Does doing a Law degree mean no Social Life?

Reply 80

14

Some interesting comments on this thread - I agree wholeheartedly with those of Jurisprudence.

There are two points I would make. First, as identified by Jurisprudence, a law degree will cover areas of conceptual difficulty which you won't have come close to at A-Level standard. It simply isn't a matter of sitting down and reading a text book for a few hours and you certainly can't read one from cover to cover in a matter of days. With respect to Not a Lawyer's post above, studying a legal text isn't like reading a Harry Potter. It isn't uncommon to have to study a particular page for an hour in an effort to grasp the concept. I still do it now. Counsel does it. Judges do it. You may need to refer to the authorities to properly understand how that concept developed. Anyone who has had the joys of studying Equity and Trusts will know what I mean. The actual volume of work (as in hours in the library) wasn't the difficult bit for me. It was the fact that it seemed almost physically impossible to understand a principle.

Secondly, does all this mean you should spend every waking hour in the library? NO!! Enjoy yourself! Throw yourself into everything Uni has to offer. Not only will that help your CV when it comes to application time but the dreaded day will come when you have to start your training contract. That, I'm afraid, is when you will really understand what a high volume of work is! All-nighters, weekends, holidays cancelled, unpleasant clients, nasty bosses, aggressive opponents*......ah, nothing beats the law!

Chalks.

*Please take the above with a substantial pinch of salt

Reply 81

Trefusis

jurisprudence

Anyways I've just completed my pre-final year (of 4) and am feeling rather burnt-out by everyhing law related, so I'm taking a year out to go any study international business at a small American university next year... So perhaps when I come back I too will be shocked again at how hard law is.

I'd think that Lawz would be the man to talk to here - I spoke to an associate at Herbert Smith recently who said that the BCL was a hothouse where they just piled on the pressure... Its put me off applying for it to some extent - I already feel like I'm in a hothouse - what's it really like?

I'm about to start the BCL. I spoke to a guy who did it 2 years ago and he said he worked (as in properly worked, not did a bit, had a cup of coffee, had a chat, got back to work) for ten hours a day, five days a week the whole time he was there. He said this was very standard, though some would have done more and others would have done less.

Reply 82

Not a Lawyer

chalks

With respect to Not a Lawyer's post above, studying a legal text isn't like reading a Harry Potter. It isn't uncommon to have to study a particular page for an hour in an effort to grasp the concept.

I find that depends largely on the area of law. I crawled through Wylie's Irish Land Law (20 pages a day was almost mind numbing) but found Anson's Law of Contract to be simple by comparison; paragraphs and pages that stump you are greatly outnumbered by those that don't in most textbooks I've used. I really can't see how spending scores of hours a week working would offer any substantial benefit over doing a lot less unless your intention is to memorise everything which seems rather pointless considering that most exams aren't 50 hours long with room for 200 page answers.

Reply 83

viviki

14

Yeah family law books are a very quick study but employment law. Oh the hours I slaved over that stupid book Grrrrr.

Reply 84

Jonesy038

A lot of it depends on what you want out of it. Just finished my first year at Sheffield, and encountered all sorts of different outlooks. Some people were happy 'just to pass' (might regret that come vacaction scheme application time!)whilst others worked hard. I fell into the latter category and it paid off.

I suppose during semesters I worked about 30 hours a week, and in the weeks leading up to exam periods, I upped that to around 40-50. That sounds like a lot, but as has been pointed out, it's nothing compared to the demands a top law firm will put on you further down the line time-wise, and 40 hours per week is only equivalent to a a regular 'monday to friday' full-time job.

Ultimately, employers look for you to have a good academic/extra-academic balance. They want rounded individuals. When I've done all my work, and fitted in all my sporting commitments etc. then there aren't enough hours in the day. I see that as a good thing rather than a negative.

I guess you reap what you sow.

Reply 85

Jonesy038

Not a Lawyer

Does anyone actually do 40 hours a week? Considering you can read most textbooks cover to cover in less than two days, how would it be possible to maintain such a heavy schedule for an entire semester without reading the same material ad nauseum? Even 15 hours a week would be pushing it.

IMO you can never do too much. There are always more concepts to grasp, more journals to read.... There is absolutely no chance that anyone, no matter how intelligent, could read and more importantly completely understand most books in two days. That just can't be done. Not properly. For some books, to read and completely grasp a single chapter can take a whole day. Indeed I'm sure most law students have at one time or another spent days on one chapter, or hours on just a couple of pages.

It just isn't possible to read a chunky book on, say, Land Law in a couple of days and remember anything.

I tend to do around 40 hours per week, occasionally more, and still sometimes feel that I haven't done enough. There is always more to do, if you so wish.

