I just noted that I meet the intellectual standard to be competitive for teaching and research posts at Oxford (as well as at Cambridge) - surely that threshold is far higher than the one for being a student. 

I have credentials that are on par with people that teach on the BCL lol. I guess that might have been their problem, but that argument is inevitably a weak one because Yale, for example, actively look for people like me to apply. 

So what does that really say about the prestige of the BCL? 

Food for thought. 

I essentially made the point in my personal statement that the BCL was the one thing I wanted to do - for myself - before I started an academic career. Thus, its not a qualification I 'need' by any means. 

It is at least plausible that put them off, but one must wonder how having a candidate like me would do anything other than make them look better. i wrote to the dean about it - perhaps i will get to the bottom of it, perhaps not. 

 at any rate, you all will do great things, no matter where you end up. 

Genuinely interested in this - what did you feel the BCL would add to this impressive CV? I'd imagine with these credentials you'd have so many options (certainly in academia or the Bar etc) available to you already!

Anyway - sounds like it's Oxford's loss! 

Out of curiosity, what did you write to the dean? About your personal rejection or about the general assessment criteria they use?

All the best for your future in any case!

I just noted that I meet the intellectual standard to be competitive for teaching and research posts at Oxford (as well as at Cambridge) - surely that threshold is far higher than the one for being a student. 

I have credentials that are on par with people that teach on the BCL lol. I guess that might have been their problem, but that argument is inevitably a weak one because Yale, for example, actively look for people like me to apply. 

So what does that really say about the prestige of the BCL? 

Food for thought. 

  
I did my undergrad at Oxford (not law) and, with all due respect, the tutors may ask themselves what another course after a Cambridge PHD would do for you? 
I get the feeling they have to balance experience with younger students who are capable but haven't had the chance to complete several degrees yet. If they didn't adjust for those things, they'd be barring people based on age. 

This is a fair point to make, I suppose. But it doesn't really square with Oxford's claim that  the BCL is the most prestigious law degree in the common law world. If that is so, then they need to admit only the very best candidates. It is, after all, a competition. 

It is also a market. Oxford aren't the only uni boasting the 'best LLM'. This is why I mentioned Yale in an earlier posting. Yale want candidates like me with ridiculous achievements, because it makes the programme look better, it creates a more dynamic and rigorous environment. An environment in which only the best survive. 

Again, I understand what you're saying, but its somewhat self-defeating. 

I just noted that I meet the intellectual standard to be competitive for teaching and research posts at Oxford (as well as at Cambridge) - surely that threshold is far higher than the one for being a student. 

I have credentials that are on par with people that teach on the BCL lol. I guess that might have been their problem, but that argument is inevitably a weak one because Yale, for example, actively look for people like me to apply. 

So what does that really say about the prestige of the BCL? 

Food for thought. 

  
I did my undergrad at Oxford (not law) and, with all due respect, the tutors may ask themselves what another course after a Cambridge PHD would do for you? 
I get the feeling they have to balance experience with younger students who are capable but haven't had the chance to complete several degrees yet. If they didn't adjust for those things, they'd be barring people based on age. 

As a doctoral student who's supposed to defend his thesis in August, I understand that there's little the MJur can do for me in terms of direction. I have opted to specialize in a largely unexplored legal niche, I got the job with the UN because of it and even a promising career in academia (if covid doesn't get me fired). Still, my decision to apply was mainly influenced by the perception that I will be meeting some brilliant people at Oxford, exchanging ideas I've accumulated with them, expanding my network and picking up on some common law perspective. As I'll never know the reasoning behind the decision, I can honestly only hope that others made a stronger case for themselves in their applications, otherwise it would mean that I was in fact - age/experience barred. And that would raise some questions as to why they have not introduced this limitation in the entry requirements.

This is a fair point to make, I suppose. But it doesn't really square with Oxford's claim that  the BCL is the most prestigious law degree in the common law world. If that is so, then they need to admit only the very best candidates. It is, after all, a competition. 

It is also a market. Oxford aren't the only uni boasting the 'best LLM'. This is why I mentioned Yale in an earlier posting. Yale want candidates like me with ridiculous achievements, because it makes the programme look better, it creates a more dynamic and rigorous environment. An environment in which only the best survive. 

Again, I understand what you're saying, but its somewhat self-defeating. 

I just noted that I meet the intellectual standard to be competitive for teaching and research posts at Oxford (as well as at Cambridge) - surely that threshold is far higher than the one for being a student. 

