No! My Camsis still hasn't been updated, which is a bit disappointing and I still haven't got my offical offer letter in the post! As I understand it, our files will only be sent to colleges once Camsis is updated. If other departments are faster, we'll end up in the colleges no one wants :(

Also nothing. The e-mail definitely could have been more specific about the expected wait..

Also nothing. The e-mail definitely could have been more specific about the expected wait..

It says on the website that they should process applications for AHRC nominated students by 26th March. Has anyone had camsis updated yet, or has no one?

Where does it say that? Could you please post a link? Still no update on my Camsis :(

http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/offices/gradstud/funding/aid/ahrc/timetable.html

Thanks for that. I called BGS last week asking them when the formal offer letters would be sent and they said that our offers haven't even been confirmed by BGS yet. I think we're in for a looooong wait.

I wonder what they will do about AHRC then. maybe process the applications for just a few people.
do you think we will get an email when camsis is updated? or is it just a case of checking it/and or waiting for a letter?

I STILL haven't heard a "no" and I haven't heard a "yes" either :-(

Does anyone know if I'm likely to get an email or a letter advising of the decision?

I got mine via email. The email comes from the Law Faculty when they reach a decision on your application. The letter is only sent when your file arrives at the Board of Graduate Studies, they confirm your offer and update your Camsis.

Hi everyone

I have been following this thread with interest and I was hoping someone can enlighten me.

With respect to someone with a LLB in one of the top universities in Australia, I know that Cambridge requires a first, but given that we know that upwards of 40-50 students gets a first, what rank (or %) is the more realistic cut-off?

What weight in put on the following factors:
- full time work experience (what % of LLM students enter Cambridge with no full time work experience?)
- published article (is this considered almost mandatory?)

Do you recommend getting full time work experience first, assuming that this means that I would have to wait 3 years.

Cheers

Hi aus_lawstudent - I have no work experience except for one mini pupillage and have not published any articles and I received an offer on Jan 6th. I however have a guaranteed first with a few academic prizes and extra curricular activities.

Hope that helps :)

I don't think that Oxbridge (and UK universities in general) care as much about work experience and extra-curriculars as their US counterparts. Most people I know who have gone there had excellent grades. Period.

With respect to someone with a LLB in one of the top universities in Australia, I know that Cambridge requires a first, but given that we know that upwards of 40-50 students gets a first, what rank (or %) is the more realistic cut-off?

What weight in put on the following factors:
- full time work experience (what % of LLM students enter Cambridge with no full time work experience?)
- published article (is this considered almost mandatory?)

Do you recommend getting full time work experience first, assuming that this means that I would have to wait 3 years.

published article (is this considered almost mandatory?)

Has anyone received a rejection yet? How does this whole thing work. The last date for applications was 1 December and it seems like tooooo looong for still pending a decision.

I have received a rejection. Ms Wade from the Law Faculty emailed me with this much disappointing news. Id rung the Law Faculty one week ago asking for an update on my application.

No news here.

My view is that Cambridge, in particular, is heavily weighted towards current undergraduate or recent graduates. The reason is clear from the application form which, unlike the Oxford form, asks for far less information. For example, Oxford asks for a writing sample, CV and so on while Cambridge sets a line limit (about 15 lines from my recollection) and focusses on academic performance.

My case may be illustrative. I received a 'weak' first from a Sandstone university (not a 'top' first) primarily because I spent the early years of my 5 year LLB/BA going to parties, sitting on the Film Club executive and so on rather than focussing on my studies.

Nonetheless, since graduating, I've worked for 5+ years in law and for two years in a related area (public policy). I've had full length articles, taught two courses at my local university, work at a top tier firm (Freehills), been reported as counsel in cases, sit on committees and volunteer at a legal aid centre. I thought I had done everything right in the years since my graduation. I was rejected from both universities because my 'degree' was not strong enough compared with the rest of my cohort (I asked for feedback).

So, *at least for Australian applicants*, my impression is that you need to be right at the top of the class because Oxbridge take a very conservative approach to applicants probably because there are so many Australian applicants. My experience is that no matter what a person does, the admissions processes place far less weight on subsequent professional experience, self-improvement or actual legal practice. Both assume (probably Cambridge moreso) that someone's performance at age 23 will be how one will perform when they are 33 (as in my case).

I am tossing up now between UCL/LSE, sticking with practice or trying for US universities next year.

So they sent a rejection email? Scary stuff.

I agree with you on the point about extracurricular considerations. The US universities place a lot more weight on this than Oxbridge.

My view is that Cambridge, in particular, is heavily weighted towards current undergraduate or recent graduates. The reason is clear from the application form which, unlike the Oxford form, asks for far less information. For example, Oxford asks for a writing sample, CV and so on while Cambridge sets a line limit (about 15 lines from my recollection) and focusses on academic performance.

My case may be illustrative. I received a 'weak' first from a Sandstone university (not a 'top' first) primarily because I spent the early years of my 5 year LLB/BA going to parties, sitting on the Film Club executive and so on rather than focussing on my studies.

Nonetheless, since graduating, I've worked for 5+ years in law and for two years in a related area (public policy). I've had full length articles, taught two courses at my local university, work at a top tier firm (Freehills), been reported as counsel in cases, sit on committees and volunteer at a legal aid centre. I thought I had done everything right in the years since my graduation. I was rejected from both universities because my 'degree' was not strong enough compared with the rest of my cohort (I asked for feedback).

So, *at least for Australian applicants*, my impression is that you need to be right at the top of the class because Oxbridge take a very conservative approach to applicants probably because there are so many Australian applicants. My experience is that no matter what a person does, the admissions processes place far less weight on subsequent professional experience, self-improvement or actual legal practice. Both assume (probably Cambridge moreso) that someone's performance at age 23 will be how one will perform when they are 33 (as in my case).

I am tossing up now between UCL/LSE, sticking with practice or trying for US universities next year.