Cambridge application 2018/2019


nowokkaz
Those of you getting college offers -- have you fulfilled all the conditions of your offer, or do the colleges go through applications even before they become unconditional?
Those of you getting college offers -- have you fulfilled all the conditions of your offer, or do the colleges go through applications even before they become unconditional?
quote
Those of you getting college offers -- have you fulfilled all the conditions of your offer, or do the colleges go through applications even before they become unconditional?


Before they become unconditional
[quote]Those of you getting college offers -- have you fulfilled all the conditions of your offer, or do the colleges go through applications even before they become unconditional?[/quote]

Before they become unconditional
quote
Studyalong

They all do look good, but I'd much prefer a mixed undergrad/postgrad college. Do you think it would be worth contacting anybody to get this across or would it be futile at this point?

Thanks for your help


I don't think they take that into account, seeing that they already gave you two choices.


Yep, fair enough. Thanks
[quote][quote]
They all do look good, but I'd much prefer a mixed undergrad/postgrad college. Do you think it would be worth contacting anybody to get this across or would it be futile at this point?

Thanks for your help [/quote]

I don't think they take that into account, seeing that they already gave you two choices.
[/quote]

Yep, fair enough. Thanks
quote
Studyalong


Probably Wolfson, Hughes or St-Edmunds, as I hear they take in a lot of LLM students, both are fine options anyways.


They all do look good, but I'd much prefer a mixed undergrad/postgrad college. Do you think it would be worth contacting anybody to get this across or would it be futile at this point?

Thanks for your help


I don't think you would get anywhere if you did. In the guidance booklet, which accompanies my offer, I recall it saying we can't change our college allocation unless there are 'exceptional circumstances', e.g. we get funding from another college.


Yeah, was the same for my undergraduate. Thanks anyway
[quote][quote][quote][quote]
Yeah, Trinity was definitely a bit ambitious, but alas. Just got word that Kings don't want me either - which one will they throw me into?! [/quote]

Probably Wolfson, Hughes or St-Edmunds, as I hear they take in a lot of LLM students, both are fine options anyways.[/quote]

They all do look good, but I'd much prefer a mixed undergrad/postgrad college. Do you think it would be worth contacting anybody to get this across or would it be futile at this point?

Thanks for your help [/quote]

I don't think you would get anywhere if you did. In the guidance booklet, which accompanies my offer, I recall it saying we can't change our college allocation unless there are 'exceptional circumstances', e.g. we get funding from another college. [/quote]

Yeah, was the same for my undergraduate. Thanks anyway
quote
Ribben

They all do look good, but I'd much prefer a mixed undergrad/postgrad college. Do you think it would be worth contacting anybody to get this across or would it be futile at this point?

Thanks for your help


I don't think they take that into account, seeing that they already gave you two choices.


Yep, fair enough. Thanks


I mean, don't get me wrong, I would prefer being in one of the old, pretty and traditional colleges too. But we have to be honest here, we're just LLM students. Our application process to Cambridge is, compared to the trouble eg undergrads or phd's need to go through, relatively short. So I don't think the old colleges really like taking in students like us who didn't even need to come for an interview to get in.
[quote][quote][quote]
They all do look good, but I'd much prefer a mixed undergrad/postgrad college. Do you think it would be worth contacting anybody to get this across or would it be futile at this point?

Thanks for your help [/quote]

I don't think they take that into account, seeing that they already gave you two choices.
[/quote]

Yep, fair enough. Thanks[/quote]

I mean, don't get me wrong, I would prefer being in one of the old, pretty and traditional colleges too. But we have to be honest here, we're just LLM students. Our application process to Cambridge is, compared to the trouble eg undergrads or phd's need to go through, relatively short. So I don't think the old colleges really like taking in students like us who didn't even need to come for an interview to get in.
quote
koffie
does anyone know when we can start expecting scholarship decisions?
does anyone know when we can start expecting scholarship decisions?
quote
does anyone know when we can start expecting scholarship decisions?


Towards the end of the month as per the information on the Cambridge Trust website.
[quote]does anyone know when we can start expecting scholarship decisions?[/quote]

Towards the end of the month as per the information on the Cambridge Trust website.
quote
LLM2238


I don't think they take that into account, seeing that they already gave you two choices.


Yep, fair enough. Thanks


I mean, don't get me wrong, I would prefer being in one of the old, pretty and traditional colleges too. But we have to be honest here, we're just LLM students. Our application process to Cambridge is, compared to the trouble eg undergrads or phd's need to go through, relatively short. So I don't think the old colleges really like taking in students like us who didn't even need to come for an interview to get in.


