TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2024-25

[Amma Usman]

Hiya @BobThebIlly

First off, well done on those impressive scores for assumptions (88%) and evaluating arguments (100%). Those are fantastic and show you’ve really nailed those sections! Let’s focus on the “drawing conclusions” part and see how you can improve in the short time you have.

The Watson Glaser tests your ability to draw conclusions in two specific sections - the deduction section, as well as the inference section.

Deductions: This section tests your ability to make a deduction. With deductions, you are trying to find what follows absolutely and necessarily from the premises you are given, and just assume that all those premises are true. For example:

• Premise 1: All cats have whiskers
• Premise 2: Ram is a cat (this premise is false, but for the purpose of your deduction just assume it's true)
• Conclusion: Ram has whiskers

Notice that, in the above argument, if you assume the initial premises are true, then the conclusion follows necessarily and absolutely. This reflects the way you should be 'drawing conclusions' in the deduction section.

The inference section, by contrast, tests your ability to draw conclusions in more probabilistic ways. They are not asking you to identify what follows absolutely or necessarily. Rather, they involve asking what conclusions are probable or strongly suggested by the evidence though not certain (e.g. follow strongly). For the purposes of the inference section, there are two styles of reasoning that you should become familiar with:

1. Inductions: Imagine you’re a scientist studying bird migration. Over the course of several years, you observe that geese in a particular region always migrate south during the winter. Based on these repeated observations, you draw the conclusion "Geese in this region migrate south every winter." This is a good conclusion to draw because it's based on consistent and repeated evidence. However, it’s not certain (there could be a year when some geese don’t migrate for an unexpected reason, like illness or environmental changes). Induction involves drawing conclusions to make predictions about the future or generalisations about a group based on observed patterns. To understand whether an inference is a strong one, you'll also want to familiarise yourself with the ways people get inductions wrong. These include, but are not limited to:
   • Overgeneralising: This occurs when someone draws a broad conclusion based on too few examples. For instance, seeing two aggressive dogs and concluding that all dogs are aggressive is an overgeneralisation. The sample size is too small to justify the conclusion.
     
     
   • Sampling Bias: Drawing conclusions from an unrepresentative sample can lead to faulty reasoning. For example, surveying only a small group of people from one region and assuming their preferences reflect an entire population’s preferences is misleading.
     
     
   • Ignoring Counterexamples: Inductive reasoning requires considering exceptions, but people sometimes disregard counterexamples that weaken their conclusions. For instance, concluding that "all swans are white" without accounting for black swans ignores evidence that challenges the generalisation. Pay attention to whether the question stem and information you're being offered provides any potential counter evidence.
     
     
   • Confusing causation and correlation: People often assume that because two things happen together, one causes the other. For example, observing that ice cream sales increase in summer alongside shark attacks might lead someone to wrongly conclude that eating ice cream causes shark attacks. In reality, both are linked to a third factor: hot weather.
2. Abductions: This involves selecting the most likely explanation based on the available evidence. For example, if you find fur on your couch and a chewed slipper, you might reasonably conclude that your dog is responsible. While other explanations are logically possible (e.g. such as a neighbour's cat sneaking into your house unnoticed to chew the slipper and shed fur on the couch) - these are far less plausible, especially if you have a dog at home. Abductive reasoning is particularly useful in situations where the evidence is incomplete or ambiguous. It allows us to make practical, reasonable conclusions by focusing on the explanation that best fits the facts. This approach is commonly used in problem-solving, diagnosing issues, and decision-making, as it prioritises what is most likely rather than what is merely possible.

Appreciating these different ways of 'drawing a conclusion' is important because you want to ensure that you're using the appropriate form of reasoning depending on the section you're working on. Mistaking one for another can lead to choosing the wrong answers in that section.

Hope this helps and my apologies in advance for the length of my reply!

Quick WG Assumption Q:

For humankind to survive, it must colonise other planets.
Assumption - There will be a time when the Earth can no longer sustain human life.

Am I right in saying that an assumption has been made here?

The only thing I can think of against this is that Earth may very well sustain human life, but not be sufficient. Then again, that would mean that it technically cannot sustain human life, and therefore, the assumption is made.

Also, if I were to invert this: There will be a time when the Earth can sustain human life, then the proposed statement becomes redundant, which should logically indicate that there is an assumption, no?

3.30 am yk, I hate these damn tests.

I have quoted a past post @Ram Sabaratnam has made on the WG (deductions) to help. I’m sure he’ll have more insights on how to tackle this assumption-type question too.

 

[trainee4u]

I got an email just now inviting me to MCQ'S.

so did I.

Big question is did anyone get PFOed/not invited?

