Hi everyone,
I'm struggling to choose between Edinburgh Uni, LLM in Corporate Law and Nottingham Uni, LLM in International Commercial Law. It appears to me that the Law Dept in Nottingham Uni is quite strong, speaking about commercial law. What about Edinburgh in that respect?
Anyone going at Nottingham University for LLM in International Commercial Law this fall?
What to choose?
Posted Jul 05, 2016 14:59
0
Hi everyone,
I'm struggling to choose between Edinburgh Uni, LLM in Corporate Law and Nottingham Uni, LLM in International Commercial Law. It appears to me that the Law Dept in Nottingham Uni is quite strong, speaking about commercial law. What about Edinburgh in that respect?
Anyone going at Nottingham University for LLM in International Commercial Law this fall?
I'm struggling to choose between Edinburgh Uni, LLM in Corporate Law and Nottingham Uni, LLM in International Commercial Law. It appears to me that the Law Dept in Nottingham Uni is quite strong, speaking about commercial law. What about Edinburgh in that respect?
Anyone going at Nottingham University for LLM in International Commercial Law this fall?
Inactive User
Posted Jul 06, 2016 00:51
0
I am heading to Nottingham this year! Top 10 and very good law school. Excellent LLM programme and one of the best schools in the UK. Edin is also good especially internationally and also a good LLM programme.
I am heading to Nottingham this year! Top 10 and very good law school. Excellent LLM programme and one of the best schools in the UK. Edin is also good especially internationally and also a good LLM programme.
Posted Jul 06, 2016 09:29
0
edinburgh law school is miles ahead of nottingham especially on postgraduate level. it is more beautiful and you may have more things to do there. Edinburgh university has also a better worldwide reputation and prestige and it is only comparable to oxbridge and london colleges. Nottingham is quite good as well. But not better than Ed.
edinburgh law school is miles ahead of nottingham especially on postgraduate level. it is more beautiful and you may have more things to do there. Edinburgh university has also a better worldwide reputation and prestige and it is only comparable to oxbridge and london colleges. Nottingham is quite good as well. But not better than Ed.
Inactive User
Posted Jul 06, 2016 10:21
0
The miles away claim is simply misleading. Yes good law school but based in Scotland and a focus on Scottish law as opposed to English law. Yes also beautiful - very true.
Academically superior? - the are both on the top 10 - Edn 8 Notts at 10
The miles away claim is simply misleading. Yes good law school but based in Scotland and a focus on Scottish law as opposed to English law. Yes also beautiful - very true.
Academically superior? - the are both on the top 10 - Edn 8 Notts at 10
Academically superior? - the are both on the top 10 - Edn 8 Notts at 10
Posted Jul 06, 2016 12:21
0
edinburgh law school is miles ahead of nottingham especially on postgraduate level. it is more beautiful and you may have more things to do there. Edinburgh university has also a better worldwide reputation and prestige and it is only comparable to oxbridge and london colleges. Nottingham is quite good as well. But not better than Ed.
First of all, thanks guys to all of you!
Myias, that's what most people are saying about Edinburgh! Great city, great uni and world recognition as well.
But on the other hand, some people say that it is the particular LLM course and the tutors that should be considered in the first place while choosing a place to study in (when we are talking about relatively comparable law schools).
My point is that the International Commercial Law LLM at Notts is taught by renowned academics in the area, such as Sue Arrowsmith (procurement law), Howard Bennett (international trade and shipping law), Sarah Dromgoole (maritime law), Irit Merovach (company law and corporate insolvency), for instance. All of them are both great academics and practitioners and are involved in work with the international organisations (as stated by the Uni). And these facts are of great appeal to me since it is people who give us knowledge, not a Uni itself. Another plus is that they are giving me a schorlaship to some of my tuition fees!
On the other hand, Edinburgh's cons speak for themselves and are really attractive.
Wheretogo, what do you really think about Notts reputation in the world in terms of recognition?
I'm an international student and this matters, I'm afraid.
Guys, any other thoughts?
<blockquote>edinburgh law school is miles ahead of nottingham especially on postgraduate level. it is more beautiful and you may have more things to do there. Edinburgh university has also a better worldwide reputation and prestige and it is only comparable to oxbridge and london colleges. Nottingham is quite good as well. But not better than Ed.</blockquote>
First of all, thanks guys to all of you!
Myias, that's what most people are saying about Edinburgh! Great city, great uni and world recognition as well.
