Law degree workload (2 Viewers)

[wheredanton]

I doubt that a few passes would rule you out of top tier, unless they were all in subjects like contract and property. A D average, honours and some nice marks in the aforementioned subjects will get you an interview, but marks can only get you so far....

From what I've seen round these parts a pass rules you out for top tier unless you manage to have a very solid D average. Also expect to be asked why you got a pass in an interview. Have a good answer as well. "Woosidasies" will probably not do.

 

[charlie_charlie]

so how do credits look then, to an interviewer? Say if you started off with credits and then went up to a distinction average?

 

[Nobody Listened]

Aaaah. =/ So you're saying if you get a couple of passes, the likelihood of getting any job is pretty much *kapeesh*?

If 'tis, then I'm screwwwwwed.

 

[neo o]

Aaaah. =/ So you're saying if you get a couple of passes, the likelihood of getting any job is pretty much *kapeesh*?

If 'tis, then I'm screwwwwwed.

I believe the words top tier were used. If a couple of passes ruled you out of getting a job 90% of law graduates would be unemployed.

 

[M@C D@DDY]

Is it true that top tier place more emphasis on 2nd and 3rd year subjects rather than the 1st year? It would seem illogical if one was to be ruled out of top tier for getting a poor mark in foundations or torts.

 

[Nobody Listened]

Oh I get it, 'twas late when I read that *needs to wear glasses more often*

Thanks for that confirmation.

 

[MoonlightSonata]

Is it true that top tier place more emphasis on 2nd and 3rd year subjects rather than the 1st year? It would seem illogical if one was to be ruled out of top tier for getting a poor mark in foundations or torts.

Top tier firms don't really care about Criminal Law marks (and to a lesser extent Torts) because they don't practice in those areas. They aren't irrelevant, since a well-rounded knowledge of the law is important, but they aren't going to really care if you get a credit for Crim, for example.

But if you're doing badly in subjects like Contracts and Corporations Law, then that's not good.

 

[goan_crazy]

Do they care about the first year foundation subjects much?
Because I got a HD in legal research but only a pass in legal process and history

but crim and contracts are my frist 2nd year law subjects
I also do fed con and torts 2nd semester.

 

[uberlovesounds]

i got 15 hours for comm (accounting)/law.. is that the average of a first year?

 

[MoonlightSonata]

Do they care about the first year foundation subjects much?
Because I got a HD in legal research but only a pass in legal process and history

An HD grade in legal research is very helpful, because obviously research is fundamental to much of what you do in law and in your legal career.

The foundation subjects, again while not as important, are indicative of a broad understanding of the law. Just make sure you do well in subjects like contracts, property, and company law.

I should note this is really in respect of top-tier commercial law firms. There are many areas of law and many different places to work, all of which place importance on different things.

 

[MoonlightSonata]

i got 15 hours for comm (accounting)/law.. is that the average of a first year?

Yes, well keep in mind law involves a lot of reading.

At UNSW, you don't really do your basic learning in law classes, you do it by your law readings. In class, you then go through what you have learned in your readings and draw out all the difficulties and complexities, ensuring it is all understood.

 

[LaraB]

Yes, well keep in mind law involves a lot of reading.

At UNSW, you don't really do your basic learning in law classes, you do it by your law readings. In class, you then go through what you have learned in your readings and draw out all the difficulties and complexities, ensuring it is all understood.

Replace "At UNSW" with "At uni..."

I can't think of any uni that doesn't do it that way

 

[melsc]

I think he said that because he prefered not to speculate as to what other uni's do but yes UWS also does that and from the looks of things so does macquarie.

 

[MoonlightSonata]

Yes, I didn't want to speak for other law schools in case it was different.

I know USyd used to have the old lecture/tutorial system for law, but that was some time ago.

 

[M@C D@DDY]

Top tier firms don't really care about Criminal Law marks (and to a lesser extent Torts) because they don't practice in those areas. They aren't irrelevant, since a well-rounded knowledge of the law is important, but they aren't going to really care if you get a credit for Crim, for example.