Reply 86

chriswhit

1

agree with a lot of whats been said about legal texts - you cant just read through them. You have to read them and chase up cases and references in the bibliography, particularly if you are reading up for an essay or thesis.

A previous poster said he did about 30 hours a week and then more towards deadlines - this is about what ive found too..and things always take longer than you think! Do people work 40 hours a week, week in week out..yeah...people often do. Hard but doable.

Reply 87

rystar00

Right, sorry to disagree guys but I sometimes feel that law students COMPLETELY embellish what you really need to do in terms of hours worked to get a good degree.

(By saying good, I don't mean an average pass of 40something%, i mean a 2:1)

I am a very sociable guy and feel that I have to balance my commitment to academia with 'more social pursuits' shall we say, I train for the uni 1st team 5 times a week, play semi pro back home on a weekend and go out on the beers after about 4 times a week. (If you dont believe me then click on this link to prove i'm not talking rubbish http://www.sunion.warwick.ac.uk/uwfc/Exec/Member%27s/match-sec.htm and http://www.sunion.warwick.ac.uk/uwfc/Teams/1st/FirstXI.htm)

I would, hand on heart say that I attend around 30% of lectures and did not go to a single seminar in my second term and never do any reading and stuff like that. I achieved straight 2:1's in all my second year modules with a 66% average, I know that some of you guys have ALOT better results than that but in terms of a work to results ratio it goes to show that much of the work that law students put in is completely irrelevant and a waste of energy.

All this talk of putting in 30-40 hours a week is not unheard of and I know tons of people that do it, I know of some people that do 16 hours a day in the library over exam time but yopu DONT NEED to do it.

Plus, many law firms look for well rounded individuals and not library robots who have buried their head in a book for the last 10 years and only gaining about 2% more.

So any potential law students out there, just learn to manage your time well, plan your deadlines sensibly and work your bo****ks off a few weeks before exams and you'll honestly be fine. Don't be put off by self-important scare-mongering!!

Reply 88

Jonesy038

rystar00

Right, sorry to disagree guys but I sometimes feel that law students COMPLETELY embellish what you really need to do in terms of hours worked to get a good degree.

(By saying good, I don't mean an average pass of 40something%, i mean a 2:1)

I am a very sociable guy and feel that I have to balance my commitment to academia with 'more social pursuits' shall we say, I train for the uni 1st team 5 times a week, play semi pro back home on a weekend and go out on the beers after about 4 times a week. (If you dont believe me then click on this link to prove i'm not talking rubbish http://www.sunion.warwick.ac.uk/uwfc/Exec/Member%27s/match-sec.htm and http://www.sunion.warwick.ac.uk/uwfc/Teams/1st/FirstXI.htm)

I would, hand on heart say that I attend around 30% of lectures and did not go to a single seminar in my second term and never do any reading and stuff like that. I achieved straight 2:1's in all my second year modules with a 66% average, I know that some of you guys have ALOT better results than that but in terms of a work to results ratio it goes to show that much of the work that law students put in is completely irrelevant and a waste of energy.

All this talk of putting in 30-40 hours a week is not unheard of and I know tons of people that do it, I know of some people that do 16 hours a day in the library over exam time but yopu DONT NEED to do it.

Plus, many law firms look for well rounded individuals and not library robots who have buried their head in a book for the last 10 years and only gaining about 2% more.

So any potential law students out there, just learn to manage your time well, plan your deadlines sensibly and work your bo****ks off a few weeks before exams and you'll honestly be fine. Don't be put off by self-important scare-mongering!!

Self-importance?! You're the one who has just rattled on about yourself and how you got good marks without doing much work etc! Pot, kettle and black spring to mind. Why has anyone else's post been self important?

People don't 'embellish' what you have to do. People do what they feel is right, and hopefully reap what they sow come results day. Some have to do more than others in order to get certain grades.

We know that Law firms look for well rounded individuals. Are you saying it's not possible to be a well-rounded individual if you work 30-40 hours a week? That's equal to or less than a regular monday-friday full-time job. Most of us are probably awake for about 16 hours per day. If you work for 8 hours that leaves another 8 hours free. That way you get 40 hours of work in and have just as much time again to pursue other things.

Also, I don't find your story to be typical. I know a great many people who didn't attend many lectures, didn't work hard during semesters, then crammed for a few weeks before lectures..... and many of them are revising for re-sits.

Reply 89

chriswhit

1

rystar00

Right, sorry to disagree guys but I sometimes feel that law students COMPLETELY embellish what you really need to do in terms of hours worked to get a good degree.