I have credentials that are on par with people that teach on the BCL lol. I guess that might have been their problem, but that argument is inevitably a weak one because Yale, for example, actively look for people like me to apply. 

So what does that really say about the prestige of the BCL? 

Food for thought. 

  
I did my undergrad at Oxford (not law) and, with all due respect, the tutors may ask themselves what another course after a Cambridge PHD would do for you? 
I get the feeling they have to balance experience with younger students who are capable but haven't had the chance to complete several degrees yet. If they didn't adjust for those things, they'd be barring people based on age. 

[Edited by Am.rajp on Mar 24, 2021]

I feel the same DR. I doubt we are even that 'old', just not 21/22 like the majority of the other applicants lol. 

Good luck defending your thesis! (And remember its their loss ultimately) 

As a doctoral student who's supposed to defend his thesis in August, I understand that there's little the MJur can do for me in terms of direction. I have opted to specialize in a largely unexplored legal niche, I got the job with the UN because of it and even a promising career in academia (if covid doesn't get me fired). Still, my decision to apply was mainly influenced by the perception that I will be meeting some brilliant people at Oxford, exchanging ideas I've accumulated with them, expanding my network and picking up on some common law perspective. As I'll never know the reasoning behind the decision, I can honestly only hope that others made a stronger case for themselves in their applications, otherwise it would mean that I was in fact - age/experience barred. And that would raise some questions as to why they have not introduced this limitation in the entry requirements.

I can totally see this side to it. My undergrad was an unrelated subject and I did a law conversion later but those connections I made have proved invaluable. 
To be fair to the admissions tutors though, a student who has graduated with first-class honours from Oxbridge with scholarships and/or good internships but happens to be 22 is just as impressive as someone with top-class experience, a PHD etc. 
I don't think you can say extra degrees or experience = capability. 
As an aside though, I'm pretty sure I've been rejected from the BCL and I am in a similar situation with first-class Oxford degree, 2 scholarships from Oxford, international experience (in and outside of law). So, who knows ahhaha

[Edited by Ll.m64523 on Mar 24, 2021]

Thanks @jsl65! I wish you the very best in your future endeavors! btw, I'm 27. maybe it’s time for me to find a good retirement plan

I feel the same DR. I doubt we are even that 'old', just not 21/22 like the majority of the other applicants lol. 

Good luck defending your thesis! (And remember its their loss ultimately) 

I agree with you - it is hard to compare the potential of a 22-year-old with the achievements of a 27-year-old. The potential is basically unlimited, and it is clear why it can sway tutors' toward younger applicants. Their perception of capability is very tricky, as your CV aptly demonstrates

I can totally see this side to it. My undergrad was an unrelated subject and I did a law conversion later but those connections I made have proved invaluable. 
To be fair to the admissions tutors though, a student who has graduated with first-class honours from Oxbridge with scholarships and/or good internships but happens to be 22 is just as impressive as someone with top-class experience, a PHD etc. 
I don't think you can say extra degrees or experience = capability. 
As an aside though, I'm pretty sure I've been rejected from the BCL and I am in a similar situation with first-class Oxford degree, 2 scholarships from Oxford, international experience (in and outside of law). So, who knows ahhaha

Oh gosh, I'm 28 with only an LLB, albeit relevant experience/internships/minor scholarships... now that I see the competition I'm up against it's no wonder I got rejected 

I agree with you - it is hard to compare the potential of a 22-year-old with the achievements of a 27-year-old. The potential is basically unlimited, and it is clear why it can sway tutors' toward younger applicants. Their perception of capability is very tricky, as your CV aptly demonstrates

I can totally see this side to it. My undergrad was an unrelated subject and I did a law conversion later but those connections I made have proved invaluable. 
To be fair to the admissions tutors though, a student who has graduated with first-class honours from Oxbridge with scholarships and/or good internships but happens to be 22 is just as impressive as someone with top-class experience, a PHD etc. 
I don't think you can say extra degrees or experience = capability. 
As an aside though, I'm pretty sure I've been rejected from the BCL and I am in a similar situation with first-class Oxford degree, 2 scholarships from Oxford, international experience (in and outside of law). So, who knows ahhaha

the competition got rejected too and I'm sure you're just as great as others who even tried for the BCL/MJur. we're just getting a bit nervous, I guess. who would have thought that a week riddled with 2AM wakeups would make us grumpy

Oh gosh, I'm 28 with only an LLB, albeit relevant experience/internships/minor scholarships... now that I see the competition I'm up against it's no wonder I got rejected 

Totally agree with @Am.rajp. I also don't see why having a PhD should lead to an expectation of automatic entry to the BCL. For the BCL most successful candidates are top of (or almost top of) their undergraduate class, which isn't a prerequisite for entry into most PhD (or other LLM) programs. If Oxford were obliged to admit everyone who completed a PhD (or other LLMs), then that would lead to lower standards and less prestige, in my opinion. Good luck with the Dean though...