I see your point, but personally I don’t think it’s right to say we’re ‘just’ LLM students. LLM admission is extremely competitive and, after all, Cambridge is ranked the best in Europe for law and second best in the world at the moment, behind Harvard... I’d also like to move onto a PhD at Cantab after the LLM, so the fact we aren’t interviewed for the LLM I’d say is irreverent and I’m sure the colleges would view it like that too (Harvard and Oxford also don’t interview).
[quote][quote][quote][quote]
They all do look good, but I'd much prefer a mixed undergrad/postgrad college. Do you think it would be worth contacting anybody to get this across or would it be futile at this point?

Thanks for your help [/quote]

I don't think they take that into account, seeing that they already gave you two choices.
[/quote]

Yep, fair enough. Thanks[/quote]

I mean, don't get me wrong, I would prefer being in one of the old, pretty and traditional colleges too. But we have to be honest here, we're just LLM students. Our application process to Cambridge is, compared to the trouble eg undergrads or phd's need to go through, relatively short. So I don't think the old colleges really like taking in students like us who didn't even need to come for an interview to get in.[/quote]

I see your point, but personally I don’t think it’s right to say we’re ‘just’ LLM students. LLM admission is extremely competitive and, after all, Cambridge is ranked the best in Europe for law and second best in the world at the moment, behind Harvard... I’d also like to move onto a PhD at Cantab after the LLM, so the fact we aren’t interviewed for the LLM I’d say is irreverent and I’m sure the colleges would view it like that too (Harvard and Oxford also don’t interview).
quote
Ononeze
Any word on Gates Cambridge?
Any word on Gates Cambridge?
quote
Ribben

I see your point, but personally I don’t think it’s right to say we’re ‘just’ LLM students. LLM admission is extremely competitive and, after all, Cambridge is ranked the best in Europe for law and second best in the world at the moment, behind Harvard... I’d also like to move onto a PhD at Cantab after the LLM, so the fact we aren’t interviewed for the LLM I’d say is irreverent and I’m sure the colleges would view it like that too (Harvard and Oxford also don’t interview).


Well that depends on what you call "extremely" competitive. The LLM is for example clearly less competitive than the undergraduate degree in law. In 2016 there were 1048 applications for the undergrad, and only 256 got an offer (24% offer rate), whereas for the LLM in 2016 there were 1331 applications but 412 got an offer (30% offer rate). Let alone if we compare this to how competitive the undergraduate degrees in for example engineering (17% offer rate) or medicine (22% offer rate) are.

To be clear, yes this degree course does have a competitive entry, but to call it "extremely" competitive is a bit of a stretch. Let's not forget there are top universities like Yale who have an LLM class size of only around 25 students. What would you call that? Super-duper extremely competitive?
[quote]
I see your point, but personally I don’t think it’s right to say we’re ‘just’ LLM students. LLM admission is extremely competitive and, after all, Cambridge is ranked the best in Europe for law and second best in the world at the moment, behind Harvard... I’d also like to move onto a PhD at Cantab after the LLM, so the fact we aren’t interviewed for the LLM I’d say is irreverent and I’m sure the colleges would view it like that too (Harvard and Oxford also don’t interview).[/quote]

Well that depends on what you call "extremely" competitive. The LLM is for example clearly less competitive than the undergraduate degree in law. In 2016 there were 1048 applications for the undergrad, and only 256 got an offer (24% offer rate), whereas for the LLM in 2016 there were 1331 applications but 412 got an offer (30% offer rate). Let alone if we compare this to how competitive the undergraduate degrees in for example engineering (17% offer rate) or medicine (22% offer rate) are.

To be clear, yes this degree course does have a competitive entry, but to call it "extremely" competitive is a bit of a stretch. Let's not forget there are top universities like Yale who have an LLM class size of only around 25 students. What would you call that? Super-duper extremely competitive?

quote
AdmissionL...


Yep, fair enough. Thanks


I mean, don't get me wrong, I would prefer being in one of the old, pretty and traditional colleges too. But we have to be honest here, we're just LLM students. Our application process to Cambridge is, compared to the trouble eg undergrads or phd's need to go through, relatively short. So I don't think the old colleges really like taking in students like us who didn't even need to come for an interview to get in.


