*/
The pupillage application process is gruelling for everyone, and for many it is an ordeal that has to be endured more than once. What can applicants do to learn from the experience and improve their applications for the next time around? Many applicants quite understandably seek feedback on their applications from the chambers to which they have applied. But different chambers take different approaches to feedback, and sometimes the most honest or candid feedback might be little more than: ‘You were good – but on the day, another candidate was better.’ How, then, can applicants seek to obtain quality feedback, make the best use of the feedback they do receive, and improve from year to year?
First, a few pointers on how to seek feedback. Unsolicited feedback is extremely rarely given, so it is incumbent on you as the applicant to ask. It ought to go without saying that your request should be polite, respectful and carefully drafted, but in fact, a surprising number of candidates make snide comments when requesting feedback from chambers. Not only does this harm your chances of a positive (or any) response, it hardly makes the set feel that they have inadvertently let a good candidate slip through their fingers. Likewise, if a set responds to say that unfortunately they aren’t able to provide feedback, a salty reply might make you feel better, but will inevitably leave a poor impression on a chambers to which you may wish to apply again.
Not all chambers will offer feedback, but equally many will not advertise that they provide it on request, so it really is always worth asking: the worst they can say is no. The exception to that is if chambers has said that they do not offer feedback, or do not offer it except at a certain stage. If that is the case, then they are unlikely to make an exception, however politely you ask. It’s important to remember that you are likely not the only person asking. What might feel to you like something that they could provide quickly and easily does not feel the same when in receipt of dozens of emails all asking for feedback on where they could improve. And do not underestimate the time and care that giving feedback takes, all done by barristers whose involvement in the application process is alongside their no doubt busy professional practice.
As a general rule, most chambers will offer feedback to candidates they have met at interview (sometimes only at second-round interview). Though there’s no harm in (politely) asking, it’s likely to be unrealistic to expect feedback if you were rejected at the paper sift stage. Although your application is of course important to you, and chambers will have given it careful consideration, most sets receive many more applications than they have scope to interview, and their capacity for providing feedback to everyone who did not get selected for interview is going to be minimal.
Make your request for feedback promptly: within a week, at the very most, of being informed that you have been unsuccessful. Even though it may still feel very raw, if you leave it longer it is inevitable that the likelihood of a positive response containing constructive feedback will diminish.
Remember that direct and personal feedback from chambers is not the only possibility. Some sets – including my own, 5 Essex Chambers – publish reports on their annual pupillage round that collate general themes – which frequently recur from year to year. Everyone thinks that their form has been submitted without major typos or unfortunate references to a rival set of chambers being their dream set – every year, a surprisingly significant proportion are wrong. These reports tend to come out in the autumn – around the pupillage fair season – and are worthy of careful attention, even if you aren’t interested in that specific set, since they will typically cover general lessons to be learnt. Pupillage fairs themselves are also valuable occasions to speak to barristers involved in the application process, who may well have insights that can help you hone your form. This can be especially valuable when looking to target a particular set of chambers.
In a similar vein, getting feedback from others while your application is still in draft is always going to be valuable – and before submitting your application is a far better time to seek to improve it than afterwards. The Inns offer pupillage application advice sessions, as does the Bar Council at its Pupillage Fair and perhaps also your law school. Mentoring schemes can also provide you with someone to ask for advice, and even asking a family member or friend outside the law to cast their eyes over your application is likely to help you find areas for improvement. Mock interviews are also available, often tailored to the kind of law you are looking to practise. Seek out and make the most of these opportunities to improve your application before it’s submitted. I would not, though, recommend paying for advice on pupillage applications: I’m not aware of anyone actively engaged in assessing applications offering paid-for pupillage advice, so you run the risk of paying for less effective advice than you could have had for free.
