A friend of mine who also has a Desmond like me, has decided to undertake a Masters Degree by distance learning at a well regarded university in the hope that it will boost her chances of Pupillage. I would be interested to hear your views on this, in particular anybody of has been involved with a pupillage committee.
Her game plan is to work for LPC (see previous post) and gain some experience whilst doing the Masters at the weekends. She asked me what I thought of her plan and I told her that if she is comfortable with it, then she should go for it. I told her that I would ask the readers of this blog for their views, comments welcome.
13 comments:
If your friend can undertake a Masters it would probably have a positive effect on her pupillage applications. It is quite common, it seems, for recent entrants to the profession to have taken postgraduate degrees too (that may depend to some extent on the area of practice she is interested in). I suspect it would be especially helpful if your friend is a 'non-conventional' entrant to the profession. The only observation I would make is that I don't know whether there is a perceived difference between distance learning and attending a taught course (by which I mean 'snob value' - unpalatable I know)) - this may be worth investigating further. Finally I would only recommend undertaking such a course of action if the course is one which actually interests your friend and one which she can devote sufficient time to to do justice to it. On balance I think it would probably be a positive thing. It certainly might give her an edge, develop any specific legal interests further, and demonstrate a genuine commitment to a legal career, something which all chambers want to see. This is, of course, my own biased view (!) having undertaken this course of action myself. However, I am sure that it helped me... L2B :-)
Like all things I think having an MA will make a marginal but not a decisive impact on your chances of getting pupillage. In order to be successful in getting to interview stages your CV needs to hit a tipping point. I knew someone with a 2:2 failed his BVC on the first attempt who decided to do an LLM. After a long hard slog managed to find pupillage in a very bad set. I did an MA and honestly dont think it made much, if any, difference to my applications.
A person needs to make their own decision whether a year of hard work and further student debt is worth it.
Ah - learned opinion seems to be split down the middle on this one!
These days the poor old prospective barrister is expected to add more and more by way of qualifications to their list of Very Clever and Impressive Things with which to Impress Chambers, and as far as I can see the Ante in this respect has most deinfately been upped. It now alsmot seems de rigeur that barristers possess a post graduate qualification, quite often in their chosen legal speciality to add even more meat to their doubtless subtantial CV's, and I dont think this is a bad thing; In fact when I finish the BVC, I'll probably go off and do one myself!
However, a worrying trend within my BVC cohort is not to undertake an LLM but to go the whole hog and start a Ph.D. I wonder if this a trend that may increase given that, in conversation with SilentWriter recently( who has decided to pursue this route)some of his legal acquaintances are dismissive of LLM'S as ( and I quote) "Chalk n Talk Degrees" or "A 4th Year of Law School"
As someone with any eye to an LLM, I hope this isnt really the case!
TB makes a valid point about a CV needing to "hit a tipping point" (the point being that if it doesn't, you won't even get as far as an interview) - it is this balance which may be tipped in your favour if you are in possession of a postgraduate degree. Once you are in front of a pupillage committee I doubt it makes very much difference at all (unless you can use it to demonstrate a particular interest in an area of law which may be relevant to their chambers). If you are a student going to the Bar from a conventional starting point (ie school followed by university followed by BVC followed by pupillage) then it may have less impact. If, however, you are a mature student who has perhaps not attained a level of performance at school which is commensurate with fellow "pupillage hunters" (common among mature students) it becomes necessary to find a way of evening the balance, and this is one way of going about it. As far as a doctorate is concerned that would only seem to be necessary for those aspiring to a career in academia (and even then it is not necessarily a pre-requisite) - unless one intends to practice in a very specialist area of law it would seem to be completely unnecessary for a career at the Bar!
Great question.
Great answers.
Hope more people contribute to this as I am considering a Masters.
I am a tenant at an employment law/PI set. We do take into account relevant Masters degrees in marking OLPAS forms, and if your friend has a 2:2 it would make quite a significant difference to her marks (although of course it doesn't mean that she would be guaranteed - or even likely to get - an interview; there are many other important factors). Possession of a postgraduate degree makes less of a difference where applicants have a 2:1 or First under our system, although I am sure that other chambers use different marking schemes.
Lawyer-2-be - you are right that, certainly in our chambers, a postgraduate degree will not work in your favour at interview, apart, obviously, from the academic edge it may give you. Its direct advantages are limited to the OLPAS form stage, but that is often the hardest hurdle to get over.
If anyone is thinking of doing a Masters, I would suggest firstly that you do it in Law (to demonstrate a commitment, and because some chambers - ours included - may not award any extra marks for postgrad degrees not related in some way to the law), and secondly that you try to do it in an area in which you would like to practise. That will not only give you extra knowledge for interview, but also demonstrate your commitment to chambers' particular area of law - something that we (and I am sure others) do take into account when marking OLPAS forms.
Doing both the LLM and LPC full time?
That sounds like a ery big (if not impossible commitment)
The careers advice I've read says that an LLM wasn't much help to bolster a weak 1st degree.
That doesn't seem entirely borne out though by the comments above. Also, Matrix - the only chambers whose OLPAS marking criteria I've seen - award an extra mark for postgrad qualifications. Then again they only interview 2:2 candidates in "exceptional circumstances"
Never made the slightest difference to me unless it was absolutely bang on the area of law the candidate wanted to practice in. Also, if not done at a 'better' University than where you got your first degree (unless Russell Group or equivalent or above) it can simply look like trolling for a better result.
The only exception is the BCL - that always works.
Better off doing something legal but not an MA in my view. Working for the death row prisoners always made an impact on me.
... Much as I would dearly love to work with Death Row Prisoners, I'm not sure I'm prepared to pay for the privilage......
Just one question
Even if your academic backround is weak (I have a desmond) if you get a VC for the BVC what possible difference will a Masters make???
BVC is virtually a Masters degree. It's practical, skills based and of more value to future barristers and chambers. Don't waste your money on 'another' masters degree guys. Any benefit is theoretical but it will still be a waste of time and money.
My friend says thanks to everyone.
This and Simon Myerson's blog prompted me to do a bit of research which I have just put up at http://publaw.blogspot.com/2007/08/pupillage-and-postgraduate.html
If you get a chance let me know what you think and good luck to you and your friend with your quests.
Post a Comment