I see your point, but personally I don’t think it’s right to say we’re ‘just’ LLM students. LLM admission is extremely competitive and, after all, Cambridge is ranked the best in Europe for law and second best in the world at the moment, behind Harvard... I’d also like to move onto a PhD at Cantab after the LLM, so the fact we aren’t interviewed for the LLM I’d say is irreverent and I’m sure the colleges would view it like that too (Harvard and Oxford also don’t interview).


Rather pointless discussion; after all, there are a few places for llm students. And if the college is particularly important to you, you have to see that although the llm is very competitive, particular colleges are even more competitive.
[quote][quote][quote][quote][quote]
They all do look good, but I'd much prefer a mixed undergrad/postgrad college. Do you think it would be worth contacting anybody to get this across or would it be futile at this point?

Thanks for your help [/quote]

I don't think they take that into account, seeing that they already gave you two choices.
[/quote]

Yep, fair enough. Thanks[/quote]

I mean, don't get me wrong, I would prefer being in one of the old, pretty and traditional colleges too. But we have to be honest here, we're just LLM students. Our application process to Cambridge is, compared to the trouble eg undergrads or phd's need to go through, relatively short. So I don't think the old colleges really like taking in students like us who didn't even need to come for an interview to get in.[/quote]

I see your point, but personally I don’t think it’s right to say we’re ‘just’ LLM students. LLM admission is extremely competitive and, after all, Cambridge is ranked the best in Europe for law and second best in the world at the moment, behind Harvard... I’d also like to move onto a PhD at Cantab after the LLM, so the fact we aren’t interviewed for the LLM I’d say is irreverent and I’m sure the colleges would view it like that too (Harvard and Oxford also don’t interview).[/quote]

Rather pointless discussion; after all, there are a few places for llm students. And if the college is particularly important to you, you have to see that although the llm is very competitive, particular colleges are even more competitive.
quote
tsangc4

I see your point, but personally I don’t think it’s right to say we’re ‘just’ LLM students. LLM admission is extremely competitive and, after all, Cambridge is ranked the best in Europe for law and second best in the world at the moment, behind Harvard... I’d also like to move onto a PhD at Cantab after the LLM, so the fact we aren’t interviewed for the LLM I’d say is irreverent and I’m sure the colleges would view it like that too (Harvard and Oxford also don’t interview).


Well that depends on what you call "extremely" competitive. The LLM is for example clearly less competitive than the undergraduate degree in law. In 2016 there were 1048 applications for the undergrad, and only 256 got an offer (24% offer rate), whereas for the LLM in 2016 there were 1331 applications but 412 got an offer (30% offer rate). Let alone if we compare this to how competitive the undergraduate degrees in for example engineering (17% offer rate) or medicine (22% offer rate) are.

To be clear, yes this degree course does have a competitive entry, but to call it "extremely" competitive is a bit of a stretch. Let's not forget there are top universities like Yale who have an LLM class size of only around 25 students. What would you call that? Super-duper extremely competitive?



There exists a high minimum academic requirement for Cambridge LLM applicants. It applies equally to Cambridge Undergraduate students as well as law students from other schools. If the LLM were in fact less competitive than the undergraduate course the entire Cambridge undergraduate cohort would gain automatic admission to the Cambridge LLM regardless of their grades. That is not the case, though.

I think it's at least plausible to suggest that the calibre of the average Cambridge LLM applicant is of higher quality than the average Cambridge undergraduate applicant. This is because LLM applicants, assuming most of those applying do have first class grades, are proven to be adept at legal reasoning, writing and handling education at a tertiary level more generally. Numbers alone cannot account for this difference in quality. (Of course, you can point out that grading methods vary among universities and those applying might hold grades more inflated than Cambridge undergraduate students', but I don't think these applicants are in the majority)

In any event, I don't think it was necessary to reply to LLM2238 sarcastically. I'm sure he or she was simply voicing her concerns.

[Edited by tsangc4 on Mar 13, 2018]

[quote][quote]
I see your point, but personally I don’t think it’s right to say we’re ‘just’ LLM students. LLM admission is extremely competitive and, after all, Cambridge is ranked the best in Europe for law and second best in the world at the moment, behind Harvard... I’d also like to move onto a PhD at Cantab after the LLM, so the fact we aren’t interviewed for the LLM I’d say is irreverent and I’m sure the colleges would view it like that too (Harvard and Oxford also don’t interview).[/quote]

Well that depends on what you call "extremely" competitive. The LLM is for example clearly less competitive than the undergraduate degree in law. In 2016 there were 1048 applications for the undergrad, and only 256 got an offer (24% offer rate), whereas for the LLM in 2016 there were 1331 applications but 412 got an offer (30% offer rate). Let alone if we compare this to how competitive the undergraduate degrees in for example engineering (17% offer rate) or medicine (22% offer rate) are.

