Journey to a TC

[sleepylawyer]

Hi,

I previously posted on here a while back introducing myself and my journey and now I have come to a very important milestone in this journey, my first application cycle.

As a penultimate year law student, I am looking to apply to a few vacation schemes this year, I have selected the following firms as they align with my interests and I meet the academic requirements for them.

- Macfarlanes
- Freshfields
- Clifford Chance
- Akin Gump
- Linklaters
- Herbert Smith Freehills
- Milbank
- Skadden

I understand the level of competitiveness involved in each and every one of these firms but through all the hours I have dedicated towards my career, the research, the events and every person who I have met, some of whom have told me my dream was unrealistic, others who have been in my shoes and helped motivate me towards it, I believe that after all that, something certainly has to workout.

The firms above take applications on a non-rolling basis which means I will have a bit more time in terms of spacing out when I want to send them out, I have made a timetable on how I will work on each application and when, meaning I have enough time to dedicate for all of them evenly, my next steps are to work on my commercial awareness and Watson Glaser abilities, whilst balancing my time for university and BIUCAC, a commercial awareness competition which rewards its winners with great opportunities within the legal field.

That is what this thread will involve in a nutshell , I will try to update it regularly, not only as a way to keep myself in check but also in case anyone has any questions or would like to share any advice.

 

[Andrei Radu]

Hi,

I previously posted on here a while back introducing myself and my journey and now I have come to a very important milestone in this journey, my first application cycle.

As a penultimate year law student, I am looking to apply to a few vacation schemes this year, I have selected the following firms as they align with my interests and I meet the academic requirements for them.

- Macfarlanes
- Freshfields
- Clifford Chance
- Akin Gump
- Linklaters
- Herbert Smith Freehills
- Milbank
- Skadden

I understand the level of competitiveness involved in each and every one of these firms but through all the hours I have dedicated towards my career, the research, the events and every person who I have met, some of whom have told me my dream was unrealistic, others who have been in my shoes and helped motivate me towards it, I believe that after all that, something certainly has to workout.

The firms above take applications on a non-rolling basis which means I will have a bit more time in terms of spacing out when I want to send them out, I have made a timetable on how I will work on each application and when, meaning I have enough time to dedicate for all of them evenly, my next steps are to work on my commercial awareness and Watson Glaser abilities, whilst balancing my time for university and BIUCAC, a commercial awareness competition which rewards its winners with great opportunities within the legal field.

That is what this thread will involve in a nutshell , I will try to update it regularly, not only as a way to keep myself in check but also in case anyone has any questions or would like to share any advice.

Hey @Tallat, I just wanted to firstly thank you for creating this thread - I think it will be really valuable for our community members to see how you progress on your journey throughout the year. Also, to mention the perhaps cliche but still very true piece of advice that you should never let other people tell you your dream is unrealistic. In my vacation schemes with top US and MC firms, I have seen people from all varieties of backgrounds and circumstances succeed - not only the straight 1.1s Oxbridge type of candidates.

In my own journey, I struggled a lot with self-doubt. In my first application cycle I was rejected at first stage in every single one of my applications and I begun to wonder whether or not I was good enough for this. However, I managed to use my frustration as a source of motivation and to come back more determined than ever before. Subsequently, I became more successful than I could have ever dreamed to in my applications and certainly more than anyone expected me to. When asked about what led to all of this success in one of my final TC interviews, I realised it had only been one thing: determination. There weren't any moments of pure brilliance or in which I demonstrated any extraordinary abilities. I was fundamentally the same person I was a year ago when I was getting rejected everywhere. The one thing that changed was how serious, motivated, and organized I managed to keep myself throughout the cycle.

All that is to say, none of this would have been possible if I had listened to the people who were telling me to lower and recalibrate my ambitions. So my advice to you is to stick by your plan and to know your worth regardless of what others might say !

 

[sleepylawyer]

Update #2

Hi, it has been a week since my last post, and as promised here is my update to how the journey is going, quite few changes have been made to my strategy going into this application cycle, I am still trying to do further research into these firms, making sure I don't leave things out, things that could hold weight in support of what I will be discussing in the application questions.

It is certainly stressful, trying to balance applications with academics and every other responsibility especially when they all matter, having a few assignments coming up for my modules I have decided to tone down on the app work and focus on them, meaning I should be able to put all my energy into the applications come next month.

