Admitted to Cambridge 2010/2011


TLF

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 :(


I am in the same situation. Waiting for my Camsis being updated.

<blockquote>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 :(
</blockquote>

I am in the same situation. Waiting for my Camsis being updated.
quote
chicago11

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..
quote
CanuckLLM

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


I agree. I've been waiting since the first week of January -- definitely didn't expect it to take this long!

I found a post from last year where it looks like Camsis was updated on April 15th. What a wait!

http://llm-guide.com/board/43857

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

I agree. I've been waiting since the first week of January -- definitely didn't expect it to take this long!

I found a post from last year where it looks like Camsis was updated on April 15th. What a wait!

http://llm-guide.com/board/43857

quote

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?

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?
quote
LLMblogger

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

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

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

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

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.

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.
quote

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 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?
quote

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 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?
quote
LLMblogger

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.

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.
quote

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 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
quote

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 :)

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 :)
quote
LLMblogger

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.

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.
quote

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?
It seems that earlier discussion about how many firsts the University of Melbourne awarded in 2009 has come around for a second time. Frankly, I think there are too many people on this site who focus on raw grades and what percentage of a cohort is awarded a first, or Honours in general. People also need to consider that Australia is just over 220 years old has over 30 law schools (quite a high number relative to population), so there seems to a be a perception that our standards are lower within the law schools themselves and also because more people can do law.

If this website hasn't shown us all the difficulties in comparing law schools, both domestically and internationally, I don't know what will. The rule is always "make sure you're comparing apples with apples."

I have been in regular contact with an Australian lawyer who is currently studying the BCL at Oxford. His view on the above question was:

"I'm not sure where you graduated but I graduated from Melbourne Law School. Although I do not want to get your hopes up rather just want to give you some information. I'm currently studying for the BCL at Oxford and like you I also had an average of 77%. When I applied I wasn't sure about whether I actually had a first myself but I just thought what the hell, I have nothing to lose."
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.
In respect of those questions, he said:
"I am also 32 years of age and like you I completed my articles at a top tier law firm - Allens Arthur Robinson in Melbourne. I suppose the only real difference I've noticed in the BCL and I imagine the LLM at Cambridge is that everyone is sooo young!!! I spent a couple of years working at Allens and Minter Ellison in Melbourne but went back home to Brisbane a couple of years ago. I had moved from Brisbane to study law at Melbourne. And like you I previously had another career but one in physiotherapy."

And, as for
published article (is this considered almost mandatory?)
His response was: "Yeah, I know about those ranked 1st, million articles published etc. but I just didn't worry too much about them when I was applying."

Yes, this is a thread about Cambridge and I'm talking about Oxford, but I feel quite confident comparing those two "apples."

<blockquote>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?</blockquote>It seems that earlier discussion about how many firsts the University of Melbourne awarded in 2009 has come around for a second time. Frankly, I think there are too many people on this site who focus on raw grades and what percentage of a cohort is awarded a first, or Honours in general. People also need to consider that Australia is just over 220 years old has over 30 law schools (quite a high number relative to population), so there seems to a be a perception that our standards are lower within the law schools themselves and also because more people can do law.

If this website hasn't shown us all the difficulties in comparing law schools, both domestically and internationally, I don't know what will. The rule is always "make sure you're comparing apples with apples."

I have been in regular contact with an Australian lawyer who is currently studying the BCL at Oxford. His view on the above question was:

"I'm not sure where you graduated but I graduated from Melbourne Law School. Although I do not want to get your hopes up rather just want to give you some information. I'm currently studying for the BCL at Oxford and like you I also had an average of 77%. When I applied I wasn't sure about whether I actually had a first myself but I just thought what the hell, I have nothing to lose."<blockquote>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.</blockquote>In respect of those questions, he said:
"I am also 32 years of age and like you I completed my articles at a top tier law firm - Allens Arthur Robinson in Melbourne. I suppose the only real difference I've noticed in the BCL and I imagine the LLM at Cambridge is that everyone is sooo young!!! I spent a couple of years working at Allens and Minter Ellison in Melbourne but went back home to Brisbane a couple of years ago. I had moved from Brisbane to study law at Melbourne. And like you I previously had another career but one in physiotherapy."

And, as for
<blockquote>published article (is this considered almost mandatory?)</blockquote>His response was: "Yeah, I know about those ranked 1st, million articles published etc. but I just didn't worry too much about them when I was applying."

Yes, this is a thread about Cambridge and I'm talking about Oxford, but I feel quite confident comparing those two "apples."



quote
bookcrazy

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.

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.
quote
beicon

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.

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

No news here.

No news here.
quote
zej

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.

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.
quote

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.

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.
quote
brazilian

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.


Wow, we both have very similar stories. I do not think I will be offered a place at Cambridge, and I can`t say how many times I regreted not being the best of my class - mostly because I wanted to enjoy university, going to parties, have all the university experience. But, to be really honest, I don`t think I would change a thing; I had a lot of fun, learnt a lot and today I have a great job an I am very well paid. The best of my class, with few exceptions, are not in the best positions, some are even at "undergraduated" jobs, almost 10 years after graduating. Others went straight to academy and can not find a job today, because good firms prefere experience over theory.

So, I am heading to LSE, with no regrets, with a nice income and good savings, and I will not think about "what if" anymore. I just desperately need to hear my "no" from Cambridge to be in peace!

<blockquote>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.</blockquote>

Wow, we both have very similar stories. I do not think I will be offered a place at Cambridge, and I can`t say how many times I regreted not being the best of my class - mostly because I wanted to enjoy university, going to parties, have all the university experience. But, to be really honest, I don`t think I would change a thing; I had a lot of fun, learnt a lot and today I have a great job an I am very well paid. The best of my class, with few exceptions, are not in the best positions, some are even at "undergraduated" jobs, almost 10 years after graduating. Others went straight to academy and can not find a job today, because good firms prefere experience over theory.

So, I am heading to LSE, with no regrets, with a nice income and good savings, and I will not think about "what if" anymore. I just desperately need to hear my "no" from Cambridge to be in peace!
quote

Reply to Post

Related Law Schools

Cambridge, United Kingdom 904 Followers 791 Discussions

Hot Discussions