Thank you so much! This is so helpful and I will slowly digest it : )Hi @MayaM0921 and thanks for the kind words! To firstly deal with the structure of the 'Why you?' answer, I think what you want is something like this:
As for the second part of your question (regarding what skills/examples to pick) I think you have to be strategic in balancing both trying to have the most convincing possible 'why me' answer and in not boxing yourself in a position where you will be forced to repeat yourself. My strategy was to first come up with the best possible answer I could for the 'Why the firm' question, then the best possible answer for the 'Why the firm' question, then the best possible answer to the 'Why commercial law', and only then draft my 'Why you?' answer. This was because I found that only a few of my experiences and achievements, could be connected to firm USPs, slightly more could be connected to my why commercial reasoning, but a lot of them could be used for showcasing a relevant skill or attribute.
- Give a high level summary of what your answer will be, something like 'There are three reasons why you should offer me a place: my critical thinking skills, my organizational skills, and my teamwork abilities, all of which are essential for a trainee solicitor'.
- Take the first skill/ability/attribute that you mentioned, and explain to the firm how an experience or achievement of yours demonstrates it. Use the STAR structure when walking the interviewer through the experience.
- Explain how the skill/ability/attribute is relevant for the job of a trainee solicitor.
- Repeat steps 2 and 3 for the other skills/abilities/attributes.
- Conclude by once again giving a short summary of what your answer has been, something like 'So, to conclude, my experiences demonstrate I possess excellent critical thinking, organizational and teamwork skills, and this makes me an ideal fit for the job'.
Beyond that, in drafting my 'Why you' answer I would just use the most impressive leftover experiences, and maybe reference one or two of the experiences in the 'Why commercial law' or 'Why firm' answers if particularly impressive. While you could still be asked a competency question in the interview that forces you to be repetitive, there's no way to eliminate that risk, as there's no way of predicting what competency you will be asked about. However, I wouldn't worry too much about it. Firstly, the interviewers know candidates will not have an unlimited list of experiences to leverage, and will definitely not mind repeating one if you also consider it and discuss it from a different angle. Secondly, while this was something I worried about a lot before my interviews (as at least compared to some of my peers, my CV was not as full) in practice it was not a situation I often found myself in. If anything, the opposite happened more, in that I would not get to speak about more than 2-3 experiences and sometimes I would finish the interview without having mentioned some of my most impressive achievements.
-
💬 Ask Graduate Recruitment Your Questions!
Hey Guest, do you have a question for graduate recruitment? Gemma Baker from Willkie is live to answer your questions!
-
Get line-by-line feedback on your applications, access to our weekly application workshops, and our law firm profiles. Use the coupon code 'SIXWEEKS' at checkout for 10% off.
TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2024-25
- Thread starter Jessica Booker
- Start date
-
- Tags
- vacation scheme
Help pls - what does this answer mean in TW's app?
Please provide details on your decision and elaborate on the reasons behind your choice. {Provide answer of 2500 characters}
Is this re the use of chat GPT? (q above this one is: * Did you seek assistance from ChatGPT when completing this application? (Please note that there is not a right or wrong answer to this question, we are focusing on your integrity to this process).
Please provide details on your decision and elaborate on the reasons behind your choice. {Provide answer of 2500 characters}
Is this re the use of chat GPT? (q above this one is: * Did you seek assistance from ChatGPT when completing this application? (Please note that there is not a right or wrong answer to this question, we are focusing on your integrity to this process).
I would assume that it is re the use of AI
Jones Day had this question on their app as well. I got a PFO in the end but said: "While I chose not to use AI tools in completing my application, I fully support their integration in the legal sector and application process. Jones Day’s white paper on AI regulation highlights the firm’s recognition of AI’s transformative potential, particularly in transactional, litigation, and compliance contexts. AI can streamline processes, provide strategic insights, and mitigate errors for applicants managing multiple applications per cycle. Embracing AI aligns with Jones Day's innovative approach, ensuring efficient solutions in a competitive landscape while maintaining high legal services and recruitment standards. The content should always authentically reflect the applicant's experiences with an AI-enhancing structure".