On a positive note, I have been moved into the interview stage for a fieldfisher application, meaning I have to get that done and could potentially be moved onto the next stage when the recruitment team take a look at both the test results and the application.

For now, I will try to stay consistent with research and doing those questions, on the side trying to practice the Watson Glaser (would appreciate if anyone has any advice for it) and yeah that is all from me for today, see you!

 

[Andrei Radu]

Update #2

Hi, it has been a week since my last post, and as promised here is my update to how the journey is going, quite few changes have been made to my strategy going into this application cycle, I am still trying to do further research into these firms, making sure I don't leave things out, things that could hold weight in support of what I will be discussing in the application questions.

It is certainly stressful, trying to balance applications with academics and every other responsibility especially when they all matter, having a few assignments coming up for my modules I have decided to tone down on the app work and focus on them, meaning I should be able to put all my energy into the applications come next month.

On a positive note, I have been moved into the interview stage for a fieldfisher application, meaning I have to get that done and could potentially be moved onto the next stage when the recruitment team take a look at both the test results and the application.

For now, I will try to stay consistent with research and doing those questions, on the side trying to practice the Watson Glaser (would appreciate if anyone has any advice for it) and yeah that is all from me for today, see you!

Hi @Tallat and first of all congrats on already progressing to the interview stage, that's amazing! As for practicing for the WG, there were two posts in which I discussed my top tips for WG preparation generally and specifically for the inferences and assumptions section. You may find them useful, I've quoted them here:

Hi Lauren, my top tip for the WG is to read really carefully the instructions for each section and note them down in a number of short bullet points, which you can then go back to when having difficulty during the assessment. The biggest mistake I've seen people make with the WG is to treat it as a general critical thinking (IQ style) test and therefore rely too much on pure intuition when choosing the answer. I have found that an intuitive answer could be right in some sections and not in other. I have tended to score quite highly on the WG and my focus has been on the precise boundaries of the criteria given for each section - what can be assumed vs what can be inferred vs what can be deducted all have slightly different meanings, just as 'true', 'probable', 'beyond reasonable doubt', 'logically certain' all have slightly different meanings. The difference between the candidates who score highly and those who score at our under average will likely depend on an ability to notice those fine distinctions.

As for top tips for the inferences section, I have copy pasted bellow the information sheet I used. Besides tips to keep in mind, it has some summary of the 'test' I mentally go through when deciding on an answer:

Tips:

• If you don’t know the meaning of a word, try and figure out from its context.
• Notice the difference between qualifiers (e.g. some, most) and extreme qualifiers (always/none).

Test:

• True: The inference is explicit in the passage; if the inference is inferable from the passage (solely from the passage and without broader reference to general knowledge).
• Probably True: If the statement does not directly suggest the inference is true, but suggests it is likely (>50%) to be the case; or if the inference is based on common knowledge + information in the passage.
• More information required: Information you are asked is simply not given in the passage, with no grounds for correctly inferring the likelihood of the truth or falsity of the statement; also, generally if the inference is opinionated.
• Probably false: if the statement does not directly suggest the inference is false, but suggests it is likely (>50%) to be the false; or if the inference is false based on common knowledge + information in the passage.
• False: The inference directly contradicts something mentioned in the statement, or if the inference misinterprets the statement

This information sheet has been partly based on an excellent course made by the TCLA team on WG preparation. If you haven't already, I highly encourage you to watch it here.

Regarding your WG struggles, the way I prepared for it was by creating a sheet of crucial information for each type of assessment and having that in front of me. I copied bellow the bullet points I had down, you may find them useful:

Assumptions = unstated piece of information which must be true for the statement in question to be true.

• Do not apply your own general knowledge or moral standards that are not included in the statement.
• Do not generalise.
• This section tests whether the statement in question assumes something, not whether you can assume something from the statement.
• Don’t conflate ‘assumable’ with ‘probable’.
• The test:
• Identify the premises and the conclusion.
• Does the conclusion logically follow from the premises?
• If not, does the assumption offered validate the conclusion? Is it a necessity for the assumption to be true in order that the conclusion of the statement logically follows from the premise?
• Apply the ‘Inverse Test’: negate the assumption and if the conclusion is damaged, the assumption is correct.

This notes were partly based on an excellent course provided by TCLA, I highly recommend taking a look here if you haven't already.

Finally, I wanted to wish you best of look in your application journey, I'm looking forward to seeing your progress!