BrightSparks Forum

Go Back   BrightSparks Singapore Scholarship & Higher Education Forum > Career Issues > Career Issues > Law
Click Here if you forgot your password.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-21-2008, 05:17 PM   #11
eugenechh
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

5500+ views for a forum like this. LOL...

Last edited by eugenechh; 08-24-2008 at 03:38 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2008, 10:07 PM   #12
thinker
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2
thinker has a neutral reputation
Default Comparing Uni Prestige

Quote:
Originally Posted by bridgehead View Post
if u've got the time/effort to question him back, y not give him an overview of overseas law

List of Approved Law Schools under the Legal Profession Rules
UK universities
Birmingham, Bristol, Cambridge, Durham, Exeter, Leeds, Leicester, Liverpool, London (King's College London, London School of Economics, Queen Mary & Westfield College, School of Oriental and African Studies, University College London), Manchester, Nottingham, Oxford, Sheffield, Southampton and Warwick

Australian universities
ANU, Flinders, Melbourne, Monash, Murdoch, New South Wales, Queensland, Sydney, Tasmania and Western Australia

New Zealand universities
Auckland and Victoria (Wellington)

USA universities
Columbia, Harvard, Michigan and NYU

keep in mind that to practise in SG, you'll need to get at least a 2:1, and you need to complete a one year diploma in SG law on your return

generally its better to go to UK for law, because the legal systems are more similar (since ours originated from theirs) and they're generally more recognised than Aus/NZ unis due to UK being the birthplace of common law and UK unis part of this long and rich heritage....for the US, keep in mind that med and law are postgrad degrees, you will have to complete a 4 year degree, work for 1-2 years, go to law school for 3 years (and besides, there're so few "recognised" US law schools by SG its simply not worth the effort if u intend to come back)

admission requirements wise (i'll talk about UK law schools since its more pertinent)

-oxbridge (u know....if u wanna know more, let me know)
-lse,ucl (3-4As, plus a good personal statement and teacher rec)
-kings, durham, warwick, nottingham etc. (2 As sufficient)

reputation and prestige wise

-oxbridge (u know)
-lse, nus, ucl, kings (this one's really debatable, since i know ppl who cant make it into nus going to kings, ucl, while i also know ppl who've made it to nus but choosing to go to lse, ucl)
-the rest

the thing about prestige is that it opens many doors for you (apart from the legal profession), but once opened, where u go to will depend on your ability

apply thru UCAS (single application for all UK unis, u have 5 choices), fill in your grades, personal statement and teacher rec, the gd thing about UK unis is that ECs don't matter
I've received conditional offer from Bristol, Warwick and Manchester in UK. Which is the considered the most prestigous in the local Law fraternity?

What about Australian universities like Monash and Sdyney - which I also have offers from. How are they compared to the UK ones I mentioned?
thinker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2008, 11:34 PM   #13
patryn33
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: not in SG!!!
Posts: 940
patryn33 has a neutral reputation
Default

ya how Monash and Sdyney stack up against Bristol, Warwick and Manchester?

BTW: is this a good guide?
http://extras.timesonline.co.uk/tol_...AL&subject=LAW
or this better?
http://education.guardian.co.uk/univ...276673,00.html
patryn33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2008, 02:05 PM   #14
LockT31W
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 813
LockT31W has a neutral reputation
Default

^ I've used them before, and I think they are rough guides for the prestige of the universities listed. But to be honest, outside of Oxbridge etc which would of course be it hot demand, law firms care about the class of degree and the difficulty of the course. They take in Australian interns on a regular basis and do hire them, after which the grads compete with one another purely on work performance. Even if there is bias towards lawyers with branded degrees, it's nothing hard work can't overcome.

if you really want rankings, here's one :http://www.australian-universities.c...hool-rankings/
LockT31W is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2008, 07:35 PM   #15
iDeAs
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 92
iDeAs has a neutral reputation
Default

Prestige-wise the general consensus is UK has the edge. Afterall the law we have here & Australia originates from the UK.

Point to note is reading Law in Australia takes 4 years compared to 3 years in the UK resulting in time savings. Also, if you do your sums, you will find the total cost to be more expensive in the Aussie unis you mentioned compared to the UK ones.

One other point you might want to consider is the research ratings. May want to consider the ones with 5* (refer to table below, only 8 unis have 5*)

http://extras.timesonline.co.uk/tol_...AL&subject=LAW

If you have AAB at A level, PM me as I might be ablle to help.

Last edited by iDeAs; 12-14-2008 at 07:48 PM.
iDeAs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2008, 03:39 AM   #16
patryn33
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: not in SG!!!
Posts: 940
patryn33 has a neutral reputation
Default

yes its more costly to study in UK.
the 1yr head start might justify for the extra cost?

