1. DECISION MAKING

What were the subjects you took in JC, and which were your favourite?

P (SMU) – Mine was quite straightforward: I took BCME!. Even though I quite liked bio, I didn’t have any interest in becoming a doctor. My subject combination is completely irrelevant now, though, unless I want to specialize in some bio-related law – but I have no idea what it’s like. I feel like the subjects I took in JC were redundant in terms of content. Skills like how to study are transferable, but for content, you have to learn from scratch. Maybe GP was most relevant, but GP is quite anyhow. In summary, my subject combination didn’t really affect my decision because it doesn’t really relate to what i’m studying now.

 

RY (NUS)  – I did Geography, Econs, English Literature and Linguistics (ELL) and H1 Math. For me, my favourite subject was definitely ELL. I freaking loved it. As to whether it’s directly applicable, I don’t really think so. But we were exposed to a bit of legalese, so I got a taste of how difficult understanding the law might be. Linguistics is a bit like law in the sense that you have a set of rules: for linguistics you have devices you use, and for law you have laws that you apply. I think the application skill is quite similar in the sense that there’s this framework of things that help you to understand a text or situation; then you use the framework to explain. For me, I didn’t find that GP was very applicable to law – you might learn about environmental policy and stuff – but when I was writing my GP essays, they were more argumentative. It seems like a very different genre from what we’re doing now. To me, GP was more fluffy; Law is so structured. You don’t even need a flair in language. You just have to communicate your points very precisely and succinctly. I don’t think there’s a direct subject that can be used to compare to Law per se.

 

Which courses were you considering? (Doesn’t need to be solely law) What made you choose this course at this university?

RY (NUS) – Both of us aren’t very good examples of what it means to be a passionate one for law. 

I wanted to do liberal arts, so Yale-NUS, right. You know the basic Singapore thing: I wanted a more practical, professional degree, it’s a safety net, you can learn more about these other fluffy humanities things once you’ve completed your law degree. But everyone please don’t take offence! It’s REALLY SO GOOD to go for what you want. I was open to both liberal arts and law. Of course I wanted liberal arts more, but my parents were paying for my education and I didn’t get a scholarship or anything, so I wanted to respect what they wanted for me.

 

P (SMU) – I think for me I was very lost-ed as to what I wanted to do. Mine was just more by elimination: I didn’t want to do biochemistry, I didn’t  want to be a doctor, I didn’t want to be an engineer; it was very clear what I didn’t want. So among the things that didn’t sound too unappealing, law was one of them, and liberal arts also. In short, it was between liberal arts and law because it was practical. For me, it was an aspirational thing to study liberal arts, in the sense that it was interesting. But in terms of practical concerns it was pretty much the same (as RY): professional degree, thinking about the future, all that kind of stuff. It just became a practical choice. I realised that I still chose to apply for Law out of all the other courses – and it was a choice I wanted and made for good reasons, even though it wasn’t my first choice! 

 

EJ (NUS) – For me, I think my answer is going to be quite boring, but I didn’t really consider anything else. Law was my only choice when I applied for uni. It’s quite a cliche answer but I just never saw myself doing anything else. I have kind of wanted to do law for quite a long time since sec 4! The thing that really changed it for me was the Moot Parliament Programme. Before that, I already had some interest in law, but after that, I was quite sure I wanted to do Law.

 

Do you think you’re going to become a lawyer?

RY (NUS) – Dude, I don’t know. I think I wouldn’t know what else to do: you spend 4 years studying Law. I think I would want to practice for a while at least, but I legit don’t know because I also don’t know what other careers there are. I haven’t really thought about that yet. I’m just studying first, but I think most people practice for a while first before they start their own businesses and go into investment banking, that kind of thing.

