Hi. Im considering applying to Cambridge to do a LLM but only have a 2:1 (64% average) from a middle of the road university. I have a first in 3 modules out of my final 6 (when i actually began to work) Im currently working in a medium sized regional law firm as a trainee solicitor but would like to study IP and move to a more niche firm.

Is it even worth applying or will i be binned at the first stage?

Thanks

My fIrst point would be that, as you may be aware, Cambridge LLM applications are closed for the 09/10 academic year now, so, it would be the year after before you would be able to start.

Whether you have a chance, personally, I would say it is worth a shot but make sure you give yourself other options. Each year, both Oxbridge universities reject a lot of applicants who have good firsts (72/73 avg up), awards, publications and the like so I'd stay realistic. Nevertheless, if you write a blinding personal statement, have excellent references and a huge amount of luck then you might get in.

Anyway, why Cambridge for IP?! I know they have Bently and Cornish but you would only be able to do 2 IP modules out of 4 (International IP and IP). It might be worth checking out Queen Mary's IP programme. You sound as if you'd have a good shot at that with your grades, it is recognised as the best IP facility in the UK and, if it matters, you are still free to apply for this year. Good luck!

S_Dimelow,

How does one differentiate between an offer holder and a rejected candidate at Oxbridge? I mean everything being equal how do they select one candidate over the other, especially given the fact that at Cambridge they don't even ask for detailed CV or any written work.

Especially for candidates with competitive credentials (High First, publication, position of responsibility, etc.) from lower ranked universities, what would be the criteria?

I know the question is a bit too generalised but given that you seem to know quite a bit about the whole thing, I thought you might have something to share

Well, don't take what I say as gospel but I'll tell you what I was told by a fairly eminent member of one of the law faculties back in October.

The first stage will be a sweep to get rid of all applicants who dont meet the academic standards. After expressing some surprise at the amount of applicants I was told that the figure is not a reflection on the amount of 'serious candidates', just a figure of those applying. This will generally get rid of anyone who hasn't got a first (or predicted, I suppose). I'd guess this isn't completely true, particularly in the case of international students who have had extensive work experience (like that MP spoken of in a different post), or indeed, anyone with good contacts, dare I say! lol. As part of this sweep, they may also get rid of what they believe to be 'non serious' applicants. Ultimately, I believe that the 1200 is knocked down to 600.

As part of this, of course, they will take the cream and give them early offers. Oxbridge undergrads/grads with ridiculously good grades, Harvard/Yale/Columbia etc, maybe even some of the other top UK unis so UOL, TCD, but I'm not sure. I guess this might reduce the size of the pool somewhat.

Next, well, it's all about luck. If you get through to this stage then, you satisfy there basic requirements but it comes down to what you say in your forms, how well your points are articulated, the quality of your references and your referees, and I guess they may even have a rough quota of students from different countries, but I don't know for definite. It certainly appears so. Ultimately, its down to a large amount of luck and everything going in your favour.

Essentially, the final part of the process is not an exact science. For one thing, they expect different things from different people. International students seem to be slightly older and have this extensive work experience or publication list which they seem to consider important while UK students will be judged academically and perhaps more on potential than actual achievement as it is rare for a UK student to have published anything at undergraduate level, at least in anything peer reviewed or the like, or to have had all that much experience away from university.

When it comes to the lower ranked universities, as far as I was told, there is no prejudice. Of course, they may expect someone from a lower ranked university to demonstrate more (ie, top of the class rather than top 5%) to accommodate for the difference in class quality (hypothetically) but I know of people currently reading for the BCL at badly ranked UK universities and, at least away from the law faculty, many UK students transfer from the bottom to the top of the league tables for postgraduate study.

I hope that helps! I feel I may have incoherently rambled .... Sometimes I feel we try to hard to assess the process when all they do is stick everyone into a hat and pull 200 names out, lol. Hence, why I told the OP to apply- essentially, so many of us require similar luck and if you don't try, you'll just regret it in the long run.

Thanks for those insightful words.

I guess the bottomline is that one has to wait for the results of the process to come out. Simply put one has an idea about one's own application but how does one compare with others is an enigma..

S_Dimelow,

your post is very reassuring and helpful!

we should all relax now and hope they pull our names out of the hat :))

Glad to help!

Luck is a major factor in admissions. As I posted in another thread, it's almost like winning the lotto.

S_Dimelow,

Would you say that high quality references are an extremely important part to an application such as the one at Cambridge? Assuming they have already sifted through the applications that clearly don't make the cut? It seems to me that your references are the best way to differentiate between many qualified applicants.

Thanks for the informative posts by the way!!!

I would say so. I think your exactly right. I mean, once those who haven't made the cut are gone, I'd say a large number of people will have said pretty similar things- I want to go here because they offer the best options for me, it will help my career, I want to test myself at the highest level etc- and so, a very positive reference might help push you through the finish line. Its surprising how small the academic world is sometimes so perhaps the quality of the referees should also be considered. If someone is particularly eminent and goes on about how well you would be suited to postgraduate study I am sure it can work wonders. On the flip side, if a student goes out to find the most eminent faculty member for a reference, but they don't really know them that well, they probably shoot themselves in the foot somewhat.

That's what I am hopng for to say the least. I definitely got lucky getting to know and being taught by professors that have good credentials.

Thanks again!!!

CambridgeHopeful,

Why aren't you Oxbridge Hopeful?
Is it because of the courses available or just like that?

Well, I absolutely love Cambridge (visited this summer) and one of my references is a Dphil supervisor at Oxford. We discussed the choices and after taking my personality and career interests in mind he recommended I go for an LLM at Cambridge instead of the BCL. I did not find the BCL courses to be all that interesting to me.

Well, I absolutely love Cambridge (visited this summer) and one of my references is a Dphil supervisor at Oxford. We discussed the choices and after taking my personality and career interests in mind he recommended I go for an LLM at Cambridge instead of the BCL. I did not find the BCL courses to be all that interesting to me.

to OPINIO JURIS

it's like winning the lotto, except if you do get in, instead of getting richer, you get $40,000 poorer LOL.

Can anyone give me some insight into the CAM LLM, from the Human Rights point of view, is it better than Oxford or Geneva for Intl Law?

Thanx