It says:

This exercise involves answering 20 multiple choice questions to test your general commercial awareness.
These questions will cover areas such as:
Organisations and people e.g. “who is the CEO of…?”
Commercial concepts e.g. “what is a debt?”
Financial instruments e.g. “what is a bond?”
Global finance e.g. “the Euro is valued against...?” [not sure what this one means, market sentiment, economy size, military might, etc?]
All questions will have multiple choice answers to choose from, you must select the correct answer. You will be required to complete the exercise within 4 minutes. You must complete this exercise by 1pm on 31 March.

 

[bluescarf]

Hill Dickinson AC invite just now!! So happy, my first this year!

 

[gazdgazd11]

Hill Dickinson AC invite just now!! So happy, my first this year!

Congrats! What time did you get the email if you don’t mind

 

[bluescarf]

Congrats! What time did you get the email if you don’t mind

Thanks, it was 15:15!

 

[tomaspessanha]

Has anyone been rejected by mishcon post-vi?

 

[tomaspessanha]

And has anyone heard back from Paul Hastings?

 

[legallyells]

Hill Dickinson AC invite just now!! So happy, my first this year!

Same see you there!! 🥳

 

[trainee4u]

so did I.

Big question is did anyone get PFOed/not invited?

It says:

This exercise involves answering 20 multiple choice questions to test your general commercial awareness.
These questions will cover areas such as:
Organisations and people e.g. “who is the CEO of…?”
Commercial concepts e.g. “what is a debt?”
Financial instruments e.g. “what is a bond?”
Global finance e.g. “the Euro is valued against...?” [not sure what this one means, market sentiment, economy size, military might, etc?]
All questions will have multiple choice answers to choose from, you must select the correct answer. You will be required to complete the exercise within 4 minutes. You must complete this exercise by 1pm on 31 March.

Just did the test.

It was pretty easy, but I was spending too much time on the questions and managed to get #17 wrong due to rushing, and ran out of time on #20. Not sure if it let me submit or not, but I just picked randomly and gave the wrong answer anyway. 18/20, not sure what their benchmark is.....

 

[gazdgazd11]

Thanks, it was 15:15!

Just got one too xx congrats

 

[j.a55293]

Has anyone still not heard back from Winston & Strawn? Not sure what to expect bc I saw both WG invites and PFO's yesterday.

 

[User5678]

Hill Dickinson AC invite just now!! So happy, my first this year!

Congratulations to you and everyone who got invited, best of luck

If you don’t mind me asking which group were you allocated and when is ur ac?

@bluescarf
@gazdgazd11 @Anon Lawyer

 

[legallady123]

Whats going on with WBD? Has anyone tried emailing? Its quite frustrating that they said we would hear back by the 7th of March and they still havent provided outcomes.

I did email them two weeks ago asking when we should expect to hear back and they said they were still working their way through applications and would aim to get back to people within a couple of weeks. So hopefully it will be this week or next!

 

[johnnysins]

Has anyone still not heard back from Winston & Strawn? Not sure what to expect bc I saw both WG invites and PFO's yesterday.

I think it's good to not have gotten a response yet, typically WG invites are staggered over days/weeks and not sent out instantly all at once so "no news is good news" (fingers crossed for your receiving a WG!)

 

[AlegalA]

Does anyone have insights on DACB's AC, or the firm in general? They don't have that many exterior resources bar Legal Cheek, and although I'm going through their website I still feel like I'm missing some extra details...

Thank you!!

 

[gazdgazd11]

Congratulations to you and everyone who got invited, best of luck

If you don’t mind me asking which group were you allocated and when is ur ac?

@legallyells @bluescarf
@gazdgazd11

Hey, thanks. It’s marine in London / 22 April

 

[trainee4u]

Three first-stage PFOs so far today: Arnold & Porter, K&L Gates, and Brown Rudnick.

Also a second-stage SHL test from Devonshires. Annoying scheduling etc. task Only got to question 21 of 24.

so apparently this was good enough, got email for Teams interview.

 

[Anon Lawyer]

Hill Dickinson AC!

 

[Mayooshi]

Michelmores online assessment invite

Has anyone completed this and can give any tips or insight?

 

[Overthinker123!]

Missing the first day could be difficult.

Can you ask the MC firm to move your final round interview date instead?

Hi Jessica,

Unfortunately, I have already rescheduled the interview already, so I don't think I could do it again.

Sorry for the late reply. I was waiting for the early careers to get back to me, as they had mentioned to me, before reaching out for further advice. However, I have not yet received any email or further communication since the offer call on Friday. How long would I normally have to wait for email confirmation following a phone call offer?

Thanks in advance!