 

P (SMU) – One of the main reasons why I chose this degree was because many people told me it was a flexible degree. You can do other things and it doesn’t narrow you down to just being a lawyer. That was something that really appealed to me when I was choosing it. When it comes to practicing law, like what RY said, you put so much time and effort into this subject – so practically speaking, I think I’ll do Law for a while. Whether it’s for the long run, I’m not too sure, but I’m open to it. It’s more of a “let’s see where life takes me” kind of thing. 

 

EJ (NUS) – I think I echo what RY said: if you study and don’t practice, it’ll be a waste. It is something that a lot of people feel. I think I know that I’ll definitely want to practice for a while at least, also because I think you gain some experience there, but I think for me, I eventually want to go into policy-making, because that’s actually what the MPP was more about, rather than practicing law. We’ll see, that’s the plan now, but it may change.

 

RY (NUS) – You become a lawyer, then you work tirelessly, then whatever job you go to, you might be a bit more relaxed. I think a lot of them go into business after that. Especially restaurants: like Awfully chocolate, all the bakeries – a lot of them go into theatre, I think. I think a lot of people involved in the theatre scene come from Law. Quite interesting. 

 

Do you advise people who are very sure that they don’t want to be a lawyer to read law?

RY (NUS) – No…?!

 

P (SMU) – Too much investment… You should at least be open to it, you know? You can’t be like… no. Then what are you studying for?

 

RY (NUS) – It’s not even how much you have to read and stuff, the mental toll it takes on you… like how much it drains you emotionally – not worth it dude, if you don’t want to do it (be a lawyer), then don’t study Law.

 

P (SMU) – But having said that, I’ve a lot of peers, who don’t aspire to become lawyers in the long run; it’s more of the “I did quite well in A levels, I want to do something professional, and law doesn’t sound too bad, I’m alright with it”, then that’s why they chose it. I think that’s why the attrition rate ends up quite high (anecdotal) because a lot of people have this mindset – which I think I’m quite guilty of myself. 

 

2. COMPARISONS (SMU VS NUS)

Did you have a preference between NUS and SMU Law? If so, how did you choose?

P (SMU) – I think most people get offers from SMU; and NUS is in that sense more difficult to get into. It could also be because NUS is looking out for slightly different things. The whole interview for SMU is more competency-based: as long as you can write well, your grades are okay, your interview is not bad, you can present yourself well, you’ll most likely get it. 

For NUS, I feel like they’re looking out for passion and an actual desire to be involved in the field and the subject. I would think that usually people just apply for both, then if you get both, you see which school aligns with what you want. For me, I didn’t get an NUS offer, so there was no choice to make. But for my friends who had both, some of them actually chose SMU in the end, because they liked the teaching style more. That’s something which is quite significant, because SMU has no lectures – it’s just seminar-based, and it’s true class participation. The culture is very vocal in that sense, sometimes you really have to speak up and a lot of people appreciate having to do so! They also felt like the teaching approach was more reflective of the practicing part of it rather than the policy-making part of it – the attitude of the schools towards the field/subject plays quite a big role in which school you choose.

I think people who choose SMU generally prefer the seminar style and what P (SMU) said about class participation and stuff – we have class participation and stuff but I think there’s more emphasis on it in SMU. Generally, I think the impression of SMU people is that they’re better at presenting themselves, and they’re more vocal. The stereotype for SMU is that “can talk, but talk fluff” then for NUS is “don’t talk that much, but do the work well”. That’s a very disgusting stereotype, but I guess it exists. 

 

EJ (NUS) – I don’t think it’s true, there may be a few people like that in each school, but it doesn’t apply to everyone.

 

P (SMU) – Stereotypes have a basis but it’s not a one-size-fit-all kind of thing; it’s not a “you’re from SMU so you’re like that” or vice versa. 

