TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2024-25

[mfuturetrainee]

This was a very interesting read. Thank you for sharing. "I’ve seen [partners] throw things at trainees." I am genuinely nervous for anyone with a snowflake mentality entering this profession. I don't think anything justifies partners treating their juniors this way, but the harsh reality is that this profession is stressful because of the high stakes involved for firms and their clients. I am developing a thick skin now so that I can take constructive, critical or even less-than-polite criticism without internalising victimhood. Otherwise, I will most certainly flunk out of the profession.

I know! I was reading it in actual shock because obviously it would be naive to think this career is not high pressured, but the way some of these lawyers were describing how they were being treated was making me feel nauseous 😭

 

[g.cl.2020344]

any1 still waiting on WC WVS?

 

[xxrr.18]

any1 still waiting on WC WVS?

yep, still waiting. not to be pessimistic but the scheme starts so soon that I think that i should jsut take it as a reection

 

[g.cl.2020344]

yep, still waiting. not to be pessimistic but the scheme starts so soon that I think that i should jsut take it as a reection

lowkey feel the same way- if they are considering us for spring idk why they haven't told us

 

[m12]

has anyone who did the written test for dechert closer to the end of oct / start of November heard back yet?

 

[aspiringfuturetrainee2025]

Sorry can someone help me answer these - i have got most wrong on this one.

All intelligent pupils are members of a diplomatic service. No normal pupil is intelligent. Therefore: Proposed Conclusions:

No member of a diplomatic service is a normal pupil.
Every intelligent pupil takes an active role in the service.
The normal pupil cannot be an active member of a diplomatic service.
Some members of a diplomatic service are abnormal pupils.

 

[V2002]

has anyone who did the written test for dechert closer to the end of oct / start of November heard back yet?

Hi yes, I was genuinely heartbroken in tears when I received the rejection last night.

 

[m12]

Hi yes, I was genuinely heartbroken in tears when I received the rejection last night.

Im so sorry to hear that – keep going, you're one yes away!!

Im wondering if the scheme is full or something did they mention anything?

 

[xxrr.18]

lowkey feel the same way- if they are considering us for spring idk why they haven't told us

someone on the forum who did the a/c on 11 Nov received an offer last week, i did mine way earlier so i don't think they're considering me for any other schemes as winter clearly hadn't filled up yet. i guess just time to move on as annoying as it is

 

[V2002]

Im so sorry to hear that – keep going, you're one yes away!!

Im wondering if the scheme is full or something did they mention anything?

Nope, no feedback either but I reckon they have spaces because they are still inviting people for interviews

 

[g.cl.2020344]

Hi yes, I was genuinely heartbroken in tears when I received the rejection last night.

Ah I'm so sorry to hear this! Stay strong, and think do you really want to work for a firm that leaves you on tender hooks for 5 weeks!

 

[g.cl.2020344]

I did my W.E 15th Oct and still no news

 

[V2002]

Ah I'm so sorry to hear this! Stay strong, and think do you really want to work for a firm that leaves you on tender hooks for 5 weeks!

lol I still want them, even if they don't want me 🤣🤣 Icl my spring applications need to come through

 

[g.cl.2020344]

lol I still want them, even if they don't want me 🤣🤣 Icl my spring applications need to come through

this is so valid!!

 

[xxrr.18]

lol I still want them, even if they don't want me 🤣🤣 Icl my spring applications need to come through

girl that is a situationship you can do better you dont chase you attract

 

[g.cl.2020344]

let's hope for good news for everyone today!!

 

[Tintin06]

Seems, the firm basically owns you. It makes sense given the salary. It helps to have a goal. If you want to buy a house.

Sorry can someone help me answer these - i have got most wrong on this one.

All intelligent pupils are members of a diplomatic service. No normal pupil is intelligent. Therefore: Proposed Conclusions:

No member of a diplomatic service is a normal pupil.
Every intelligent pupil takes an active role in the service.
The normal pupil cannot be an active member of a diplomatic service.
Some members of a diplomatic service are abnormal pupils.

I think Conclusion Follows; Conclusion Follows; Conclusion Does Not Follow; Conclusion Does Not Follow. What's the answer?

 

[Unknowncabbage]

Finally received tests from Mayer Brown! Any tips for them?

 

[sammm10101]

finally have been sent the Mayer Brown tests.
Is anyone else still waiting for HL test for summer?

 

[ashwright]

Sorry can someone help me answer these - i have got most wrong on this one.

All intelligent pupils are members of a diplomatic service. No normal pupil is intelligent. Therefore: Proposed Conclusions:

No member of a diplomatic service is a normal pupil.
Every intelligent pupil takes an active role in the service.
The normal pupil cannot be an active member of a diplomatic service.
Some members of a diplomatic service are abnormal pupils.

I am far from a Watson Glaser professional but I shall share my two pence (partly as practice!)

WARNING - this lengthy response might be entirely wrong; if so, I apologise in advance and would appreciate any corrections.

Statements -

All intelligent pupils are members of a diplomatic service. No normal pupil is intelligent. Therefore:

When approaching the statements, I like to start by (1.) doing a venn diagram and/or (2.) taking the contrapositive.

Statement 1: All intelligent pupils are members of a diplomatic service.

With this statement, you learn two things: (1.) there's a class (aka group) of people called 'members of a diplomatic service'. (2.) all intelligent pupils are part of that class. This is a good statement to do a venn diagram for - big circle is the class - 'members of a diplomatic service'; within this circle, draw a circle to represent members - 'all intelligent pupils'.

Statement 2: No normal pupil is intelligent.

With this, I like taking the contrapositive - this is a fancy way of flipping the statement back-to-front, then negating whatever was positive and vice-versa. It's a good thing to do - I definitely encourage having a look into it if you haven't. The contrapositive would be - "All intelligent pupils are not normal pupils". This is your learning number three.

Putting these three 'learnings' together, you can now attack the conclusions pretty quickly because you've got a better understanding.

Proposed Conclusion 1 - No member of a diplomatic service is a normal pupil.
Here, I like to look at learning 1+2 (or just statement 1) - the only thing you know is that intelligent people ARE part of the class of 'members of a diplomatic service'. Now, we do know that per learning 3, intelligent students are not normal. BUT - there is nothing stating that intelligent people are the ONLY people who are part of the diplomatic service; we know nothing about who else might be part of that class. In other words, the class is not specified as being exclusive to intelligent pupils - there may well be be normal people + intelligent pupils. Therefore, the proposed conclusion DOES NOT follow.

Proposed Conclusion 2 - Every intelligent pupil takes an active role in the service.
Immediately, one word should jump out - 'active'. Even if the sentence is true regardless of that adjective, the word is not used in the statements therefore we know nothing about it. Therefore, DOES NOT follow.

Proposed Conclusion 3 - The normal pupil cannot be an active member of a diplomatic service.
See my response to Proposed Conclusion 2

Proposed Conclusion 4 - Some members of a diplomatic service are abnormal pupils.
Look at Statement 1 again. We know that all intelligent pupils are members of a diplomatic service. We also know, from taking the contrapositive of Statement 2, that all intelligent pupils are not normal. Therefore, since all intelligent pupils are abnormal + all intelligent pupils are members of the diplomatic service, we can say that conclusion FOLLOWS.

Fun thing to remember about the Watson Glaser - words like 'some' do not have their everyday meaning. When we normally say 'some', we just mean a portion of a whole. In the Watson Glaser, 'some' can mean everything from 1 to everything. So, even if the only people who comprised the diplomatic service were intelligent pupils, proposed conclusion 4 would still follow, given that 'some' can mean 'all'.