To be clear, yes this degree course does have a competitive entry, but to call it "extremely" competitive is a bit of a stretch. Let's not forget there are top universities like Yale who have an LLM class size of only around 25 students. What would you call that? Super-duper extremely competitive?

[/quote]

There exists a high minimum academic requirement for Cambridge LLM applicants. It applies equally to Cambridge Undergraduate students as well as law students from other schools. If the LLM were in fact less competitive than the undergraduate course the entire Cambridge undergraduate cohort would gain automatic admission to the Cambridge LLM regardless of their grades. That is not the case, though.

I think it's at least plausible to suggest that the calibre of the average Cambridge LLM applicant is of higher quality than the average Cambridge undergraduate applicant. This is because LLM applicants, assuming most of those applying do have first class grades, are proven to be adept at legal reasoning, writing and handling education at a tertiary level more generally. Numbers alone cannot account for this difference in quality. (Of course, you can point out that grading methods vary among universities and those applying might hold grades more inflated than Cambridge undergraduate students', but I don't think these applicants are in the majority)

In any event, I don't think it was necessary to reply to LLM2238 sarcastically. I'm sure he or she was simply voicing her concerns.
quote
LLM2238

I see your point, but personally I don’t think it’s right to say we’re ‘just’ LLM students. LLM admission is extremely competitive and, after all, Cambridge is ranked the best in Europe for law and second best in the world at the moment, behind Harvard... I’d also like to move onto a PhD at Cantab after the LLM, so the fact we aren’t interviewed for the LLM I’d say is irreverent and I’m sure the colleges would view it like that too (Harvard and Oxford also don’t interview).


Well that depends on what you call "extremely" competitive. The LLM is for example clearly less competitive than the undergraduate degree in law. In 2016 there were 1048 applications for the undergrad, and only 256 got an offer (24% offer rate), whereas for the LLM in 2016 there were 1331 applications but 412 got an offer (30% offer rate). Let alone if we compare this to how competitive the undergraduate degrees in for example engineering (17% offer rate) or medicine (22% offer rate) are.

To be clear, yes this degree course does have a competitive entry, but to call it "extremely" competitive is a bit of a stretch. Let's not forget there are top universities like Yale who have an LLM class size of only around 25 students. What would you call that? Super-duper extremely competitive?



I do recall looking at the admission stats when I applied, including the year you refer to. And I recall that the number of people who met their offer conditions/choose to accept were almost half the number (in total circa. 200), which I recall is consistent with previous years. So if circa. 200 students out of circa. 1300 applications isn’t competitive enough for you, then happily you should go to Yale if that bothers you! Yale is an obvious exception anyway and this is all a red herring...

My underlining point in the last comment was that people shouldn’t put their college allocation disappointments down to the course, as I understand that is not correct.
[quote][quote]
I see your point, but personally I don’t think it’s right to say we’re ‘just’ LLM students. LLM admission is extremely competitive and, after all, Cambridge is ranked the best in Europe for law and second best in the world at the moment, behind Harvard... I’d also like to move onto a PhD at Cantab after the LLM, so the fact we aren’t interviewed for the LLM I’d say is irreverent and I’m sure the colleges would view it like that too (Harvard and Oxford also don’t interview).[/quote]

Well that depends on what you call "extremely" competitive. The LLM is for example clearly less competitive than the undergraduate degree in law. In 2016 there were 1048 applications for the undergrad, and only 256 got an offer (24% offer rate), whereas for the LLM in 2016 there were 1331 applications but 412 got an offer (30% offer rate). Let alone if we compare this to how competitive the undergraduate degrees in for example engineering (17% offer rate) or medicine (22% offer rate) are.

To be clear, yes this degree course does have a competitive entry, but to call it "extremely" competitive is a bit of a stretch. Let's not forget there are top universities like Yale who have an LLM class size of only around 25 students. What would you call that? Super-duper extremely competitive?

[/quote]

I do recall looking at the admission stats when I applied, including the year you refer to. And I recall that the number of people who met their offer conditions/choose to accept were almost half the number (in total circa. 200), which I recall is consistent with previous years. So if circa. 200 students out of circa. 1300 applications isn’t competitive enough for you, then happily you should go to Yale if that bothers you! Yale is an obvious exception anyway and this is all a red herring...

