When you're tempted to decline a 'better' University...

[TykeDragon]

So the choices I applied to for law were Warwick (38), Reading (37), Southampton (36), Exeter (36), York (36).

I got my offers through of a surprising 35 from Reading, 36 with 18 at HL for Southampton, 36 from Exeter, and an interview at York, which hasn't been done yet. Haven't heard from Warwick at all.

Now, Warwick has been my top choice and I loved it when I visited. However, Southampton cut in at a close second for me upon visiting, however I recently attended the post offer day. Everyone seemed so happy there, and I really liked the place, the facilities, and the staff I met. I also have an extra convenience with Southampton as it's fairly close to home (about half the distance it is to Warwick, and a quarter of the distance it is to York/Exeter. Only Reading is closer, and it's not by that much.) I was finding myself thinking that if I missed my Warwick offer, or got rejected by Warwick, I wouldn't be too cut up about having to go with Southampton as my insurance.

Does anybody else have these moments where they are tempted to decline their first choice, or the 'better' university? (Although I'm not even sure if warwick is better in terms of employability, I think that Southampton's reputation is catching up.) At any rate, if I get a rejection through I think I wouldn't hesitate in making Southampton my firm and logically make the Reading offer my insurance. I think if I do get the offer, I'll just attend the post offer day and see which impresses me more. Notably, at the Warwick open day I went to, they didn't pick the most interesting person to talk about law, and everybody seemed glazed over.. although I obviously just accepted that it might have just been a poorer choice of speaker and not a reflection on everything else, which I was impressed with.

Anybody have any insights into these universities, or suggestions as to what they think, perhaps from experience? Thanks!

[Arrowhead]

Warwick will open doors for you in terms of employability to a much greater extent than Southampton ever will. You're right in thinking that Southampton is catching up, but they're at least a decade (at minimum) away from the reputation and sheer funds and research being conducted at Warwick.

Assuming you're interested in pursuing a career of a solicitor in the City at a top/reasonably good firm, your chances of being taken seriously are much higher if you go somewhere universally respected as Warwick, as opposed to a place like Southampton where you will only ever be second fiddle.

I never actually thought which university you went to made such a difference, but I was interning at a law firm last summer, Slaughter & May, one of the 'Magic Circle' in the UK. I 'overheard' (re: eavesdropped) on Grad Recruitment, they were basically discussing how they divided up applications: Oxbridge at the top, then LSE and UCL went in one pile just below. All other applications would be automatically rejected unless (1) There was evidence of a first-class degree, AND (2) lots of impressive and respectable work experience.

Warwick would actually get your foot in the door at most good firms, at least to some extent; Southampton, well, you will be fighting an uphill battle.

That's just my two cents.

Arrowhead.

Edited February 10, 2013 by Arrowhead

[TykeDragon]

Thanks for your insight Arrowhead, and heard of Slaughter and May of course! I did suspect that Southampton would be the weaker choice in terms of reputation/employability, it's just that the students I was speaking to there seemed to be doing quite well, were getting their work experiences and training contracts and stuff no worries. However, I am aware of Warwick's better reputation... plus, I quickly learnt not to bother with University League Tables apart from for a rough idea, because they all contradict each other, and the completeuniversityguide suggests that Reading would be a stronger choice for law than Warwick would be. But Warwick and Southampton seemed very close in those charts.

[Arrowhead]

Thanks for your insight Arrowhead, and heard of Slaughter and May of course! I did suspect that Southampton would be the weaker choice in terms of reputation/employability, it's just that the students I was speaking to there seemed to be doing quite well, were getting their work experiences and training contracts and stuff no worries. However, I am aware of Warwick's better reputation... plus, I quickly learnt not to bother with University League Tables apart from for a rough idea, because they all contradict each other, and the completeuniversityguide suggests that Reading would be a stronger choice for law than Warwick would be. But Warwick and Southampton seemed very close in those charts.

You're absolutely right to not give any importance to League Tables and I am 100% with you on that one. But my post above did not stem from League Table prejudice (if that's even a thing), though I can see how you came to that conclusion.

