Ah, your will power did not last then?! Congratulations once more. I imagine you are firmly set upon Oxford then?!
It's interesting that both you and Jags were not successful at Cambridge but were accepted by Oxford. One would have thought that having the calibre to be accepted into one would have carried over and we would see many obtaining offers from both. Does anyone have a theory on that?
Oxford BCL and Cambridge LLM Applicants 2009
Posted Mar 22, 2009 19:55
It's interesting that both you and Jags were not successful at Cambridge but were accepted by Oxford. One would have thought that having the calibre to be accepted into one would have carried over and we would see many obtaining offers from both. Does anyone have a theory on that?
Posted Mar 22, 2009 20:04
No- I´am sometimes quite impatient...:-) In fact I can´t really believe it cause I am not working in academia and thought that oxon is admitting predominantly people who want to stay or still work in academia...
I hope the wait is over for you all tomorrow!
I hope the wait is over for you all tomorrow!
Posted Mar 23, 2009 03:39
Posted Mar 23, 2009 10:04
did anyone of you read anything about the date you must have accepted/declined your offer by ? does it depend on the date you received the (in)famous 1-line offer ?
Posted Mar 23, 2009 10:31
It's interesting that both you and Jags were not successful at Cambridge but were accepted by Oxford. One would have thought that having the calibre to be accepted into one would have carried over and we would see many obtaining offers from both. Does anyone have a theory on that?
What you will probably find is that those who have been accepted into Oxford were in or around the maybe pile for Cambridge but just didn't make the cut. You have to remember that the BCL/MJur 'only' receives about 600 applications per year in comparison to Cambridge's 1200, and both ask for the same requirements. This may well be explained by the fact that the Oxford programme, for home students at least, is considerably more expensive but I don't really know. Anyway, seeing they will initially make similar offer numbers,
And anyway, what your effectively saying is that on the Cambridge form you couldn't say everything you wanted to say about yourself because the word limit wasn't long enough. Personally, I'd say it was in no way 'stringent' and, considering that Oxford request that it's applicants have a 'particular eye for finesse and economy' in their writing, it would suggest that, if anything, on the presumption that you followed a similar writing style for both apps, it would be 'easier' to get into Oxford than Cambridge because they have obviously allowed you more space to write what you want and not really paid attention to their own 'entry requirements'.
For the record, I don't happen to believe this. I believe that it is pretty much equally difficult to get into both because where you have a chance to impress on one app, you don't on another, and so on. Plus, you can have a lucky day on one and not on the other, which is something most applicants need when there is such stiff competition.
It's interesting that both you and Jags were not successful at Cambridge but were accepted by Oxford. One would have thought that having the calibre to be accepted into one would have carried over and we would see many obtaining offers from both. Does anyone have a theory on that?</blockquote>
What you will probably find is that those who have been accepted into Oxford were in or around the maybe pile for Cambridge but just didn't make the cut. You have to remember that the BCL/MJur 'only' receives about 600 applications per year in comparison to Cambridge's 1200, and both ask for the same requirements. This may well be explained by the fact that the Oxford programme, for home students at least, is considerably more expensive but I don't really know. Anyway, seeing they will initially make similar offer numbers,
And anyway, what your effectively saying is that on the Cambridge form you couldn't say everything you wanted to say about yourself because the word limit wasn't long enough. Personally, I'd say it was in no way 'stringent' and, considering that Oxford request that it's applicants have a 'particular eye for finesse and economy' in their writing, it would suggest that, if anything, on the presumption that you followed a similar writing style for both apps, it would be 'easier' to get into Oxford than Cambridge because they have obviously allowed you more space to write what you want and not really paid attention to their own 'entry requirements'.
For the record, I don't happen to believe this. I believe that it is pretty much equally difficult to get into both because where you have a chance to impress on one app, you don't on another, and so on. Plus, you can have a lucky day on one and not on the other, which is something most applicants need when there is such stiff competition.