My underlining point in the last comment was that people shouldn’t put their college allocation disappointments down to the course, as I understand that is not correct.
quote
LLM2238

I see your point, but personally I don’t think it’s right to say we’re ‘just’ LLM students. LLM admission is extremely competitive and, after all, Cambridge is ranked the best in Europe for law and second best in the world at the moment, behind Harvard... I’d also like to move onto a PhD at Cantab after the LLM, so the fact we aren’t interviewed for the LLM I’d say is irreverent and I’m sure the colleges would view it like that too (Harvard and Oxford also don’t interview).


Well that depends on what you call "extremely" competitive. The LLM is for example clearly less competitive than the undergraduate degree in law. In 2016 there were 1048 applications for the undergrad, and only 256 got an offer (24% offer rate), whereas for the LLM in 2016 there were 1331 applications but 412 got an offer (30% offer rate). Let alone if we compare this to how competitive the undergraduate degrees in for example engineering (17% offer rate) or medicine (22% offer rate) are.

To be clear, yes this degree course does have a competitive entry, but to call it "extremely" competitive is a bit of a stretch. Let's not forget there are top universities like Yale who have an LLM class size of only around 25 students. What would you call that? Super-duper extremely competitive?



There exists a high minimum academic requirement for Cambridge LLM applicants. It applies equally to Cambridge Undergraduate students as well as law students from other schools. If the LLM were in fact less competitive than the undergraduate course the entire Cambridge undergraduate cohort would gain automatic admission to the Cambridge LLM regardless of their grades. That is not the case, though.

I think it's at least plausible to suggest that the calibre of the average Cambridge LLM applicant is of higher quality than the average Cambridge undergraduate applicant. This is because LLM applicants, assuming most of those applying do have first class grades, are proven to be adept at legal reasoning, writing and handling education at a tertiary level more generally. Numbers alone cannot account for this difference in quality. (Of course, you can point out that grading methods vary among universities and those applying might hold grades more inflated than Cambridge undergraduate students', but I don't think these applicants are in the majority)

In any event, I don't think it was necessary to reply to LLM2238 sarcastically. I'm sure he or she was simply voicing her concerns.


I completely agree :)
[quote][quote][quote]
I see your point, but personally I don’t think it’s right to say we’re ‘just’ LLM students. LLM admission is extremely competitive and, after all, Cambridge is ranked the best in Europe for law and second best in the world at the moment, behind Harvard... I’d also like to move onto a PhD at Cantab after the LLM, so the fact we aren’t interviewed for the LLM I’d say is irreverent and I’m sure the colleges would view it like that too (Harvard and Oxford also don’t interview).[/quote]

Well that depends on what you call "extremely" competitive. The LLM is for example clearly less competitive than the undergraduate degree in law. In 2016 there were 1048 applications for the undergrad, and only 256 got an offer (24% offer rate), whereas for the LLM in 2016 there were 1331 applications but 412 got an offer (30% offer rate). Let alone if we compare this to how competitive the undergraduate degrees in for example engineering (17% offer rate) or medicine (22% offer rate) are.

To be clear, yes this degree course does have a competitive entry, but to call it "extremely" competitive is a bit of a stretch. Let's not forget there are top universities like Yale who have an LLM class size of only around 25 students. What would you call that? Super-duper extremely competitive?

[/quote]

There exists a high minimum academic requirement for Cambridge LLM applicants. It applies equally to Cambridge Undergraduate students as well as law students from other schools. If the LLM were in fact less competitive than the undergraduate course the entire Cambridge undergraduate cohort would gain automatic admission to the Cambridge LLM regardless of their grades. That is not the case, though.

I think it's at least plausible to suggest that the calibre of the average Cambridge LLM applicant is of higher quality than the average Cambridge undergraduate applicant. This is because LLM applicants, assuming most of those applying do have first class grades, are proven to be adept at legal reasoning, writing and handling education at a tertiary level more generally. Numbers alone cannot account for this difference in quality. (Of course, you can point out that grading methods vary among universities and those applying might hold grades more inflated than Cambridge undergraduate students', but I don't think these applicants are in the majority)

In any event, I don't think it was necessary to reply to LLM2238 sarcastically. I'm sure he or she was simply voicing her concerns. [/quote]

I completely agree :)
quote
Ribben

There exists a high minimum academic requirement for Cambridge LLM applicants. It applies equally to Cambridge Undergraduate students as well as law students from other schools. If the LLM were in fact less competitive than the undergraduate course the entire Cambridge undergraduate cohort would gain automatic admission to the Cambridge LLM regardless of their grades. That is not the case, though.