How can you make the best use of any feedback you receive? Obviously incorporate any feedback obtained prior to submitting your application into your form. If it’s feedback after a rejection, keep a record of it – otherwise it will be nearly impossible to incorporate it into next year’s applications. And think about what the feedback means. It’s important to recognise that it is inevitably subjective – different sets will have different application processes, different criteria and different personalities, and it’s by no means impossible to end up with annoyingly contradictory feedback – too sure of yourself on one hand, too diffident on the other, for example. Try to relate the feedback you’ve received to how you felt you performed at interview (it might be an idea to make some notes immediately post-interview to help with this; that can also help you improve from interview to interview). But don’t lose sight of the fact that it may just be that that particular panel, on that particular day, asking those particular questions, felt that you weren’t quite what they were looking for – that does not mean that on another day, even at the same set, you wouldn’t ace the process, perhaps with only small changes. Think about whether the feedback identifies something that is within your power to fix – would more research have helped address it, or gaining more experience in a particular field? Would a mock interview have helped? Or is it something that is inherently subjective – in which case, is that set necessarily the right fit for you and what you want to do? Or is it simply that it’s worth picking yourself up, dusting yourself off, and going again?
Ultimately, particularly for those who have reached a second-round interview, the reality is that the application process can be one of extremely fine margins. Feedback can be immensely valuable in helping to overcome the challenge – but it is not a panacea, and needs to be thought about and acted on to help lift your applications next time around.
John Goss is a barrister and pupil supervisor at 5 Essex Chambers. He specialises in police law, data protection and information law, public law, and inquests and public inquiries.
The pupillage application process is gruelling for everyone, and for many it is an ordeal that has to be endured more than once. What can applicants do to learn from the experience and improve their applications for the next time around? Many applicants quite understandably seek feedback on their applications from the chambers to which they have applied. But different chambers take different approaches to feedback, and sometimes the most honest or candid feedback might be little more than: ‘You were good – but on the day, another candidate was better.’ How, then, can applicants seek to obtain quality feedback, make the best use of the feedback they do receive, and improve from year to year?
First, a few pointers on how to seek feedback. Unsolicited feedback is extremely rarely given, so it is incumbent on you as the applicant to ask. It ought to go without saying that your request should be polite, respectful and carefully drafted, but in fact, a surprising number of candidates make snide comments when requesting feedback from chambers. Not only does this harm your chances of a positive (or any) response, it hardly makes the set feel that they have inadvertently let a good candidate slip through their fingers. Likewise, if a set responds to say that unfortunately they aren’t able to provide feedback, a salty reply might make you feel better, but will inevitably leave a poor impression on a chambers to which you may wish to apply again.
Not all chambers will offer feedback, but equally many will not advertise that they provide it on request, so it really is always worth asking: the worst they can say is no. The exception to that is if chambers has said that they do not offer feedback, or do not offer it except at a certain stage. If that is the case, then they are unlikely to make an exception, however politely you ask. It’s important to remember that you are likely not the only person asking. What might feel to you like something that they could provide quickly and easily does not feel the same when in receipt of dozens of emails all asking for feedback on where they could improve. And do not underestimate the time and care that giving feedback takes, all done by barristers whose involvement in the application process is alongside their no doubt busy professional practice.
As a general rule, most chambers will offer feedback to candidates they have met at interview (sometimes only at second-round interview). Though there’s no harm in (politely) asking, it’s likely to be unrealistic to expect feedback if you were rejected at the paper sift stage. Although your application is of course important to you, and chambers will have given it careful consideration, most sets receive many more applications than they have scope to interview, and their capacity for providing feedback to everyone who did not get selected for interview is going to be minimal.
Make your request for feedback promptly: within a week, at the very most, of being informed that you have been unsuccessful. Even though it may still feel very raw, if you leave it longer it is inevitable that the likelihood of a positive response containing constructive feedback will diminish.
Remember that direct and personal feedback from chambers is not the only possibility. Some sets – including my own, 5 Essex Chambers – publish reports on their annual pupillage round that collate general themes – which frequently recur from year to year. Everyone thinks that their form has been submitted without major typos or unfortunate references to a rival set of chambers being their dream set – every year, a surprisingly significant proportion are wrong. These reports tend to come out in the autumn – around the pupillage fair season – and are worthy of careful attention, even if you aren’t interested in that specific set, since they will typically cover general lessons to be learnt. Pupillage fairs themselves are also valuable occasions to speak to barristers involved in the application process, who may well have insights that can help you hone your form. This can be especially valuable when looking to target a particular set of chambers.