 

RY (NUS) – Because of that reason also, I think I chose NUS because although I felt that social skills, networking and how you present yourself or market yourself are very important, but it’s something that you can pick up along the way also, like when you head for internships. But I also chose NUS because I felt that they could give me a better foundational experience – not to say that SMU doesn’t – but just because the NUS law course, factually speaking, has been there longer. NUS has really got a lot of resources; it’s insane. They say the Indian Law journals in NUS law are more complete than the Indian collection in India. They spend a lot of money on resources and make sure that you have access to all these, though it’s not like I ever open any of these Law journals. I think NUS is a very good place for opportunities, I think the profs are very open, I have several friends who are super passionate, he will email his tutors, they’ll go for lunch and they’ll talk about a controversial case. I think they’re really receptive to students who take initiative, which I appreciate a lot – I mean which I cannot appreciate because I don’t do it, but I see that my friends do!

 

P (SMU) – Just to add on, the resource thing is real. Literally our SMU profs will go to NUS to use their resources. Like sometimes when we ask for consultation, they’ll say “you can find me in NUS’–it’s not even “find me in the SMU campus”, because the profs will be there using the resources. To put it crudely, some people do choose NUS for the brand name because it is more credible in a sense, and it’s understandable if that’s important to you.

 

EJ (NUS) – SMU does have very good profs too: when SMU was set up, quite a few NUS profs went over, like people who wrote all the (Y1) textbooks; they’re all there. (Also said by another SMU Law student!)

 

P (SMU) – Quite funny, they link you to their own journals in class.

 

What are the differences/similarities between NUS and SMU law?

P (SMU) – I think in that aspect, sometimes I do use NUS notes, LOL. But at least for me, I don’t think I can speak for Y2, Y3. I honestly don’t know what we are going to study in the future. It’s pretty much the same thing, Torts, Contract Law 1 and 2, Crim Law. It’s the same 4 subjects, but ordered slightly differently.

 

RY (NUS) – We have Intro to Legal Theory, which is like Jurisprudence. It’s a very brief overview of how legal theory came about. 

 

P (SMU) – We have Singapore Legal System; it’s similar. It’s kinda like social studies. I think the fundamentals would be the same. But in terms of scope, I think it’s maybe similar, though the teaching style and what they focus on is quite different. Sometimes we use “pre-writes”, (like NUS “muggers” or “paras” (notes from seniors) – because in Law, you take a set of rules and then you apply it to a hypothetical situation for a paper. You can prepare the rules part of it, and some people even go so far as to prepare how to apply it. Those are the resources used to tackle the exam. 

 

EJ (NUS) – Do you guys do presentations?

 

P (SMU) – Group presentation? Yeah, it’s quite big in SMU, they focus quite a lot on it.

 

RY (NUS) – I had presentations for Crim and ILT. It was 20% or something for Crim. 

 

RY (NUS) – I had presentations that count towards class participation in NUS, so it really depends on your professor and how he/she wants to structure it. I really think that you cannot generalise NUS and SMU. Because even within NUS, whatever the prof wants to teach you within that module might be different. And for Introduction to Legal Theory (ILT), the way they choose to test you also is different. So the bell curve is within your own seminar group and not across the entire cohort. Thus, we learn different things for different profs. 

 

P (SMU) – Actually I think the content is more or less the same because you need to face the same problems in the future. Like what RY says, the focus depends on the prof; but if you were to generalize it, maybe the presentation thing is kind of big at SMU. In NUS maybe some profs like it, and they put in class participation. But for us every single module you take in SMU, you have a presentation as one of the components, on top of class participation. They’re very big on teamwork, how to work in groups, presentation skills. 

In general, the grading system is something like this: 

• 20-30% for class participation
• Finals are quite big, maybe up to 40%
• Presentations are around 20%
• Some other assignments and Mid Years 

Our final exams are very big. Yours also, right?

 

EJ (NUS) – Yeah, it depends on the subject, I think. For those done in one semester, like criminal law, finals will be around 80%. For other ones that are spread out across the year, it’ll be something like 20% class participation, 30% mid-terms and 50% finals. [Disclaimer: This breakdown has changed recently because of COVID-19 and there are changes to how we are accessed. Breakdown for your final grade also changed based on your prof, so this is only a VERY general guide.]

 

What is school life usually like?