I think it's at least plausible to suggest that the calibre of the average Cambridge LLM applicant is of higher quality than the average Cambridge undergraduate applicant. This is because LLM applicants, assuming most of those applying do have first class grades, are proven to be adept at legal reasoning, writing and handling education at a tertiary level more generally. Numbers alone cannot account for this difference in quality. (Of course, you can point out that grading methods vary among universities and those applying might hold grades more inflated than Cambridge undergraduate students', but I don't think these applicants are in the majority)


To be honest I still think that the LLM is not as competitive as they make out to be, but I assume that is because I have had personal experiences that tell me so. For example, both me and my colleague got into the LLM programme, although neither of us had a first. My colleague was even quite far away from it. Meanwhile the best student in my class in high school got into the final round for admission into Cambridge's undergrad program in law, but was ultimately not selected, even though his grades were ridiculously high (a minimum of 90% average on all his courses, mind you in my country our curriculum constists out of 12 courses, so that means he scored equally well on maths as on French or sports, crazy). He ultimately chose not to study law and went for a degree in civil engineering, and is still way more talented than I am.

I mean, by all means, let's pat ourselves on the back that we made it into Cambridge, but all I am saying is that we should keep our heads level and realize that this is just an LLM program.
[quote]
There exists a high minimum academic requirement for Cambridge LLM applicants. It applies equally to Cambridge Undergraduate students as well as law students from other schools. If the LLM were in fact less competitive than the undergraduate course the entire Cambridge undergraduate cohort would gain automatic admission to the Cambridge LLM regardless of their grades. That is not the case, though.

I think it's at least plausible to suggest that the calibre of the average Cambridge LLM applicant is of higher quality than the average Cambridge undergraduate applicant. This is because LLM applicants, assuming most of those applying do have first class grades, are proven to be adept at legal reasoning, writing and handling education at a tertiary level more generally. Numbers alone cannot account for this difference in quality. (Of course, you can point out that grading methods vary among universities and those applying might hold grades more inflated than Cambridge undergraduate students', but I don't think these applicants are in the majority)
[/quote]

To be honest I still think that the LLM is not as competitive as they make out to be, but I assume that is because I have had personal experiences that tell me so. For example, both me and my colleague got into the LLM programme, although neither of us had a first. My colleague was even quite far away from it. Meanwhile the best student in my class in high school got into the final round for admission into Cambridge's undergrad program in law, but was ultimately not selected, even though his grades were ridiculously high (a minimum of 90% average on all his courses, mind you in my country our curriculum constists out of 12 courses, so that means he scored equally well on maths as on French or sports, crazy). He ultimately chose not to study law and went for a degree in civil engineering, and is still way more talented than I am.

I mean, by all means, let's pat ourselves on the back that we made it into Cambridge, but all I am saying is that we should keep our heads level and realize that this is just an LLM program.
quote
tsangc4

There exists a high minimum academic requirement for Cambridge LLM applicants. It applies equally to Cambridge Undergraduate students as well as law students from other schools. If the LLM were in fact less competitive than the undergraduate course the entire Cambridge undergraduate cohort would gain automatic admission to the Cambridge LLM regardless of their grades. That is not the case, though.

I think it's at least plausible to suggest that the calibre of the average Cambridge LLM applicant is of higher quality than the average Cambridge undergraduate applicant. This is because LLM applicants, assuming most of those applying do have first class grades, are proven to be adept at legal reasoning, writing and handling education at a tertiary level more generally. Numbers alone cannot account for this difference in quality. (Of course, you can point out that grading methods vary among universities and those applying might hold grades more inflated than Cambridge undergraduate students', but I don't think these applicants are in the majority)


To be honest I still think that the LLM is not as competitive as they make out to be, but I assume that is because I have had personal experiences that tell me so. For example, both me and my colleague got into the LLM programme, although neither of us had a first. My colleague was even quite far away from it. Meanwhile the best student in my class in high school got into the final round for admission into Cambridge's undergrad program in law, but was ultimately not selected, even though his grades were ridiculously high (a minimum of 90% average on all his courses, mind you in my country our curriculum constists out of 12 courses, so that means he scored equally well on maths as on French or sports, crazy). He ultimately chose not to study law and went for a degree in civil engineering, and is still way more talented than I am.