Posted Mar 23, 2009 10:40
I couldn't agree more, Cicero
Posted Mar 23, 2009 10:42
Posted Mar 23, 2009 10:45
A
Posted Mar 23, 2009 10:51
will all the applicants be informed through email? should I email Ms Malloy??????
Posted Mar 23, 2009 11:00
As far as the number of applications is concerned, one has to bear this in mind too..
Oxford calls for applications from those who are in top 5% (and then says that usually those pursuing BCL would be at or near te top of their class) whereas Cambridge invites applications from the top 10%, so the number of applications is higher for Cambridge.
After searching, I couldn't find the page where Oxford specified 'top 5%'- only a number of pages which specified that the applicant must have a first class degree. Anyway, it's irrelevant because neither invites applicants from a top percentage of each class- they attempt to simplify what a first class degree is in other jurisdictions so that international students can have a rough idea of whether they might be able to apply before looking any further into it. If you graduate in the top 8% of your class but your class happens to be awful and you end up with a 2:2, then the fact that Cambridge states '5-10%' on the website doesn't mean you can still apply.
Oxford calls for applications from those who are in top 5% (and then says that usually those pursuing BCL would be at or near te top of their class) whereas Cambridge invites applications from the top 10%, so the number of applications is higher for Cambridge.</blockquote>
After searching, I couldn't find the page where Oxford specified 'top 5%'- only a number of pages which specified that the applicant must have a first class degree. Anyway, it's irrelevant because neither invites applicants from a top percentage of each class- they attempt to simplify what a first class degree is in other jurisdictions so that international students can have a rough idea of whether they might be able to apply before looking any further into it. If you graduate in the top 8% of your class but your class happens to be awful and you end up with a 2:2, then the fact that Cambridge states '5-10%' on the website doesn't mean you can still apply.
Posted Mar 23, 2009 11:02
will all the applicants be informed through email? should I email Ms Malloy??????
I presume so. It is perhaps best to wait until some offers, which aren't institgated by applicants, start to appear to see whether they arrive by post or email but Jagsmehn stated last week that the fortunate would be emailed so I would think so.
I presume so. It is perhaps best to wait until some offers, which aren't institgated by applicants, start to appear to see whether they arrive by post or email but Jagsmehn stated last week that the fortunate would be emailed so I would think so.
Posted Mar 23, 2009 11:09
will all the applicants be informed through email? should I email Ms Malloy??????
I presume so. It is perhaps best to wait until some offers, which aren't institgated by applicants, start to appear to see whether they arrive by post or email but Jagsmehn stated last week that the fortunate would be emailed so I would think so.
thank you, Cicero. but I've been accepted by another uni, really cannot wait
I presume so. It is perhaps best to wait until some offers, which aren't institgated by applicants, start to appear to see whether they arrive by post or email but Jagsmehn stated last week that the fortunate would be emailed so I would think so. </blockquote>
thank you, Cicero. but I've been accepted by another uni, really cannot wait
Posted Mar 23, 2009 12:19
Posted Mar 23, 2009 12:33
Sorry, I ddin't see the first reply until I'd just now.
I don't understand the point about me not discussing the CV and written work aspect. It is impliedly mentioned in my reference to one application allowing an applicant to impress where the other doesn't. Anyway, I'll deal with it in more depth...
Cambridge don't compare the academic worth of two applicants just on the basis of numbers.They rely heavily on the academic references and their quality and they look for a logical, lucid and well written statement as to why an applicant wants to study there and why they should be offered a place above and beyond anyone else.
You seem to rely too heavily on the impact of a CV and a piece of written work. I believe that you'll find that neither are examined, beyond a brief look to see whether, because of the huge amounts of international students applying for the BCL/MJur, the applicant can present a case in something approaching well written english. They certainly aren't going to look into the law because, for the very same reason, so much of the work will be from jurisdictions they know little about. If you consult other forums and view the opinions of past and current Oxbridge grad students you'll see that this is the consensus view.