In a similar vein, getting feedback from others while your application is still in draft is always going to be valuable – and before submitting your application is a far better time to seek to improve it than afterwards. The Inns offer pupillage application advice sessions, as does the Bar Council at its Pupillage Fair and perhaps also your law school. Mentoring schemes can also provide you with someone to ask for advice, and even asking a family member or friend outside the law to cast their eyes over your application is likely to help you find areas for improvement. Mock interviews are also available, often tailored to the kind of law you are looking to practise. Seek out and make the most of these opportunities to improve your application before it’s submitted. I would not, though, recommend paying for advice on pupillage applications: I’m not aware of anyone actively engaged in assessing applications offering paid-for pupillage advice, so you run the risk of paying for less effective advice than you could have had for free.
How can you make the best use of any feedback you receive? Obviously incorporate any feedback obtained prior to submitting your application into your form. If it’s feedback after a rejection, keep a record of it – otherwise it will be nearly impossible to incorporate it into next year’s applications. And think about what the feedback means. It’s important to recognise that it is inevitably subjective – different sets will have different application processes, different criteria and different personalities, and it’s by no means impossible to end up with annoyingly contradictory feedback – too sure of yourself on one hand, too diffident on the other, for example. Try to relate the feedback you’ve received to how you felt you performed at interview (it might be an idea to make some notes immediately post-interview to help with this; that can also help you improve from interview to interview). But don’t lose sight of the fact that it may just be that that particular panel, on that particular day, asking those particular questions, felt that you weren’t quite what they were looking for – that does not mean that on another day, even at the same set, you wouldn’t ace the process, perhaps with only small changes. Think about whether the feedback identifies something that is within your power to fix – would more research have helped address it, or gaining more experience in a particular field? Would a mock interview have helped? Or is it something that is inherently subjective – in which case, is that set necessarily the right fit for you and what you want to do? Or is it simply that it’s worth picking yourself up, dusting yourself off, and going again?
Ultimately, particularly for those who have reached a second-round interview, the reality is that the application process can be one of extremely fine margins. Feedback can be immensely valuable in helping to overcome the challenge – but it is not a panacea, and needs to be thought about and acted on to help lift your applications next time around.
The Chair of the Bar reports back
Clement Cowley, Partner at The Penny Group, explains how global events can influence the performance of pensions and ISAs, and why taking a long-term approach to investing is often the most effective strategy
Mário Barroso, Head of R&D and Method Development at AlphaBiolabs, discusses what family law professionals need to know about hallucinogens, from the main hallucinogenic drugs encountered in family proceedings, to their effects and the testing options available
Harmony Christian Ministries is the latest charity to benefit from a £500 donation from AlphaBiolabs via the company’s Giving Back initiative
By David Green
Mário Barroso, Head of R&D and Method Development at AlphaBiolabs, examines the forensic science underpinning hair drug testing, its evidential scope and limitations, and why it remains the gold standard for evidencing patterns of drug use in family proceedings
Developing a tech start-up demands a different definition of excellence to the Bar, says Saara Idelbi. The co-creator of Advocatr on entrepreneurship, AI advocacy training, and matching the thrill of a killer cross-examination
At the start of her term, Chair of the Bar 2026 Kirsty Brimelow KC set out a series of priorities for the year ahead. One of those priorities was children in the justice system
As the world becomes more digital, Barbara Vinagre Mota examines international research into the mental health consequences of judges’ exposure to graphic and immersive evidence, highlighting the importance of support systems
Reviewed by Daniel Barnett
James McNeill Whistler at Tate Britain until 27 September Rothko in Florence at Palazzo Strozzi until 23 August Reviewed by Stephen Cragg KC