(By saying good, I don't mean an average pass of 40something%, i mean a 2:1)

I am a very sociable guy and feel that I have to balance my commitment to academia with 'more social pursuits' shall we say, I train for the uni 1st team 5 times a week, play semi pro back home on a weekend and go out on the beers after about 4 times a week. (If you dont believe me then click on this link to prove i'm not talking rubbish http://www.sunion.warwick.ac.uk/uwfc/Exec/Member%27s/match-sec.htm and http://www.sunion.warwick.ac.uk/uwfc/Teams/1st/FirstXI.htm)

I would, hand on heart say that I attend around 30% of lectures and did not go to a single seminar in my second term and never do any reading and stuff like that. I achieved straight 2:1's in all my second year modules with a 66% average, I know that some of you guys have ALOT better results than that but in terms of a work to results ratio it goes to show that much of the work that law students put in is completely irrelevant and a waste of energy.

All this talk of putting in 30-40 hours a week is not unheard of and I know tons of people that do it, I know of some people that do 16 hours a day in the library over exam time but yopu DONT NEED to do it.

Plus, many law firms look for well rounded individuals and not library robots who have buried their head in a book for the last 10 years and only gaining about 2% more.

So any potential law students out there, just learn to manage your time well, plan your deadlines sensibly and work your bo****ks off a few weeks before exams and you'll honestly be fine. Don't be put off by self-important scare-mongering!!

It works for this person and great, but I wouldnt advise anyone to follow this particular approach. Having graduated from Warwick and represented the students for all three years of my degree, I've never heard anything like this. Yes you have to balance work and play, but hardly going to any seminars or lectures is asking for trouble imho. Lectures are your bread and butter, with the lecturers having prepared them to ensure coverage of the core course content. Yes you can copy up others notes but its not the same as people take them at different levels of details. Not going to lectures and seminars etc etc won't exactly improve any reference tutors might have to write for you.

Seminars in a fair number of places, including Warwick, are compulsory and give you an important chance to check that you understand ideas and discuss them.

On another level this kind of post makes me a bit depressed? It might just be me, but dont people actually go to university in order to study a subject because they actually want to learn things out of an interest in something which extends above and beyond the desire to pass exams well? I hope so.

Reply 90

Jonesy038

Chris, seminars are compulsory at Sheffield too- that is to say if you don't attend at least 7 out of 8 for each module (something like that anyway), you fail the module with a mark of 0. Maybe Rystar is the one 'embellishing' what he does (or doesn't do) in order to get decent marks! People always enjoy making out that they did no work, went to no lectures etc and still got good marks to try an make them sound as if they're sufficiently clever that they can just turn up and breeze everything. It's almost always a load of cobblers.

Reply 91

Latayah

11

Lauren18

1. Not all Law degrees are the same
2. Not all lawyers are the same
3. Not all Law degrees have the same workload
4. Not all lawyers have the same workload
5. What's a 'great social life?'
6. What's 'hardwork'?

Your post is completely subjective - you either want to do Law or you don't. You're either willing to put in the effort, or you're not. You either want to be a lawyer, or you don't. You either want to be a hard-working lawyer, or a ******, unemployed one.

I really can't help you anymore than that.

i don't think that was any help at all.

Well obviviously her question will be quite vague, lighten up. If you don't know the answer why not just not reply.

Anyway to the thread starter - i've had many friends who have had very fruitful social lifes more so than some and studied law quite successfully.

Reply 92

YellowBentine

Focused revision and focused study make all the difference. I freely admit that I didn't spend as much time in the library at LSE as most other Law students - I played football for the uni, got involved in societies etc - but with focused revision close to exams on the topics I knew were going to come up, I've got a high 2:1. There are people who kill themselves, doing 9-5 studying all week, for the entire three years, who've come out with the same degree classification as me. Having outside interests definitely helps at Vac Scheme and TC interviews too.

Reply 93

rystar00

guys, just read my post back and I do sound like a knob!

Honestly, I'm not embellishing or exaggerating what I do, I was just pissed off with law students in general and how they seem to go on about how much work they do.

I haven't got much experience of what law students are like in general, but at Warwick I find that alot of the law students there are extremely competitive and all up their own arses, to the point where they are all just absolute w*****s.

Im sorry if I tar you all with the same brush, but when law students babble on about the 40 hour weeks they put in it just smacks of arrogance and appears to be an opportunity for them to show off and go on about how hard their degree is when alot of the work they do is irrelevant.

At the end of the day, academic robots are not particularly employable, and alot of the LLB (and even parts of the LPC) are not actually relevant to the eventual job they will be doing (I have heard that from a number of current second year trainees). Therefore, the point I am making is that you don't NEED to do all this work as it is possible to actually have a life and pursue other interests, whilst still attaining 2:1's and paradoxically increasing employability by actually developing a personality.

in essence......you do not NEED to do 40 hour weeks like some of you say unless you are aiming for a 1st.

and to adress a few points

We know that Law firms look for well rounded individuals. Are you saying it's not possible to be a well-rounded individual if you work 30-40 hours a week? That's equal to or less than a regular monday-friday full-time job. Most of us are probably awake for about 16 hours per day. If you work for 8 hours that leaves another 8 hours free. That way you get 40 hours of work in and have just as much time again to pursue other things.

