To add a different perspective, at Cambridge majority of STEM subjects but not humanities are graded on a curve, and that curve can be incredibly harsh with the bottom 10% of the year group being forced to get a third, and only top 15% get a first/following 35% getting a 2.1, this means that around half of the year group gets a 2.2 or a 3rd which I always found unfair since many humanities have their lowest ranked student get a 2.1/high 2.2.Wow I've just caught up with this and gone on a whole journey from university debates to Gordon Ramsay memes, I love this forum 🤩
Regarding the RG vs Non-RG universities debate, I was just wondering whether GR typically take subjects into account (beyond the law vs non-law level) as well? I ask because my particular course was so subjective that the highest mark lecturers gave out is 78. This was in a stepped marking system where you could only obtain marks such as 62, 65, 68, and so on. I remember being exasperated at university when seeing friends on courses like maths score consistent 80+ marks, due to the definite answers!
Secondly, again from a non-law perspective, my university did not allow non-law students to join the law society. This meant that, although it was a RG university and there were these opportunities on campus, they were much harder to access and be aware of if you were non-law. For me, that lack of access definitely delayed my decision to pursue law.
I also would like to note that GR aren’t stupid, and they know that there are huge disparities among universities/courses so truly I don’t think academics are all that important in the final decision, and definitely not as important as work experience and written answers from my impression of the application process as I have gotten a 55 in a module and have progressed past the application stage multiple times.