I have to agree with LockT31W on this pt "Even if there is bias towards lawyers with branded degrees, it's nothing hard work can't overcome." too bad, not many ppl are willing to start off going against a strong head wind. everyone wants a easier time.
patryn33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2008, 05:20 PM   #17
LockT31W
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 813
LockT31W has a neutral reputation
Default

patryn, i think the previous poster meant that UK unis are both shorter and cheaper. but if hard work and talent can overcome an initial bias towards branded degrees, they can also overcome 1- or even 2-year headstarts by other people. seriously - if you're really good, in 5 or 6 years you'll be ahead of people who got branded degrees or headstarts. nobody's gonna even know the difference.

hard work and talent always win, no matter what - though, of course, talented people with branded degrees are hard to beat in the first place.
LockT31W is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2008, 10:59 AM   #18
thinker
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2
thinker has a neutral reputation
Default

I do agree that with hardwork, one can get past the advantage of branded degrees. However, its nice to know which universities are more highly regarded. I wouldnt consider the legal faternity in Singapore big so when entering the scene its best to have a branded uni to clinch a spot in the top law firms.

I'm not Oxford, Cambridge material. I'm not the top student in school but definately above average. So I hope and feel the need for someone in the scene to shed some light on the "second tier" unis like Bristol, Warwick and Manchester which are still pretty well regarded in UK.

P.S I've done the math. UK is cheaper than Au.

To iDeAs, thanks for your offer. I've actually been offer a place at Warwick and Manchester. Yet to hear from Bristol and rejected by UCL. I think its cause of my LNAT. Regretted nt applying for LSE - they dont need the LNAT
thinker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2008, 11:45 PM   #19
patryn33
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: not in SG!!!
Posts: 940
patryn33 has a neutral reputation
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LockT31W View Post
patryn, i think the previous poster meant that UK unis are both shorter and cheaper.
Amazing man.. ppl here do think UK are shorter and cheaper!
the crowd here is certainly different from HWZ...
to those that consider Warwick, will not take UTAS into consideration. those that do might find Oz cheaper.

esp with this new release in news
http://ph.news.yahoo.com/rtrs/200812...e-0cd41eb.html
Quote:
Aussie dollar may fall below $0.50 - Morgan Stanley
Reuters - Wednesday, December 17

SYDNEY, Dec 17 - The Australian dollar <AUD=> may fall below $0.50 in the first half of 2009 as falling commodity prices and a shortage of funds for private firms tip Australia into a recession, Morgan Stanley said on Wednesday.
Gerard Minack, a Sydney-based Morgan Stanley analyst, said Australia may fall into a deep recession despite an expected fall in interest rates to 2.5 percent from 4.5 percent and government spending to boost growth.

"I am more convinced than ever that there will be a recession, possibly a deep recession," Minack said.

"The economy boomed higher, so the risk is it will bust harder. Our global foreign exchange team expects the Australian dollar to fall below $0.50."

The forecast is one of the most bearish among private sector economists. A Reuters monthly poll of 44 strategists in December showed a median forecast for the Aussie of $0.62 in the next three to six months [ID:nSYD309906].

Minack said Australia's current-account deficit may balloon and could be more difficult to finance as local banks struggle to raise money abroad, as seen in the September quarter when global investors were a net seller of Australian debt.

Cheap foreign funds had played a key role in Australia's booming economy in the last few years, and had helped fuel its red-hot housing market.

He said Australia's terms of trade -- a measure of trade profitability -- is expected to drop to 2005 levels in the next 12-18 months. Minack now expects the economy to contract by 1.2 percent in the fourth quarter of next year.

Minack said the global credit crunch had made it hard for Australian firms, which needed almost 7.5 percent of Australia's GDP in funding in the last financial year, to borrow money. This will force firms to either cut costs, raise equity, or go bust, he said. "Next year we will likely see a sharp increase in corporate failures," he said.
patryn33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2008, 03:51 PM   #20
iDeAs
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 92
iDeAs has a neutral reputation
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thinker View Post
I do agree that with hardwork, one can get past the advantage of branded degrees. However, its nice to know which universities are more highly regarded. I wouldnt consider the legal faternity in Singapore big so when entering the scene its best to have a branded uni to clinch a spot in the top law firms.

I'm not Oxford, Cambridge material. I'm not the top student in school but definately above average. So I hope and feel the need for someone in the scene to shed some light on the "second tier" unis like Bristol, Warwick and Manchester which are still pretty well regarded in UK.

P.S I've done the math. UK is cheaper than Au.

To iDeAs, thanks for your offer. I've actually been offer a place at Warwick and Manchester. Yet to hear from Bristol and rejected by UCL. I think its cause of my LNAT. Regretted nt applying for LSE - they dont need the LNAT
If quite happy with the offers received, just go for it. These are still good universities with little seperating them from each other in terms of reputation or employability, ie its unlikely one is going to get the job just because the person comes from a particular uni

Unlike for example Southampton which is well known for those who wish to specialise in Maritime Law, these unis doesn't seem to have any particular niche areas of stregth which they possess. But that is not a concern.
iDeAs is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +8. The time now is 06:09 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.