My post above dealt specifically with employers' perspectives on universities' prestige. According to a 2012 League Table - the Complete University Guide, I think - LSE ranked #1 for Law in the UK, according to another one, we were #5. So the discrepancy is obvious. But what makes a lot of difference is what employers think! So if an employer thinks Oxford is the best for Law, well, then it doesn't matter what the League Tables say.

Southampton Law is a great programme, don't get me wrong, they do a lot of work and their students have strong employability statistics, but you also have to look at the kind of employment they're in and check that with your own ambitions.

Do you want to work at a high-end, magic circle, city law firm? Or would you be happy with a smaller, niche firm such as Shoosmiths or Wragge & Co.? Or are you looking for something non-commercial, like family law, then you'd be looking into Dawson Cromwell, for example? Or maybe working in-house - Google; The London Underground; Vodafone Legal? Government Legal Service? Depending on where you want to go and what you want to do and how poignant or competitive your future ambitions are, everything varies for you.

I hope that made sense.

Best,

Arrowhead.

Edited February 11, 2013 by Arrowhead

[TykeDragon]

Makes good sense, and a helpful post. Definitely worth thinking more over... of course an MC firm is the ideal (unlikely as it may be) but would it be wrong to wonder whether being a bit further out from London (ie to Warwick) would have any effect on interactions/opportunities with London firms? Except I'm sure that they must come out to talent-spot / recruit.

[Arrowhead]

Makes good sense, and a helpful post. Definitely worth thinking more over... of course an MC firm is the ideal (unlikely as it may be) but would it be wrong to wonder whether being a bit further out from London (ie to Warwick) would have any effect on interactions/opportunities with London firms? Except I'm sure that they must come out to talent-spot / recruit.

They definitely come out to talent-spot/recruit, just maybe not as much as a London uni because of distance/difficulties? But Oxford and Cambridge are pretty far out of London, all law firms still go there en masse. Don't worry about that too much, if you go to Warwick, that certainly won't be an issue for you, I can guarantee as much.

In retrospect, I am biased towards Warwick, personally. They were my insurance choice and I would've honestly been very happy to have gone there had I not met my LSE offer.

Edited February 11, 2013 by Arrowhead

[TykeDragon]

That's good to hear yeah, I certainly think Warwick has the edge has far as my options go. I also hear that Reading is a step down from my other choices, maybe partly because it's not Russell, but I don't know much about that :/ I'm glad that it shouldn't be a concern as to whether the London firms come out to Warwick to recruit. Still waiting to hear back from them... when is it they have to reply by, March? Hope they reply soon!

Also, how would you say Exeter/York compare to Southampton/Warwick? They seem to have varying feedback. Though obviously you might not be able to answer this question as well as the last one, because Warwick was your insurance, I understand that

[Yahooo!]

What are your thoughts regarding New College of the Humanities?

[TykeDragon]

What, where? If you mean Southampton, they don't count law as a humanity

[Award Winning Boss]

What, where? If you mean Southampton, they don't count law as a humanity

It's a university. Personally, I wouldn't bother with them since they're a London uni that would use similar resources the other universities use and the others don't charge £18,000 a year for tuition.

[TykeDragon]

Oh, thanks AWB, well I guess that answers the question on my thoughts regarding New College then

Edited February 11, 2013 by TykeDragon

[Arrowhead]

Also, how would you say Exeter/York compare to Southampton/Warwick? They seem to have varying feedback. Though obviously you might not be able to answer this question as well as the last one, because Warwick was your insurance, I understand that

York > Southampton > Exeter > Reading (personally and from what I've seen/heard). Edited February 11, 2013 by Arrowhead

[TykeDragon]

Ahh interesting, thanks. That's about what I expected too. I'm assuming Warwick is at the far left!

[Sandwich]

What are your thoughts regarding New College of the Humanities?

Overpriced rip-off with a tiny set of students, celebrity professors who've got many other main pursuits that aren't teaching, no track record of teaching, no reputation and who have god-knows-how integrated themselves into the University of London in order to rob space from the facilities of established and already space-poor institutions - and all sold to prospective students under the shining banner of celebrity.

At least I think that's how they describe it... ;