W&C AC! I had a question about the questions to ask during the interview, as it would be with the grad rec and an associate. What are some examples of questions that I could ask the both of them?
rip was going to apply today but guessing there's probably not much point...
issa knife when you really want to apply to a firm but they have the worst possible application questions
when they ask about a time you showed courage/resilience... like applying in itself is a terrifying process thank you very much surely this covers it
You have to score lowest somewhere, I wouldn't think much about it.
I need some Watson Glaser advice.
Recently, on practice tests, I have been scoring 75 - 78% overall. I'm very confident with the arguments, interpretation and deduction sections, scoring close to if not exactly 100%. Assumptions took me a worrying amount of time to get over but I now score 75% and above nonetheless.
I struggle the most however with Inferences. It's where I lose the most marks. A lot of the time, my answer is close to the correct one. For example, I'll put insufficient data when its is probably true, or I'll put probably false when it's false. Typically, my second guess is the correct answer instead. I use the Verbal reasoning tests as practice but I'm scoring 50% to 63% regularly. On my second go it's more 72.5% to 83% but it's because I've taken the test before so I don't see it as much of an improvement.
In short, I dunno if this is a respectable score? I dunno how much more I can keep on practising to improve as deadlines for completing are fixed and impending. Does anyone have any insights to improve on this section, or should I be fine?
I recognise this is all about percentiles more than anything.
Recently, on practice tests, I have been scoring 75 - 78% overall. I'm very confident with the arguments, interpretation and deduction sections, scoring close to if not exactly 100%. Assumptions took me a worrying amount of time to get over but I now score 75% and above nonetheless.
I struggle the most however with Inferences. It's where I lose the most marks. A lot of the time, my answer is close to the correct one. For example, I'll put insufficient data when its is probably true, or I'll put probably false when it's false. Typically, my second guess is the correct answer instead. I use the Verbal reasoning tests as practice but I'm scoring 50% to 63% regularly. On my second go it's more 72.5% to 83% but it's because I've taken the test before so I don't see it as much of an improvement.
In short, I dunno if this is a respectable score? I dunno how much more I can keep on practising to improve as deadlines for completing are fixed and impending. Does anyone have any insights to improve on this section, or should I be fine?
I recognise this is all about percentiles more than anything.
congratulations! did you get the AC? would you mind telling me what questions they asked if you remember?
- Sep 9, 2024
- 438
- 658
I think whether this is desirable or not does depend on the firm. Some firms actively encourage reapplying, whereas others only consider a new application provided you have significantly improved your candidate profile. Unfortunately, it is difficult to determine which category a firm fits in, as unless they advertise it you can only find out by word of mouth.
Personally, I did not and would not advise others to mention it unless you have a good reason to think the firm will like that. If the firm is one that likes people who reapply, it is likely that they know you are reapplying anyway. Thus, the mere fact of your new application (hopefully, in conjunction with a strong 'why the firm' answer) should suffice to show you are really driven to the firm. However, if the firm does not encourage reapplying, you are not doing yourself any favors by notifying/reminding them you have applies in the past. As I see it, the downside risks are greater than the upside opportunities.
- Sep 9, 2024
- 438
- 658
Hi @bangarangbass39 ! Regarding your first question, as to whether this is a respectable score, I think the short answer is yes. A 75-78% overall score should put you well-above the benchmark for most firms. However, this will not be enough to put you heads and shoulders above the crowd when recruiters assess your application + your WG performance holistically. As such, make sure to put a lot of effort into the quality of your research and writing.
As for your second question, I think this depends on how much you have been practicing up to this point and whether there are any good online resources that you have not tried yet. My main bit of advice here is to limit your reliance on purely intuitive judgement and to focus on the technical meanings of the terms describing each category. While the technical meaning has the same extension as the intuitive meaning many times, there are cases that are specifically selected in the test where the extensions differ. The ability to spot those differences is part of what will distinguish a good WG performance from a great WG performance.
When I was preparing for the WG I made a word document summarizing the meanings of the key concepts. I have copied here my Inferences section in case you find that useful:
- 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.
I applied to Sidley and NRF for their Winter Vac schemes but am yet to hear back? Is anybody else in this position or should I take this as a rejection?
Similar threads
- Sticky
- Locked
- Sticky
- Sticky
