I am a final year lawyer at Cambridge, and I am hoping to become a barrister. I am very much interested in both international law/human rights, and I have been fortunate enough to have been accepted to read for the LLM at the LSE next year, as well as the in Mst International Human Rights Law at Oxford.

I would like to solicit your opinions on which of the two courses is preferable. I am interested in the courses for both academic/intellectual reasons, as well as because I am applying to chambers specialising in human rights, and therefore I hope that having the extra qualification will help me secure a pupillage. Both courses allow for extensive study in the field of human rights/international law.

Please bear in mind that whichever course I eventually enroll in, I will be do so part time, as I am keen to qualify asap. I hope to be enrolled part time in the masters whilst I am enrolled full time for the BPTC.

Which would you recommend I choose? Which do you think would be more impressive to chambers?

The Oxford course is newer, and is an MSt - rather than an LLM like at the LSE - but then I would receive an LLM as part of the BPTC anyways.

Thank you all for your opinions!

OMG they have made me an offer! After being turned down by UCL I had given up hope...


Maybe because this is really where I wanted to go and my personal statement was more convincing?

Congratulations legalalien.. is great!! I am sure that LSE gave great value to your work experience!! Do u still have some pending applications?? Congratulations again, is a great way to start the week :)))

Thanks Morticia! In true London City elitist style I only applied to UCL and LSE so feel very lucky! My 5 year old son and I have just completed a very uncool self-congratulatory dance around the house - he's pleased because it means I'm committed to picking him up from school for the next 2 and a half years (I'm doing this part time).

congratulations man, you deserve it! good luck!

I am allowing myself a couple of months grace before starting stressing about my ability to cope with the course... my son has every faith :)

Don't stress, just enjoy and celebrate!!

Hello!

Does anybody know if LSE offers pre-sessional English courses? Is the TOEFL or IELTS test the only way to satisfy the language condition and how strict is LSE with the language requirement?

Need help!

Regards

It looks as though there is a summer school course at LSE - see

http://www2.lse.ac.uk/study/summerSchool/courses/englishLanguage/Home.aspx

I don't know how the timing interacts with the language requirement though.

Thank you for the information. Do you know how strict they are with the language requirement?? An IELTS score of 7.5 respectevly a TOEFL iBT score of 109 is quite much...

I found some additional info as well, which I think is probably more relevant
http://www2.lse.ac.uk/language/EnglishProgrammes/Presessional/PresessionalHome.aspx

Note that there's a specific English for law course, once you make the 7.5.

Sorry - no idea about how strict they are - luckily I'm a native English speaker!

@ legalalien

Thank you! Yes, lucky you!!!

I just received an e-mail informing me of the unconditional offer they made me. After some people already receiving their offers, I though I was going to be left out, but I guess I got lucky :)

Fantastic news - congratulations!

Have you decided whether to accept, or do you have multiple applications pending?

I'm not sure yet, I've already accepted UCL's offer, but am still waiting for Oxbridge's answer. So first, I need to decide between UCL and LSE, since I don't want to accept every offer I get and then cancel all but one. And I think it says in the conditions of the offer that you need to accept it within 6 weeks of receiving their mail, so it may just be I have time to wait for Oxbridge's decision to arrive, as it's probably going to take another two or three weeks for LSE's mail to reach me. Plus, their website states that even if you don't answer within the said 6 weeks, they don't withdraw their offer, so you could prolong your decision making even further.

I'm not sure yet, I've already accepted UCL's offer, but am still waiting for Oxbridge's answer. So first, I need to decide between UCL and LSE, since I don't want to accept every offer I get and then cancel all but one. And I think it says in the conditions of the offer that you need to accept it within 6 weeks of receiving their mail, so it may just be I have time to wait for Oxbridge's decision to arrive, as it's probably going to take another two or three weeks for LSE's mail to reach me. Plus, their website states that even if you don't answer within the said 6 weeks, they don't withdraw their offer, so you could prolong your decision making even further.

The universities are aware of the situation people are in, so no one's going to lose a place because I accepted an offer and may or may not cancel it later. They're just going to prolong their decision-making process in regard to those that fall somewhere in between. Plus, I thought their offer deadline was firm and that it is withdrawn should you not accept it, so yeah, it may be a bit selfish to accept it and later drop it, but what other choice do you have. If you're that sure of getting into Oxbridge, fine, but some of us aren't and would like to at least get in somewhere rather than stake it all and get in nowhere.