RY (NUS) – This is like YouTube bro, a week in my life. I think it depends on the extracurriculars you take, and how you want to portion your time. For me, I was in Temasek hall. So for me, a lot of times after school, I’ll go for training, rehearsals and stuff. Actually, in year 1 you’re in school almost every day,  you had school every day, right EJ (NUS)?

 

EJ (NUS) – No, that’s just because your timetable was lousy, remember? 

 

RY (NUS) – But I was basically in school from 9-6 3/5 days a week. I’ll have 4 hour breaks in between, and I just have to study because I have nothing to do. 

 

EJ (NUS) – It depends on your timetable, though. Usually, I will show up for 5 hours straight or less, then I’ll just go back to RC. I don’t remember spending much time in school. But I’ll see RY studying all the time because she’s waiting for classes. I think I was quite lucky to have a good timetable. You definitely spend a lot less time actually in lessons; most of it is your own stuff. 

 

P (SMU) – I think like RY said, it’s a lot about portioning your time. Some people are on campus a lot, then for some people once classes are over they just go home. For SMU, there’s no campus life in the sense that there’s no residence on campus other than the scholars or the boarding school. So it’s not as accessible and not everyone is usually there. But I think a lot of people are still on campus a lot; I was in school nearly every single day every week. Our actual class time is very little because we don’t have lectures and only have seminars. So if you take 4 modules, then it’s about 3-4 days in school a week, then each (regular one credit module) module will be about 3 hours of lesson a week. So you have 3 hours of lessons every day for 4 days and that’s it for your actual in-class time. For me, the rest of it I was in some CCAs or some projects so I was in school. But there’s a lot of socialising in year 1, honestly. That’s what I spent most of my time on. It’s either socialising or in the library.

 

RY (NUS) – Yeah, in the library. Oh man. There was one day we had ILT and Criminal Law on the same day.

 

EJ (NUS) – Yeah, that was the toughest. 

 

RY (NUS) – So it was a 3 hour seminar, a one hour break, then a 3 hour seminar. You go insane.

 

EJ (NUS) – That one’s the worst.

 

P (SMU) – 3 hour long seminars are just hard to get through compared to secondary school to JC.

 

EJ (NUS) – there are some days I go to school for 1.5 hours then I go back, so it really varies. But 3 hour seminars are tough. 

 

RY (NUS) – IT SHOULDN’T BE LEGAL. (Attention span should be 45 min blocks, okay? All these crazy law people… I’m so done with Law School.)

 

P (SMU) – Do you all have breaks in your class?

 

EJ (NUS) and RY (NUS) – Yeah, depends on your prof.

 

We heard that in NUS, you have a lot more lecture-tutorials, is it true?

 

How is the workload as compared to JC?

What expectations did you have about your course? Which ones were met and which were not?

EJ (NUS) – Not much has changed. I think I underestimated how important exam techniques were. In Secondary school and JC of course you’ll do better if you’re exam smart, but I feel like it’s a whole new level in uni. Even when you think you understand, there may still be “another level” you haven’t understood. That’s the only thing that is different for me. I didn’t have much expectations to begin with. 

 

RY (NUS) – I didn’t know what I was in for. But really nothing could have prepared me for the whack in the face that was law. Definitely underestimated how mentally exhausting it would be; that’s for me because I’m not a super studious person. But I think it’s good to have some emotional preparation. 

 

P (SMU) –  I think similar to what they said before, I didn’t really have much expectations of what I was going to do in law. The reason why I felt like I didn’t have much expectations was because I wasn’t very sure that I wanted to do this course in the first place. When people say that they are very passionate about the law, I am quite skeptical because how would you know that you’re passionate about something you haven’t done before?  The emotional preparation part that RY mentioned is quite real because you need to prepare yourself for the overwhelm of the academic nature of the course. Something that hit me quite hard was the “shit why is this so hard to get” part. Upon reflection, I think that the level of difficulty of the JC curriculum is incomparable to what it is now. It’s the next level of “wah I cannot get it.” But you’ll be fine, we all did it. (The others chime in.. “Ya we survived…”) 

 

Are there any common misconceptions about your course?

