Hi
@Abbie Whitlock and
@Andrei Radu: for a q on why the firm, i have structure it in terms of paragraph 1) work paragraph 2) int presence and 3) blended in qality of training + pro-bono work - i have advised to have quality of training as a point on its own but i do not have too much substance on it as attending insight days + speaking to trainees there was no like specific stnad outs that i got so do you think my structure is okay?
Hey!
Your structure seems absolutely fine - you don't necessarily need a separate paragraph on the quality of training, especially if you don't have enough meaningful detail to justify one. It's better to keep your points concise and well-supported than to add a standalone section that feels light and slightly empty.
If you've attended insight days and spoken to trainees but didn't get a single standout "unique" point, you can still weave training into another paragraph. For example, you can reference the firm's reputation for thorough, hands-on training or the consistency you heard from trainees, without needing a dramatic "USP". It's better to be honest and grounded than forcing detail that isn't there.
Overall, your three-part structure (which is similar to what I would usually follow) is perfectly acceptable. What matters most is that each point is specific, genuine, and tied back to why you want to train there.