I mean, by all means, let's pat ourselves on the back that we made it into Cambridge, but all I am saying is that we should keep our heads level and realize that this is just an LLM program.


I don’t think the academic rigour of a high school curriculum can be compared to a university’s, but ok
[quote][quote]
There exists a high minimum academic requirement for Cambridge LLM applicants. It applies equally to Cambridge Undergraduate students as well as law students from other schools. If the LLM were in fact less competitive than the undergraduate course the entire Cambridge undergraduate cohort would gain automatic admission to the Cambridge LLM regardless of their grades. That is not the case, though.

I think it's at least plausible to suggest that the calibre of the average Cambridge LLM applicant is of higher quality than the average Cambridge undergraduate applicant. This is because LLM applicants, assuming most of those applying do have first class grades, are proven to be adept at legal reasoning, writing and handling education at a tertiary level more generally. Numbers alone cannot account for this difference in quality. (Of course, you can point out that grading methods vary among universities and those applying might hold grades more inflated than Cambridge undergraduate students', but I don't think these applicants are in the majority)
[/quote]

To be honest I still think that the LLM is not as competitive as they make out to be, but I assume that is because I have had personal experiences that tell me so. For example, both me and my colleague got into the LLM programme, although neither of us had a first. My colleague was even quite far away from it. Meanwhile the best student in my class in high school got into the final round for admission into Cambridge's undergrad program in law, but was ultimately not selected, even though his grades were ridiculously high (a minimum of 90% average on all his courses, mind you in my country our curriculum constists out of 12 courses, so that means he scored equally well on maths as on French or sports, crazy). He ultimately chose not to study law and went for a degree in civil engineering, and is still way more talented than I am.

I mean, by all means, let's pat ourselves on the back that we made it into Cambridge, but all I am saying is that we should keep our heads level and realize that this is just an LLM program.[/quote]

I don’t think the academic rigour of a high school curriculum can be compared to a university’s, but ok
quote
Ribben

I don’t think the academic rigour of a high school curriculum can be compared to a university’s, but ok


I made that point to illustrate how someone with much more potential than me didn't get into Cambridge and I did, because I think the LLM admission standards are lower and take other factors into account (for example academic potential etc).
[quote]
I don’t think the academic rigour of a high school curriculum can be compared to a university’s, but ok [/quote]

I made that point to illustrate how someone with much more potential than me didn't get into Cambridge and I did, because I think the LLM admission standards are lower and take other factors into account (for example academic potential etc).
quote
LLM2238

There exists a high minimum academic requirement for Cambridge LLM applicants. It applies equally to Cambridge Undergraduate students as well as law students from other schools. If the LLM were in fact less competitive than the undergraduate course the entire Cambridge undergraduate cohort would gain automatic admission to the Cambridge LLM regardless of their grades. That is not the case, though.

I think it's at least plausible to suggest that the calibre of the average Cambridge LLM applicant is of higher quality than the average Cambridge undergraduate applicant. This is because LLM applicants, assuming most of those applying do have first class grades, are proven to be adept at legal reasoning, writing and handling education at a tertiary level more generally. Numbers alone cannot account for this difference in quality. (Of course, you can point out that grading methods vary among universities and those applying might hold grades more inflated than Cambridge undergraduate students', but I don't think these applicants are in the majority)


To be honest I still think that the LLM is not as competitive as they make out to be, but I assume that is because I have had personal experiences that tell me so. For example, both me and my colleague got into the LLM programme, although neither of us had a first. My colleague was even quite far away from it. Meanwhile the best student in my class in high school got into the final round for admission into Cambridge's undergrad program in law, but was ultimately not selected, even though his grades were ridiculously high (a minimum of 90% average on all his courses, mind you in my country our curriculum constists out of 12 courses, so that means he scored equally well on maths as on French or sports, crazy). He ultimately chose not to study law and went for a degree in civil engineering, and is still way more talented than I am.

I mean, by all means, let's pat ourselves on the back that we made it into Cambridge, but all I am saying is that we should keep our heads level and realize that this is just an LLM program.


I don’t think the academic rigour of a high school curriculum can be compared to a university’s, but ok


I agree, and also I’d very interested to know why they’re accepting people with 2:1’s, if what Ribben is saying is true, when I know people who Cambridge have rejected with firsts, eg someone who has a first and did a training contract at a magic circle firm... my understanding is if you do not have a first you will not be admitted. I feel a freedom of information request coming on to find out if this is true.
[quote][quote][quote]
There exists a high minimum academic requirement for Cambridge LLM applicants. It applies equally to Cambridge Undergraduate students as well as law students from other schools. If the LLM were in fact less competitive than the undergraduate course the entire Cambridge undergraduate cohort would gain automatic admission to the Cambridge LLM regardless of their grades. That is not the case, though.

