Hi, thank you for your response! By "more developed" do you mean it should be explained in more detail? Or should there be additional layers of reasons added? And can the reasoning mentioned in the application be mentioned at all in the interview, or will that seem repetitive?
Your reason for choosing law is unlikely to have significantly changed by the time you reach an interview. I would use your original answer as a skeleton and build on it. That could mean a more detailed explanation, or you may have had additional experiences that could add value.
For example:
- In an initial application you could have written that you chose law because of your studies which made you seek further experiences in the legal sector. In an interview, youcould add more depth to this by:
- Building on this explanation:
- What did you study?
- Why did you study that?
- Why did it interest you in law?
- What were your next steps to ensure law was right for you?
- What experiences in the legal sector did you seek out?
- Why did you enjoy/not enjoy these experiences?
- How did these experiences shape the type of law you wanted to do?
- How have these experiences shaped your understanding of what lawyers do?
- Adding to this explanation:
- What experiences have you done since this application?
- Did you miss anything out in your explanation? Was there a step between choosing law for your studied and seeking further experiences?
Obviously this differs depending on what application question you are referring to. For example, if you had to answer a question on a news story, it is probably less relevant by the time you get to interview. You will want to know how that story has developed and you will probably want another more recent news story up your sleeve.
Hopefully that's a bit clearer? I'm no expert though.