I'd like to point out that all programmes over-accept. If you have 100 places in the programme, you might accept 120 candidates, with the knowledge that some of them will choose to study elsewhere. That's the first thing. No university is rejecting another qualified applicant because Ryker accepted the offer. If you don't get in, it is - sorry to say - on merit.

Second, however, before you all lose your minds, you should find out whether, in addition to over-accepting, UCL maintains a wait-list. In that case, the only way Ryker could actually be depriving some lost soul of his or her rightful place in the programme is if (1) so many accepted students choose to attend other universities that the programme becomes undersubscribed and, then, (2) the programme is so undersubscribed that all the candidates on the wait-list are offered admission.

If, in that case, UCL has already (foolishly) decided to send rejection letters to all other applicants (rather than simply delaying decisions on some of the more competitive applicants who remain), THEN, perhaps you could argue that Ryker may be depriving some candidate of an offer.

Like I say, find out about wait-listed admission. But, even if UCL doesn't have a wait-list, keep your heads about you because there are always a few candidates who accept conditional offers and then fail to fulfill their conditions, and through no fault of their own (e.g., English language requirements). I think the admissions teams are likely pretty good at what they do, and I think you should all feel pretty confident that offers and rejections are merit-based and that no one is getting screwed simply by the numbers.

Well put, it was all I wanted to say but didn't and more. I'd like to add another scenario, where I would screw over another rightful applicant by accepting and later cancelling an offer, though. That would be the case where I waited long enough for the university to clear - be it accept or reject them - all waitlisted applicants and only then cancel my offer. I'm not sure whether this is even possible in practice as universities probably have some checks to prevent it, such as imposing earlier deadlines for paying tuition fees and similar.

In any case, Good Gosh, this scenario will NOT happen, you can be sure of that. You've portrayed me as a selfish bastard in your post, but it is not my intent to take careless action with disregard for everyone else. I do need to, however, take care of my interests and secure a place at least at some of the applied for universities and putting all of my eggs in the Oxbridge basket would in my situation most certainly be a sign of unfounded over-confidence. I did not place top of my class so I can't be *sure* I'm going to get accepted there. I hope I will, but I believe having a backup plan is to be expected and quite reasonable. Please correct me if you disagree.

Plus, as said, I would most certainly wait out longer if your assertions were correct and with provisionally accepting an offer I would screw someone over. But I'm not doing that. Do you really believe UCL or any other university rejects someone straight away, even if they believe that certain someone would perhaps fit in if only there were a couple more spots open, under false assumptions that all of the applicants who have accepted the offers will in fact honour their acceptance? No, in fact - though I can't find UCL's general conditions right now - they even plan ahead for just such a situation where one withdraws their acceptance. They explicitly mention what one should do should he change his mind. Would they put that in general conditions if they wanted to prevent this by any means necessary? You be the judge of that.

It is my belief that, although they may not positively endorse it, the universities ARE aware of the situation students are in. They are also aware of the quality of other universities and of the fact that Oxbridge may take until March and April to send out offers to the same students that applied to their university. It would be quite easy for them to prevent applicants from accepting and later cancelling their acceptances. All it would take would be either a) to try and reach an agreement with other universities in the country to set the same deadlines for acceptances or b) to delay the acceptance / rejection process until early in the year of the start of studies as Oxbridge does. b) probably sounds more plausible, but if it works for undergraduate studies (UCAS) option a) could also be brought to life.

Even if you disagree with this, I can assure you it is not my intent to hurt anyone's chances of getting accepted and that if I do get accepted at Oxbridge I will cancel my offer right after getting word of that so as to not keep anyone waiting and the university in false belief that I will be attending their courses.

Well, you present a novel rationalisation. Personally speaking I would not commit to an institution - by accepting an offer - in the knowledge that i would rescind it were another to pop through the mail. I do believe that doing so is reprehensible, and I don't respect those who choose to do so. I view it as analogous to agreeing to go to the a ball with sally, but then ditching her if the more glamorous annie takes you up on an earlier offer. You evidently don't agree with that, preferring the delusion that it is a victimless offence. (Shrugs) How one behaves says a lot about a person I guess.