As I am reading applicant's (people who are applying to Oxford) inadequate analysis upon the matters of marks and ranks. Insofar as to justify rather marks and ranks are irrelevant seems rather pointless for this thread. I seriously hope whomever applies to Oxford gains admittance. Despite the inadequate information being exchanged on this thread.
Moving along. The rigour of Oxford will boost your researching skills. However based upon the impractical analysis applicants exchange within this very thread. Some of you need a 'run for your money', per se. I find it appalling how applicants focus on the least important variables, concerning both marks and ranks. Have any of the applicants ever took the time to research law schools besides wasting thoughtful energy/time on such condescending exchanges? All law schools with regards to JD/LLB programme infer the same compulsory courses/modules for a qualifying degree. That is what I meant by "a 1st is a1st", verbatim. Nevertheless the lackluster ranking exchange holds no relevant weight toward sufficient information. And please take this into consideration; applicants who sought after answers when scrolling down the petty exchange about marks and ranks on a thread regarding the application process only negates any possible chance of gaining information about the BCL/MJur programme. And to add; you might have a renowned scholar as your lecturer. But the position of the renowned scholar, is simply, a lecturer. And the scholar's lectures are not going to make applicants more brilliant than they already are!
Aforementioned. Why are renowned scholars praised? Their approach on lecturing remains practical within academia. Applicants are mainly glorifying Oxford for unforeseen reasons. Which remains speculative on the applicants behalf. Those explicit reasons are expressed in threads like this one. However, renowned scholars (or lecturers) at Oxford are not going to bother to take students under their wing (training purposes). The lecturer will only hear, not listen, to the student's apprehensive whinge on their scholarly materials that students find incomprehensible. There is nothing renowned about an Oxford scholar. Their pieces are regarded based upon marketing (network) themselves during uni. This means, having people who will vouch for the best of their interest. If a student lack interpersonal skills. The student will be another graduate/post-graduate from Oxford. Getting your work (research) published takes [a lot] of ground work. You do not hear of the whereabouts of Oxford alums. Majority of them hide the fact of being from Oxford. Unless, they are a lecturer at uni. Becoming a judge/magistrate or supreme court justice might be too farfetched. And being an alum of Oxford can hinder an applicants chances of gaining employment as a practicing barrister/solicitor. Furthermore, a lot of LLC/INC are not fond of academics handling claimants. You doubt me? Find out how many Oxford alums make it into the magic/silver circle within the UK. And please give me dated information if you endeavour.
Oxford is good in its own way. Therefore I beg to differ on a practical stance that students are not going to learning more at Oxford than some lower ranked uni. The BCL/MJur will consist of applicants who defer their chances of undergoing a pupillage. For the chance of attending a year at Oxford. Whilst the BCL/MJur programme will inform applicants on a practical stance. I feel the only rigour a student will get out of Oxford is diving right into research in their first week. That is it. And just to reiterate, there is no way of a student graduating from Oxford's post-graduate programme being completely brilliant! The only 'true' question remains relevant to applicants: will graduating from Oxford open doors to desired employers? No.
Hopefully applicants will start a blog and tell us their experience at Oxford.
And this substantively is also untrue, the national media did an investigation on leaked emails Oxford postgrad admissions and they had a list of universities whose students were "probably not worth an offer" see http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2005/feb/22/highereducation.oxbridgeandelitism
Whilst this is not law and is in 2005 it is clear that the process is at least potentially not as you describe it. And viz. our analysis and its lacklustre approach rendering us "running for money" and ergo unsuitable applicants; it's a forum not an analytical thesis in socio-normative perspectives in higher education.
You obviously skimmed through that article. I give you credit for endeavouring. But what is not true?
Also I stated: "a run for your money" not "running for money" verbatim. It is an expression.
In a thread (you call it a forum) you can enquire about anything on your mind for feedback. There will be a person in the future who will answer the respective query. As long as it feasible to the thread. What I am asking is not rocket science. You either do or do not reply to the post. Your choice.
I am not here to burn bridges nor make acquaintances. I am here to exchange thoughtful ideas concerning the LLM (BCL/MJur).