Snake Culture

EJ (NUS) – Snake culture is probably the biggest misconception. I also have no idea what to make of it because everyone turned it into a joke. People just joke about us being snakes and we laugh along too. But it’s not as bad as it seems… 

 

RY (NUS) – I’m sure that there are snakes but it’s not a prevailing culture. Everyone is generally super nice. But they like to scare you. I remember during orientation we had a slippery slope, and then we have to climb up, so the seniors will hold your hand to help you. They say don’t trust anyone in law school and they let go of your hand. It’s just an ongoing joke. The senior culture is actually very good in NUS. There’s a freshmen guide and they started a whole mentorship program as well so you’ll have people to guide you, and it’s less scary for you academically. However, sometimes people mess with the google drives and key in the wrong information so you go into the examination having learned the wrong information. But it doesn’t happen very often? You just hear stories of people who have done it before. There’s a professor who was a student at NUS and he told us not to use his notes from a few years back because he changed the dates. 

 

P (SMU) – I think the snake-y thing (a cut throat and competitive culture) is a different thing in SMU because it’s not very tied to the faculty. People say that SMU stands for Snake Management University. I personally have not experienced being at the receiving end of such behaviour. I feel that it’s a two-way thing; if you don’t do it to people, people will not do the same thing to you. I do see a bit of the cut throat culture, but it’s not backstabbing because it’s apparent in class participation where you need to get the opportunity for yourself – if you don’t speak up, your grades will suffer. I think the google drive thing happens also because I have a lot of friends who have experienced that. It has to do with the whole group presentation thing. It’s easy for you to get unhappy feelings through group work so it’s quite inevitable if some people try to snake other people. 

 

Regarding Debating

EJ (NUS) – Also I think it’s less debating than you think, you can debate if you want, it’s more of reading and understanding the cases given. 

 

Is law school competitive?

Everyone nods silently… 

EJ (NUS) – I think it’s the nature of the people that choose it. Mostly, they have expectations of themselves and are high achieving people. The cohort is small, and we have the bell curve, across only 100-200 people, so it’s very easy to feel competitive (as compared to A levels where the bell curve is across the whole of SG) 

 

P (SMU) – You take the general population, take the top of it, and place it in one school. It can be competitive and building up each other/taking down each other, depending on who you hang out with.  

 

RY (NUS) – I think the thing is you have all these boys who have gone through NS for 2 years who have kind of figured out what they want to do in life, so when they come in here and do not slack. They are really so insane – you witness a different degree of intensity in law school. My friend even calculated how much you pay for an hour in law school and how he’s going to work the debt off.

 

How does A Levels and Law School compare in terms of intensity?

EJ (NUS) – It’s a very different kind of stress. I felt more stressed for A levels because it’s one big exam, so if you screw up it’s like “oh no” whereas in Law school you have various exams with lower stakes so it’s less stressful. In terms of studying, it really depends. I hear of people studying for 13 hours a day. You can compare Finals period to A levels period but on a normal basis it’s hard to compare. For me, I took PCME in JC, and studying for the very different subjects felt very disjointed (Eg. when you go from math to GP/Econs), whereas in law school you don’t need to do that switch so that part was easier for me. 

 

P (SMU) – I think comparing stress levels, since A Levels is a national high stakes exam, I think I was more stressed then than now. Also, I’m still in Y1 so that takes away more stress. The amount of time that you spend studying is the same as in JC, but something that may help to mitigate the stress is the fact that the semesters are quite short, around its 13-15  weeks. Also, unless there’s a continuation, after you take the subject you will never have to see it again for the rest of your uni life! 

 

Do you have time for CCAs/Hall/RC?