A variable approach to applications merely means that one institution believes it can make a judgement on less information to another. Perhaps the Cambridge approach is more frank in saying 'Actually, we won't look at all this other stuff so we won't trouble you to send it- if it comes down to it, we will rely on the quality of your written application and references'. Notably, as far as I can see, Harvard don't ask for a writing sample (http://www.law.harvard.edu/prospective/gradprogram/llm/apps-and-deadlines/index.html), ( I was only skim reading the pages so I may be wrong) but, either way, shouldn't a top candidate be able to adapt to different application methods and alter their approach to suit the institution?
I don't understand the point about me not discussing the CV and written work aspect. It is impliedly mentioned in my reference to one application allowing an applicant to impress where the other doesn't. Anyway, I'll deal with it in more depth...
Cambridge don't compare the academic worth of two applicants just on the basis of numbers.They rely heavily on the academic references and their quality and they look for a logical, lucid and well written statement as to why an applicant wants to study there and why they should be offered a place above and beyond anyone else.
You seem to rely too heavily on the impact of a CV and a piece of written work. I believe that you'll find that neither are examined, beyond a brief look to see whether, because of the huge amounts of international students applying for the BCL/MJur, the applicant can present a case in something approaching well written english. They certainly aren't going to look into the law because, for the very same reason, so much of the work will be from jurisdictions they know little about. If you consult other forums and view the opinions of past and current Oxbridge grad students you'll see that this is the consensus view.
A variable approach to applications merely means that one institution believes it can make a judgement on less information to another. Perhaps the Cambridge approach is more frank in saying 'Actually, we won't look at all this other stuff so we won't trouble you to send it- if it comes down to it, we will rely on the quality of your written application and references'. Notably, as far as I can see, Harvard don't ask for a writing sample (http://www.law.harvard.edu/prospective/gradprogram/llm/apps-and-deadlines/index.html), ( I was only skim reading the pages so I may be wrong) but, either way, shouldn't a top candidate be able to adapt to different application methods and alter their approach to suit the institution?
Posted Mar 23, 2009 12:52
As far as the number of applications is concerned, one has to bear this in mind too..
Oxford calls for applications from those who are in top 5% (and then says that usually those pursuing BCL would be at or near te top of their class) whereas Cambridge invites applications from the top 10%, so the number of applications is higher for Cambridge.
After searching, I couldn't find the page where Oxford specified 'top 5%'- only a number of pages which specified that the applicant must have a first class degree. Anyway, it's irrelevant because neither invites applicants from a top percentage of each class- they attempt to simplify what a first class degree is in other jurisdictions so that international students can have a rough idea of whether they might be able to apply before looking any further into it. If you graduate in the top 8% of your class but your class happens to be awful and you end up with a 2:2, then the fact that Cambridge states '5-10%' on the website doesn't mean you can still apply.
I don't know where this all is headed. But what I meant (and the same has been written here earlier by others too) was that Cambridge tends to place a lower cut-off percentage than Oxford. This would imply a larger number of applications than Oxford, which would mean a person not making the cut at Oxford, but having strong extra-curriculars (or something else to make up the lack of marks) may have a better chance at Cambridge.
May be, in my case, Oxford might have had lesser number of applications for the subjects for which I had applied. One never knows what weighed in one's favour, but I'm sure Cambridge application didn't even carry half the information that Oxford application did (both in terms of quantity and quality).
I completely understood your 'cut off' point and I've answered it already- I can't find evidence for what you are saying on the website but, even so, the figure used is not a cut off point- it is simply a rough idea of the grade required by an international applicant to apply for the course- it doesn't mean everyone within the top 10% of a class can apply because that wouldn't always equat to a first class honours degree
Yes, I'm sure it didn't carry half the information in quantity! In terms of quality, obviously, Cambridge believe the application method employed gives an applicant suffcient space to demonstrate the qualities they want. As I've said, I wouldn't overestimate the impact of CVs and essays anyway I return to a hypothetical point- if you Cambridge application didn't allow you to show them everything you have ever done and express, in as many words as you like, exactly why you want to study there, surely any application which allows you to employ Cvs, writing samples, longer statements etc, is more simple and, essentially, easier?!
