Quote:
Originally Posted by hYperTrOphY  Perhaps. But if we take Bell531's response, for example, he says that UNSW has a better law program, but that USyd is more prestigious. Thus he appears to be treating quality as separate and distinct from prestige.
On the points you make:
1. Do you think the university you go to strongly impacts upon one's ability to make connections?
2. Do you think the correlation between the university you attend and your job prospects is causative in nature, or is it simply a consequence of the fact that the students who attend certain universities are the same students who have done well in the past, and are thus more likely to be better candidates in general? Because if it is the latter, the university you go to may have little impact at all. |
1. Not really, connections in this field are practically done well before university begins, ie, you're really born into the high-end of town, those who buck that trend are the exception rather than the rule. As an egalitarian society, we like to promote that anyone can become a chief justice etc, but that's just not true.
2. I think this is a bit more complex, and has more to do with the established partnerships in place, ie certain firms may be partnered with universities but as a requirement would have some say on what gets taught as part of the syllabus/course, so that those graduating are ready-to-go for the particular industry. Again, while there are those that buck this trend, it'd be more the exception. This may also explain why certain universities are considered to have an 'edge' on others in terms of graduate positions, because those 'partnered' courses/universities have been sponsored and thus the firm knows what standards and skills they are getting.
In this sense, the uni you go to will have a tremendous impact upon your job prospects but not in the way people think it may affect things. Again, reality is that most lawyers are there for a vocational reason and the big firms are centres of stability as well as status/money. Also, the reality of law courses are that there aren't any specific skills taught that are strictly 'law' skills, there aren't any formulaes or the like, and so the specialisations and understanding of processes are more important than actually understanding the philosophy of law.
For this reason, it seems fairly difficult to apply 'prestige' to undergraduate courses in the traditional sense of the word as the quality of courses are not really that far apart.