RY (NUS) – Ya! I did hall and I was doing regular training for various sports. If you apportion time to it then you’ll definitely have time for it and I was quite invested. So I’d try to do my work ASAP and make the time for these things! But that’s not to say that that came at a cost also HAHA

 

P (SMU) – I think I do socialize a lot. We don’t have a hall, so at first I was FOMO, but there’s still campus life. Nearing finals everyone is studying together at the library, it’s a bit like A levels. Before that, at the beginning/mid part of the semester there is sufficient time for you to do other things and be part of communities. 

 

EJ (NUS) – I don’t really participate in a lot of RC activities. I think it’s quite easy to find the time to do activities outside of school if you want to, but I usually just choose to chill with my friends. 

 

Do you guys have modules outside of law?

P (SMU) – SMU has compulsory core modules – there’s a basket of modules where you take your pick but there’s a criteria you need to fulfill. You need to complete the core modules in order to graduate. It’s OTOT to finish it, but a lot of people like to do it in Y1 because it’s the least stressful period. The courses feel more redundant, and the courses are quite fluffy (like this module called Happiness and Suffering) the other one I took was Business and Governance which sounds more relevant but is also quite fluffy. 

 

EJ (NUS) – NUS for Y1/2 you only do law mods, but in Y3/4 you get to do electives, and we can choose some non-law modules to do, but we don’t have compulsory non-law mods. 

 

How do you feel about the possibility that there might be an oversupply of lawyers?

Laughs. 

P (SMU) – It’s not that big of a deal. I don’t think it will be like an “I’m jobless because there’s an oversupply,” – but I sure hope that I can get a job! I don’t think there should be such a big issue since they opened another school. There’s also the whole “AI is going to replace lawyers”, it’s the same threat, so you just have to make yourself lucrative. 

 

Do students from both schools stand an equal chance at obtaining a Training Contract?

EJ (NUS) – I think it depends on the individual more than the school.

 

P (SMU) – I think it only matters if your employer is really loyal to their school, but other than that I feel they look at your credentials more. 

 

EJ (NUS) – It may have been something in the past but now I don’t think there’s much difference. However, we’re not employers so we’re not sure how reliable our perspective is either.

P (SMU) – I think when you speak to practicing lawyers they are quite open to both schools.

 

3. WORDS FROM SENIORS

How can we guide/advise our juniors in making the decision that feels the most right to them?

RY (NUS) – Don’t ask me, just read letters of the law, it’s legit damn inspirational.

 

EJ (NUS) – Read letters of the law, I think it’s pretty nice/talk to your senior/someone in law because it’s hard to give general advice. I think you should find someone who will give you an honest opinion of what it is. It depends on why you are uncertain, and what else you are going to be doing if you don’t read law.  

 

General Advice

P (SMU) – I think the scary thing about giving advice because it seems that I know better, but I don’t really feel I know better because I feel like I’m struggling. It’s quite general because I don’t think it’s directly applied to Law per se, but I think it’s important to know why you’re doing what you’re doing. Conviction is important. If you remember why you chose it in the first place, that will help you get through it. Without conviction, you will just feel very lost – I’ll wonder: Why am I putting so much effort into something I don’t really want?

I think along similar threads with what EJ (NUS) said, get a better picture of what you’re getting yourself into, because that was something I felt that I didn’t do very well, I just went in like woooo whatever let’s just no idea no standards and go in! Because of that, I didn’t really prep myself for it. 

 

Law Advice

P (SMU) – Law-wise, I feel that the actual studying of it is not as intense as it seems. If you’re qualified enough you would have an inclination towards reading/writing and enough experience towards studying, it’s tough but not completely impossible. It’s the emotional turmoil/frustration toward the subject that is tougher to handle. 

 

EJ (NUS) – We say that there are a lot of readings. I personally don’t really like reading and I rarely read books, so sometimes I would ask myself “why did I decide to do this again?” However, I find that it is quite fun to read the cases. Some cases are really quite interesting, so reading them doesn’t feel as much of a chore as you think it sounds.