I think it's at least plausible to suggest that the calibre of the average Cambridge LLM applicant is of higher quality than the average Cambridge undergraduate applicant. This is because LLM applicants, assuming most of those applying do have first class grades, are proven to be adept at legal reasoning, writing and handling education at a tertiary level more generally. Numbers alone cannot account for this difference in quality. (Of course, you can point out that grading methods vary among universities and those applying might hold grades more inflated than Cambridge undergraduate students', but I don't think these applicants are in the majority)
[/quote]

To be honest I still think that the LLM is not as competitive as they make out to be, but I assume that is because I have had personal experiences that tell me so. For example, both me and my colleague got into the LLM programme, although neither of us had a first. My colleague was even quite far away from it. Meanwhile the best student in my class in high school got into the final round for admission into Cambridge's undergrad program in law, but was ultimately not selected, even though his grades were ridiculously high (a minimum of 90% average on all his courses, mind you in my country our curriculum constists out of 12 courses, so that means he scored equally well on maths as on French or sports, crazy). He ultimately chose not to study law and went for a degree in civil engineering, and is still way more talented than I am.

I mean, by all means, let's pat ourselves on the back that we made it into Cambridge, but all I am saying is that we should keep our heads level and realize that this is just an LLM program.[/quote]

I don’t think the academic rigour of a high school curriculum can be compared to a university’s, but ok [/quote]

I agree, and also I’d very interested to know why they’re accepting people with 2:1’s, if what Ribben is saying is true, when I know people who Cambridge have rejected with firsts, eg someone who has a first and did a training contract at a magic circle firm... my understanding is if you do not have a first you will not be admitted. I feel a freedom of information request coming on to find out if this is true.
quote
tsangc4

I don’t think the academic rigour of a high school curriculum can be compared to a university’s, but ok


I made that point to illustrate how someone with much more potential than me didn't get into Cambridge and I did, because I think the LLM admission standards are lower and take other factors into account (for example academic potential etc).


I’d respond but I find it pointless at this point... good luck at Cambridge!
[quote][quote]
I don’t think the academic rigour of a high school curriculum can be compared to a university’s, but ok [/quote]

I made that point to illustrate how someone with much more potential than me didn't get into Cambridge and I did, because I think the LLM admission standards are lower and take other factors into account (for example academic potential etc). [/quote]

I’d respond but I find it pointless at this point... good luck at Cambridge!
quote
Ribben

I agree, and also I’d very interested to know why they’re accepting people with 2:1’s, if what Ribben is saying is true, when I know people who Cambridge have rejected with firsts, eg someone who has a first and did a training contract at a magic circle firm... my understanding is if you do not have a first you will not be admitted. I feel a freedom of information request coming on to find out if this is true.


Because, I repeat, Cambridge LLM's admission standards are lower than the undergrad program (where nearly everyone has perfect high school scores). Also they take into account completely different things. In my experience (and I know around 5 people from my country who did the LLM) if you have a strong academic profile they will be very likely to grant you admission, even if you only have a 2:1.
[quote]
I agree, and also I’d very interested to know why they’re accepting people with 2:1’s, if what Ribben is saying is true, when I know people who Cambridge have rejected with firsts, eg someone who has a first and did a training contract at a magic circle firm... my understanding is if you do not have a first you will not be admitted. I feel a freedom of information request coming on to find out if this is true.[/quote]

Because, I repeat, Cambridge LLM's admission standards are lower than the undergrad program (where nearly everyone has perfect high school scores). Also they take into account completely different things. In my experience (and I know around 5 people from my country who did the LLM) if you have a strong academic profile they will be very likely to grant you admission, even if you only have a 2:1.
quote

Reply to Post

Related Law Schools

Cambridge, United Kingdom 661 Followers 698 Discussions

Related Articles

UK Student Visas for LL.M. Students

Nov 30, 2017

Get into an LL.M. in the UK? Read about Tier 4 visas and working in the country after completing an LL.M.

Living an International Life in England

Mar 23, 2016

Students from all over the world are drawn to England to pursue their LL.M.s while learning legal English and gaining international expertise.

More Articles