We know that Law firms look for well rounded individuals. Are you saying it's not possible to be a well-rounded individual if you work 30-40 hours a week? That's equal to or less than a regular monday-friday full-time job. Most of us are probably awake for about 16 hours per day. If you work for 8 hours that leaves another 8 hours free. That way you get 40 hours of work in and have just as much time again to pursue other things.

I am indeed saying that working 30 hours a week makes it hard to be a TRUELY well rounded individual. You may have a few interests but it is unlikely that you will be able to pursue them to a fully committed level.

Maybe Rystar is the one 'embellishing' what he does (or doesn't do) in order to get decent marks! People always enjoy making out that they did no work, went to no lectures etc and still got good marks to try an make them sound as if they're sufficiently clever that they can just turn up and breeze everything. It's almost always a load of cobblers.

do i need to reiterate? I have already stated that I got a 66% average ie a 2:1, and I have posted a link to highlight the level of my involvement with just one of the societies at uni.

Yellow Bentine is completely right, you only need to cram for exams, all the spouting on about "oh I do a million hour week and its so hard (boo hoo)" is just self importance. It is unlikely that many of you will get a 1st, so just do what you need to do to get a 2:1 and stop whinging!!

Reply 94

Dreama

13

rystar00

I would, hand on heart say that I attend around 30% of lectures and did not go to a single seminar in my second term and never do any reading and stuff like that.

If I was your mother, I'd shout at you... :biggrin:

Seriously though... How do you cover the workload if you only went to 30% of lectures, no seminars, and read nothing?

Reply 95

rystar00

lol.....she does believe me!

our lecturers are pretty good at posting up notes from lectures on the net, they aren't comprehensive with regard to detail but cover the main points.

If i'm being honest I did do some 'question gambling' during exams by looking through past papers over the years and picking out common themes. I found that if you prepare well for these areas then the ancilliary work you have to do for seminars and the like is not needed.

Admittedly I may not know the subject in the same depth as alot of the students on my course, but as long as my degree classification states a 2:1 then i'm not too bothered as from what I have been told alot of the LLB is not relevant to the eventual job many people will do.

I know I sound like a p***k but if you knew what the law students are like at my uni you'd be the same trust me, all self-important and arrogant *****, and when I come on the forum and people go on about how they work so hard and it is so difficult it just pisses me off as it might put prospective lawyers off studying the subject.

Reply 96

emily87

9

rystar00

do i need to reiterate? I have already stated that I got a 66% average ie a 2:1, and I have posted a link to highlight the level of my involvement with just one of the societies at uni.

Yellow Bentine is completely right, you only need to cram for exams, all the spouting on about "oh I do a million hour week and its so hard (boo hoo)" is just self importance. It is unlikely that many of you will get a 1st, so just do what you need to do to get a 2:1 and stop whinging!!

Obviously everyone works differently, needs to work different amounts and revises in a different way. Last minute intense revision works for some, others need/want the security of steadier, longer revision. Comparing hours is pointless - everyone should just do what works for them and not worry if someone else can do as well on less, or someone insists that you need to do more.

Reply 97

octanethriller

2

God, I have read some rubbish on this thread. I'm at King's, and in my second year I did property, trusts, tort and competition law. These at king's are all very intensive and tough subjects. The seminar leaders told us that they'd expect the reading to take 8 hours per subject. The fact of the matter was that what they said was an understatement- most weeks it took much more! Often be spending 12 hours a week per subject reading and still have missed out on some cases etc.

I suppose it all depends on the individual, but what I have seen over and over - at least at King's anyway- those who don't put in the hours and don't attend the lectures and seminars are the ones who do not so well in exams.

Also, those who say you just need to cram - I have found on my course any how, that if you don't do the reading throughout the year then you will have very big problems cramming before an exam - try cramming from Gray & Gray or Hayton & Marshall!

Reply 98

YellowBentine

Not a Lawyer

Considering you can read most textbooks cover to cover in less than two days

Apologies if I'm being cheeky here, but you're quite clearly 'Not a Lawyer' if you think most textbooks can be read cover to cover in two days. Gower and Davies' Principles of Company Law, anyone?

Reading textbooks for a Law degree isn't like reading a novel - it's not a case of ploughing through the pages to get to the end. You need to take notes, and has been mentioned on this thread, read and re-read pages, often seven or eight times, to ensure you understand the concepts involved.

Reply 99

themesong

just find your own workplan and stick to it...as i have learnt, never follow the crowd, do your own thing and keep your head down.

Does doing a Law degree mean no Social Life?

Related discussions

Articles for you

How The Student Room is moderated