If you have scored lower than 20 in the LNAT you are bound to struggle to cope with the rigour of a law degree.
So 19 is the borderline?
For the top UK unis a score of 19 is considered low. As for SIM's standard nobody knows cos its a new course. But look at this from another angle. If you score 19 on your LNAT but you have glowing references from employers, good CCA background etc do you think these components will make up for your disastrous showing on the LNAT? Of course not.
Singapore's style has always been to be different from other countries. Perhaps the LNAT score won't be that much of a factor when being awarded a place at SIM's law school but if that is the case then why should SIM subject students to do LNAT? It defeats the purpose.
The LNAT is designed to streamline those who cannot think critically from those who can. In a UK uni setting, if you're an admissions tutor, the logical thing to do is to automatically dismiss the applications of those who score below 20, given that there are only 60 places on the course. This makes it easier for the admissions tutor. Agreed?
On top of this there are interviews to convince and impress the interview panel as to why you deserve a place on this programme. So this acts as a further filter. Once there have a sizeable number of positive applications/applicants, these students will form the pioneer batch.
SIM is not gonna accept students who scored lowly for the LNAT. That is a given. The question is what then is the threshold? If you ask me, it should be 26 and above. Cos don't forget the LNAT is out of 42.
Most people want to do law cos lawyers earn a lot of money. What people make in a month, lawyers can make in half a day to a full day. A criminal case already can cost $3000 upwards so you tell me if I am making sense?
Kaixin, do you have any idea what it cost to study in Singapore putting aside the fairness of charging said fees?
The bloody fees at the postgraduate level which is unsubsidised run at $70,000 for SMU and close to $100,000 for NUS. So I can tell you for one that price is not a matter when a UK degree inclusive of living outside of London will run you at about $120,000.
If I'm an idiot looking in, S'pore law school, qualify for Singapore bar; UK law school, must take 1 year additional part A & B bridging to qualify, guess where will I go? The answer is staring at you. A 13% acceptance rate for a PART TIME Programme while you're doing yours at your nice top 5 Uni FULL TIME. That's why the fees are cheaper for UniSIM.
The whole point of UniSIM seems to escape you---fill up the gaping hole that is family and criminal Lawyers.
Stop misleading the people when half the qualifying UK degrees got the axe last year. ONE year ago. Already there are not enough of the commercial lawyering jobs to go around. So why pit a U.K. Degree against a local one when the most important thing is to qualify for a bar, be it UK or Singapore.
You putting it the way you did is just misleading them to think that just because you FEEL uk is better therefore it IS better. Newsflesh, you could be from Oxbridge and you can't pass the bar? You need to find a new job.
I will repeat my point that it is too bad that even without the bar exams, there already aren't enough commercial lawyering jobs BOTH in the UK and Singapore to go around assuming everybody passes the bar. The economy has been tanking since 2008 if you have not realised by now.
Come on! Give me a better argument than this pre-2009 rehashed to hell argument that you are still pushing. I'm inclined to dismiss your whole post when you stated the cheaper fees here which is untrue. Without the government subsidy that everybody pretends to be invisible, the fees are equally high if Not higher here in Singapore.
Clearly you have touched on points which I did not make or state. Nowhere in any of my previous posts did I mention about postgraduate law degrees. I have only referred to the basic LLB degree. Your post tells me a few things about you which I will address in my last paragraph of this post.
One of the many myths being perpetuated - which you raised in your diatribe above - is that the creation of SIM law school to 'fill up the gaping hole that is family and criminal Lawyers'.
Do you honestly think that SIM law graduates in the future will only remain and practise within criminal and family law? Of course not! They will eventually venture into finance aspect of the law cos thats where the money is.
You must also bear in mind that the minister has already said that there are no restrictions on the SIM law graduates in future to not venture into other aspects of the law besides criminal and family law. Think critically; doesn't this defeat the purpose of the SIM law school?
You are mistaken. There are plenty of law jobs in Singapore. The problem is people are not looking at the right places or not looking hard enough.
Now I come to you. If I were to hazard a guess, you're either a
- law graduate from the external law degree from University of London which is not recognized by the Board of Legal education in Singapore to be a lawyer
- applicant to the SIM law school who has done miserably on the LNAT
- Temasek Poly law and mgmt diploma graduate who cannot get in NUS or SMU and/or has no money to go overseas to do the law degree
- a clerk in a law firm who will remain in that position for years to come even though you know you can perform the role of a lawyer if only you had the means to complete a recognized law degree.
I wish you well.