash out their understanding of torts like defamation. So quit with the childish attempts at intimidation, if you knew your defamation, you'd know that a large class cannot be defamed and that includes the Bar (Knuppfer v London Express).



    My evidence is entirely anecdotal but I have heard it with my own ears from those who have pupillage and therefore it is very real, obviously I would have no intention of repeating it on here.
    We are unfriendly in here :lol:

    Just FYI, re the above, if you knew your defamation, you'd know that such a comment would, counterintuitively, likely be slander rather than libel...

    http://www.out-law.com/page-9330

    First, remove the log from your own eye, old chap
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mixxy)
    We are unfriendly in here :lol:

    Just FYI, re the above, if you knew your defamation, you'd know that such a comment would, counterintuitively, likely be slander rather than libel...

    http://www.out-law.com/page-9330

    First, remove the log from your own eye, old chap
    Escobedo seems to have deleted the posts in questions, for whatever reason.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jjarvis)
    Escobedo seems to have deleted the posts in questions, for whatever reason.
    :lol:

    And to think, I showed him up with only a lowly Commendation. How embarrassing!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by curlpower)
    I know what you mean but I still think you have to be fairly intelligent and hard-working to get any form of a 2.1- research, understanding and synthesising complex information, articulating that information, formulating and structuring a convincing and concise argument, etc- there's a lot more to it than not being illiterate and being able to copy out information from books, it winds me up when people try to undermine the achievement of an arts degree!
    Of course not, I have plenty of friends doing arts degrees, and they work hard for them. Although, all the figures I discussed were actually in reference to my LL.B
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • 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

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