Oxford calls for applications from those who are in top 5% (and then says that usually those pursuing BCL would be at or near te top of their class) whereas Cambridge invites applications from the top 10%, so the number of applications is higher for Cambridge.</blockquote>
After searching, I couldn't find the page where Oxford specified 'top 5%'- only a number of pages which specified that the applicant must have a first class degree. Anyway, it's irrelevant because neither invites applicants from a top percentage of each class- they attempt to simplify what a first class degree is in other jurisdictions so that international students can have a rough idea of whether they might be able to apply before looking any further into it. If you graduate in the top 8% of your class but your class happens to be awful and you end up with a 2:2, then the fact that Cambridge states '5-10%' on the website doesn't mean you can still apply. </blockquote>
I don't know where this all is headed. But what I meant (and the same has been written here earlier by others too) was that Cambridge tends to place a lower cut-off percentage than Oxford. This would imply a larger number of applications than Oxford, which would mean a person not making the cut at Oxford, but having strong extra-curriculars (or something else to make up the lack of marks) may have a better chance at Cambridge.
May be, in my case, Oxford might have had lesser number of applications for the subjects for which I had applied. One never knows what weighed in one's favour, but I'm sure Cambridge application didn't even carry half the information that Oxford application did (both in terms of quantity and quality).</blockquote>
I completely understood your 'cut off' point and I've answered it already- I can't find evidence for what you are saying on the website but, even so, the figure used is not a cut off point- it is simply a rough idea of the grade required by an international applicant to apply for the course- it doesn't mean everyone within the top 10% of a class can apply because that wouldn't always equat to a first class honours degree
Yes, I'm sure it didn't carry half the information in quantity! In terms of quality, obviously, Cambridge believe the application method employed gives an applicant suffcient space to demonstrate the qualities they want. As I've said, I wouldn't overestimate the impact of CVs and essays anyway I return to a hypothetical point- if you Cambridge application didn't allow you to show them everything you have ever done and express, in as many words as you like, exactly why you want to study there, surely any application which allows you to employ Cvs, writing samples, longer statements etc, is more simple and, essentially, easier?!
Posted Mar 23, 2009 13:06
Posted Mar 23, 2009 13:14
Posted Mar 23, 2009 13:16
As dranwn from my application I would say that Oxford really takes your extra curricular activities into consideration...
Jags have you been rejected by lse?
Jags have you been rejected by lse?
Posted Mar 23, 2009 13:18
Re.
Posted Mar 23, 2009 13:29
The question was indeed that, but then I disagreed with the point made about it being 'easier to get into Cambridge than Oxford'. I can see that we will have to disagree, but I am most grateful of the repetition of 'evidence' to support a claim that Cambridge is harder to get onto. lol
Of course, that is not what I believe. I believe that each are pretty much equally difficult to get into. Every candidate has the same opportunity to impress because each institution has a standardised method of application and so every candidate is in the same advantageous/disadvantageous position. As I say, in my opinion, to claim one is more difficult, when everyone is on such a playing field, is ridiculous.
Of course, that is not what I believe. I believe that each are pretty much equally difficult to get into. Every candidate has the same opportunity to impress because each institution has a standardised method of application and so every candidate is in the same advantageous/disadvantageous position. As I say, in my opinion, to claim one is more difficult, when everyone is on such a playing field, is ridiculous.
Related Law Schools
Hot Discussions
-
Oxford 2025-2026 BCL/MSCs/MJUR/MPHIL/MLF
15 hours ago 1,456 32 -
NUS LLM cohort 2025/26
Nov 03 11:27 AM 338 5 -
LLM Technology law Germany in English lang.
Oct 21, 2024 803 5 -
LLM in ADR
Oct 23, 2024 357 4 -
Harvard LLM 2025-2026
Oct 27, 2024 1,303 4 -
Going into arbitration?
Oct 20, 2024 256 3 -
NUS vs Peking
Nov 07 12:53 PM 144 3 -
LLM in Germany 2024
Oct 20, 2024 773 3