I got cut off when applying to Gateley in early 2023 and also ended one video saying 'and um things' and still ended up with the Vac Scheme (in my defence, I was so nervous as it was my first VI and first cycle, haha). So, while not ideal, I don't think it's the end of the world!
-
How confident are you in your knowledge of the core LLB/PGDL subjects, including Contract, Tort, Trusts, Land, Criminal, and Public Law?
TCLA is teaming up with BPP for a free interactive event designed to refresh your fundamentals, especially for those interested in or planning to take the SQE. We'll practise multiple choice SQE questions, with prizes for the highest scoring participants!
Register Here
TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2024-25
- Thread starter Jessica Booker
- Start date
-
- Tags
- vacation scheme
I got cut off when applying to Gateley in early 2023 and also ended one video saying 'and um things' and still ended up with the Vac Scheme (in my defence, I was so nervous as it was my first VI and first cycle, haha). So, while not ideal, I don't think it's the end of the world!
- Sep 9, 2024
- 691
- 1,258
In this case it's likely not going to be weighed too heavily. Your progression will probably come down more to how much the recruiters like both your substantive points and the way in which you articulated them.
- Sep 9, 2024
- 691
- 1,258
I'm not sure whether Cleary has any particular CV preferences, but I think using bullet points is widely accepted as common practice for structuring a CV. This is the way I structured mine and was progressed by multiple firms.Hi everyone, I have a question regarding Cleary's CV - should we opt for bullet points, or for short prose? Thanks in advance
Paul, Weiss Open Day PFO
Need to keep reminding myself it takes one YES!
Is anyone still waiting to hear back from NRF post-test? Completed the Arctic Shores assessment on 23 September, and haven't heard back since...
- Sep 9, 2024
- 691
- 1,258
I would say what is best to ask depends on (i) what your interests are; (ii) who is interviewing you; and (iii) what has previously been discussed in the interview:
- Firstly, you want to ask something that you actually care about. Whoever is interviewing you likely has significant experience with the process and will therefore be able to see whether you are being genuine or just asking a question for the sake of it. Thus, when you think of a potential question, first ask yourself why do you think the answer might matter to you. In fact, I think it would be good if in the interview you mention the reason why you care about the question before you actually ask it - this will directly show the interview that you have put thought into it. An example of questions that you may choose to ask could be questions relating to your 'Why the firm' motivations. For instance, if a a strong reputation in one practice area, you may ask: how has the firm managed to build such a strong practice? what are plans for the future of the practice? are there any relevant challenges and opportunities in that practice's market, and how is the firm planning to respond to that? how can the firm's practice be differentiated from competitors with similar reputations? etc.
- Secondly, you want to tailor your question to the audience as much as possible. Some questions may be more appropriate for an associate, some for a junior partner, and some for a senior partner. For instance, questions relating to junior culture and training experience are great for associates, questions around progression and the different tasks and responsibilities at different seniority levels in the firm would be great for a junior partner, while questions about the firm's strategy, client base, and market reputation when compared to competitors would be great for the more senior partners. Moreover, you may not want to ask a disputes partner about the firm's strategy to increase market share in PE, and you may want to avoid asking a transactional partner about details of the firm's newest competition litigation mandate. If possible, tailoring your questions around your interviewer's expertise is optimal.
- Thirdly, you want for your questions to feel natural - you don't want to seem like you came in with a pre-prepared list which you were going to ask regardless of how the interview went. Of course, it is good to show that you have done your research and came prepared. However, you also want to make this section of the interview feel as conversational as possible, as for once you are playing the role of the person doing the asking. The more you can link your questions with what has been touched upon in the interview, the better. Some questions could just be follow-ups to the interviewer's answers to your pre-prepared questions. Some could be just about asking the interviewer to elaborate on some points they touched upon beforehand. However, take care to not be repetitive. Thus, only ask a question if you think it is likely there is a lot more that the interviewer could have to add to the previous discussion.
- What are the key challenges of the non-rotational TC? What are the key differences between the people that you see succeed in the non-rotational structure and the people who have difficulties adapting to it?
- Why did the firm decide to depart from the traditional TC model and implement a non-rotational structure? How does the firm benefit from it, and how successful has it been so far?
- How does the firm manage to ensure it retains its collaborative culture if people are competing for work rather than being allocated their work?
- How does the firm see its market position for transactional practices when compared to US rivals? And what are the firm's strategic goals in London in terms of target clients bases and increases in market share?
- How has the firm managed to build its reputation for exceptional advisory (mainly IP) and disputes work as an US firm? Is the firm looking to have a complete full service offering, and if so, are there any further practice areas that the firm is seeking to expand?
Has anyone noticed that Addleshaw Goddard have dropped to one question, last year it was around 4/5 questions.
Not entirely sure but I intuitively think that, if this was the case, then we would have already heard of applicants receiving rejections based on their scores.
I submitted Hogan app late Sep for summer VS. Do we need to follow up with Hogan grad rec if still not receiving WG invite by now?
For those that have done the Dechert written task, did you receive an email confirmation after you submitted? I only had a bubble popping up on my screen saying "your output has been saved and submitted", but the timer wouldn't stop and I also am not redirected to a different page? Is that normal lol pls help
Could anyone who has struggled with SJTs and managed to get successful at them offer any insights on how they did it?
This is my 4th application cycle and I typically pass the application stage when there is no SJT involved, but whenever there is an SJT at any stage of the process, I always get rejected. I paid for many practice tests and usually score between 80-90% (selecting them based on the specific providers used by each firm). However, when it comes to the real tests I always fail, even though I account for the different values each firm has. I have not passed a single SJT in the past 3 years, and at this point, I do not know what I am doing wrong.
I know I should instead focus on firms that do not have an SJT in their recruitment process, but many of them do. It's really frustrating that I will have to overlook firms I have a genuine interest in due to this weakness of mine that, despite my efforts, I can't seem to improve...
My only remaining theory is that I choose too many 'extreme' options. For example, if a statement says, 'I proactively ask for feedback,’ I’ll pick ‘strongly agree’ because that’s true to me. I read somewhere that test providers could flag individuals who choose these extreme options too often as giving false answers/ being unrealistic - could this be the issue?
I would greatly appreciate any insights on this - thank you!
This is my 4th application cycle and I typically pass the application stage when there is no SJT involved, but whenever there is an SJT at any stage of the process, I always get rejected. I paid for many practice tests and usually score between 80-90% (selecting them based on the specific providers used by each firm). However, when it comes to the real tests I always fail, even though I account for the different values each firm has. I have not passed a single SJT in the past 3 years, and at this point, I do not know what I am doing wrong.
I know I should instead focus on firms that do not have an SJT in their recruitment process, but many of them do. It's really frustrating that I will have to overlook firms I have a genuine interest in due to this weakness of mine that, despite my efforts, I can't seem to improve...
My only remaining theory is that I choose too many 'extreme' options. For example, if a statement says, 'I proactively ask for feedback,’ I’ll pick ‘strongly agree’ because that’s true to me. I read somewhere that test providers could flag individuals who choose these extreme options too often as giving false answers/ being unrealistic - could this be the issue?
I would greatly appreciate any insights on this - thank you!
Completely understand where you’re coming from. It’s gotten to the point for me where I am actively trying to prioritise firms who do not have any SJT tests. Despite doing all the research and taking into account the firm’s values, I always score low. Would also really appreciate anyone’s insights on how to succeed.
Similar threads
- Sticky
- Locked
- Sticky
- Sticky