This is a fair point to make, I suppose. But it doesn't really square with Oxford's claim that  the BCL is the most prestigious law degree in the common law world. If that is so, then they need to admit only the very best candidates. It is, after all, a competition. 

It is also a market. Oxford aren't the only uni boasting the 'best LLM'. This is why I mentioned Yale in an earlier posting. Yale want candidates like me with ridiculous achievements, because it makes the programme look better, it creates a more dynamic and rigorous environment. An environment in which only the best survive. 

Again, I understand what you're saying, but its somewhat self-defeating. 

In all honesty, do you think it might have something to do with the attitude reflected in your application? You have an impressive CV, but you are literally questioning the prestige of a course and claiming the process is 'bent' because you did not get accepted. How do you think successful applicants feel?

So far, you have mentioned that you don't 'need' the BCL, you could make Oxford look better, and you have 'ridiculous achievements'. If this is how you came cross in your application, then it can be quite off-putting.

'The very best applicant' is a subjective threshold. There will be younger applicants who have demonstrated great ambition, drive, and potential. I don't think accepting these students undermines the prestige of the course. There will also be people who were accepted (and rejected) with a stronger profile than yours (and if you can confidently claim that you have the strongest profile out of every single person rejected, then I can confidently say that the problem lies within your attitude).

It is okay to be frustrated, and I fully agree with the people who are complaining about the transparency and administration issues regarding the delayed rejection letters. However, I don't think it is fair to question the quality of the course because just because they rejected 'someone like you'. 

Just my two cents. Feel free to disagree and continue with your complaint. 

[Edited by JM98105 on Mar 25, 2021]

My assumption is premised on the fact that the three best LLMs in the world are Harvard, Oxford and Cambridge. 
To be fair, you don’t see the same level of frustration on all other different Universities’ LLM admissions thread, therefore implying there indeed was a problem with Oxford’s handling of admissions this year. Granted covid did mess things up a little, but still the fact that the Oxford thread has generated so much discontent and unhappiness speak volumes. Compared to the Cambridge and Harvard threads, the Oxford one has so much misgivings. 

If anything, I myself ranked 1st on the LLB cohort, had a masters from Cambridge, topped the bar examinations and was rejected! 

[Edited by Oxfordmad on Mar 25, 2021]

still no word. how about the rest?

Same, not even a rejection 

what a joke

Sent an email to the id available on the law website yesterday and received an email that my application was rejected. Anyone who needs information at the earliest should probably just email them than wait.

Sent an email to the id available on the law website yesterday and received an email that my application was rejected. Anyone who needs information at the earliest should probably just email them than wait.

I agree, this radio silence has generated a lot of frustration because it actually speaks loads about Oxford’s attitude toward rejected students. And I am disappointed because I thought Oxford is the pinnacle of professionalism.

And I see your point @DM98105, of course having a PhD does not equal automatic acceptance. But when it comes to grades, I do not think most people here graduated with anything less that a first, as that is explicitly required by the admissions. I graduated top of my class at Sapienza (as an Italian that was the best I can do and I adore and respect my Uni), but again I can see why some tutors would prefer younger applicants or look out for some subtle signs someone’s more suited for their MJur course for whatever reason. 

My assumption is premised on the fact that the three best LLMs in the world are Harvard, Oxford and Cambridge. 
To be fair, you don’t see the same level of frustration on all other different Universities’ LLM admissions thread, therefore implying there indeed was a problem with Oxford’s handling of admissions this year. Granted covid did mess things up a little, but still the fact that the Oxford thread has generated so much discontent and unhappiness speak volumes. Compared to the Cambridge and Harvard threads, the Oxford one has so much misgivings. 

If anything, I myself ranked 1st on the LLB cohort, had a masters from Cambridge, topped the bar examinations and was rejected! 

Sent an email to the id available on the law website yesterday and received an email that my application was rejected. Anyone who needs information at the earliest should probably just email them than wait.