But if you're doing badly in subjects like Contracts and Corporations Law, then that's not good.

So Top tier firms not only require you to perform well in these commercial law subjects but also achieve an overall distinction average. Is that correct?

 

[LaraB]

Yes, I didn't want to speak for other law schools in case it was different.

I know USyd used to have the old lecture/tutorial system for law, but that was some time ago.

I know that's what you meant/said and would not have thought that simply saying that you can replace unsw with unis meant that i didn't understand what was said . I was simply clarifying further that just about every uni does it that way so you can generalise in that case.

In future I will make sure i comment post script that i do understand the content and it was just a clarification to save people the need/urge to tell me what i already know...

Even courses where the lecture/tute system is used expect reading to be done before just like most courses.... courses that do not expect prior reading are probably more a rarity now due to logistics and just plain common sense that you are likely to learn more if you have some background and are able to ask questions.

As a side point - why don't all you guys with queries about what top tier firms will/won't accept ask the firms? you'd be surprised how receptive a lot of mid and top tier firms are to such questions and wouldn't you rather make sure you got the correct information anyway? because a lot of what people say otherwise is just unsubstantiated personal opinion or guesses based on their experience which may not be a typical one.

 

[MoonlightSonata]

Even courses where the lecture/tute system is used expect reading to be done before just like most courses.... courses that do not expect prior reading are probably more a rarity now due to logistics and just plain common sense that you are likely to learn more if you have some background and are able to ask questions.

Yes, prior reading is always necessary, but in most lecture/tutorial systems you actually get taught core material in lectures (as opposed to simply clarifying it and going through it in more detail, etc).

As a side point - why don't all you guys with queries about what top tier firms will/won't accept ask the firms? you'd be surprised how receptive a lot of mid and top tier firms are to such questions and wouldn't you rather make sure you got the correct information anyway? because a lot of what people say otherwise is just unsubstantiated personal opinion or guesses based on their experience which may not be a typical one.

It is indeed highly useful to seek out the opinions of law firms on these topics.

Of course, the opinions of law students and the opinions of law firms are not mutually exclusive. The opinions of those who have undergone the process of clerkship interviews or experiences with people in the industry can also provide valuable information. So yes, students should not take the word of other students as gospel, but there is value in seeking the experiences and opinions of others. (Particularly given the fact that law firms are not always entirely straightforward or honest.)

 

[MoonlightSonata]

So Top tier firms not only require you to perform well in these commercial law subjects but also achieve an overall distinction average. Is that correct?

There is no absolute rule, but generally a distinction average is what top-tier firms are after.

There are other important factors such as personality, extra-curricular activities, leadership and team responsibilities, etc which also influence their decision of whether to take you on board. Sometimes these can obviously ease a less than perfect set of marks. But generally you're looking at a distinction average.

If you do badly in one commercial subject it's not the end of the world. An employer won't look at your Credit in Contracts and put a line through your name. They are simply factors which all contribute to their decision, and some factors (such as significant commercial courses) are more important than others.

 

[LaraB]

Yes, prior reading is always necessary, but in most lecture/tutorial systems you actually get taught core material in lectures (as opposed to simply clarifying it and going through it in more detail, etc).
It is indeed highly useful to seek out the opinions of law firms on these topics.

Agreed, however, i don't know any friends or siblings who don't have to do required reading prior to the lecture - that was my point - even if you are taught some substance during the lecture, you still have to do work before - it's not as though you can rock up to class and just learn based on that (at least in theory lol)

Of course, the opinions of law students and the opinions of law firms are not mutually exclusive. The opinions of those who have undergone the process of clerkship interviews or experiences with people in the industry can also provide valuable information. So yes, students should not take the word of other students as gospel, but there is value in seeking the experiences and opinions of others. (Particularly given the fact that law firms are not always entirely straightforward or honest.)

Also agreed... i only bothered to point that out since the majority of students who ask these kinds of questions seem very unversed in the workings of top tier firms so it's safe to assume they either haven't done or haven't considered doing so. Makes more sense to try the firm first, then ask students to compare rather than the other way around

 

[pmtennis]

good points here....i will do