But on the other hand, some people say that it is the particular LLM course and the tutors that should be considered in the first place while choosing a place to study in (when we are talking about relatively comparable law schools).
My point is that the International Commercial Law LLM at Notts is taught by renowned academics in the area, such as Sue Arrowsmith (procurement law), Howard Bennett (international trade and shipping law), Sarah Dromgoole (maritime law), Irit Merovach (company law and corporate insolvency), for instance. All of them are both great academics and practitioners and are involved in work with the international organisations (as stated by the Uni). And these facts are of great appeal to me since it is people who give us knowledge, not a Uni itself. Another plus is that they are giving me a schorlaship to some of my tuition fees!
On the other hand, Edinburgh's cons speak for themselves and are really attractive.
Wheretogo, what do you really think about Notts reputation in the world in terms of recognition?
I'm an international student and this matters, I'm afraid.
Guys, any other thoughts?
First of all, thanks guys to all of you!
Myias, that's what most people are saying about Edinburgh! Great city, great uni and world recognition as well.
But on the other hand, some people say that it is the particular LLM course and the tutors that should be considered in the first place while choosing a place to study in (when we are talking about relatively comparable law schools).
My point is that the International Commercial Law LLM at Notts is taught by renowned academics in the area, such as Sue Arrowsmith (procurement law), Howard Bennett (international trade and shipping law), Sarah Dromgoole (maritime law), Irit Merovach (company law and corporate insolvency), for instance. All of them are both great academics and practitioners and are involved in work with the international organisations (as stated by the Uni). And these facts are of great appeal to me since it is people who give us knowledge, not a Uni itself. Another plus is that they are giving me a schorlaship to some of my tuition fees!
On the other hand, Edinburgh's cons speak for themselves and are really attractive.
Wheretogo, what do you really think about Notts reputation in the world in terms of recognition?
I'm an international student and this matters, I'm afraid.
Guys, any other thoughts?
Posted Jul 06, 2016 20:56
0
I thing that Notts is a good law school. it is respected worldwide but mostly in UK and i would put it in the same category as bristol, warwick and durham. But in terms of global recognition and prestige, Edinburgh's law school is ahead, incomparable and really competitive to get into some of its llms. If you don't mind paying more fees then go to Edinburgh 100%.
I know from personal experience that noone will ask you who was your professor during your studies. The only thing that a possible employer will see, is the name of your Universities and your experience. So i would clearly go with Edinburgh. Again, Nottingham is really good.
About the scotts law comment i disagree. Most of the llms at the University of Edinburgh are designed for international students and are not based on scotts law.
Finally yes edinburgh is 8th and Notts 10th according to the complete university domestic rankings (note that in student satisfactory, those rankings rate Edinburgh among the worst universities.. but even with that rated is still in top10 ahead of notts). In QS world rankings (the most accurate in my opinion), Edinburgh is in the top 20 both as a university and as a law school and Notts well below..
I thing that Notts is a good law school. it is respected worldwide but mostly in UK and i would put it in the same category as bristol, warwick and durham. But in terms of global recognition and prestige, Edinburgh's law school is ahead, incomparable and really competitive to get into some of its llms. If you don't mind paying more fees then go to Edinburgh 100%.
I know from personal experience that noone will ask you who was your professor during your studies. The only thing that a possible employer will see, is the name of your Universities and your experience. So i would clearly go with Edinburgh. Again, Nottingham is really good.
About the scotts law comment i disagree. Most of the llms at the University of Edinburgh are designed for international students and are not based on scotts law.
Finally yes edinburgh is 8th and Notts 10th according to the complete university domestic rankings (note that in student satisfactory, those rankings rate Edinburgh among the worst universities.. but even with that rated is still in top10 ahead of notts). In QS world rankings (the most accurate in my opinion), Edinburgh is in the top 20 both as a university and as a law school and Notts well below..
I know from personal experience that noone will ask you who was your professor during your studies. The only thing that a possible employer will see, is the name of your Universities and your experience. So i would clearly go with Edinburgh. Again, Nottingham is really good.
About the scotts law comment i disagree. Most of the llms at the University of Edinburgh are designed for international students and are not based on scotts law.
Finally yes edinburgh is 8th and Notts 10th according to the complete university domestic rankings (note that in student satisfactory, those rankings rate Edinburgh among the worst universities.. but even with that rated is still in top10 ahead of notts). In QS world rankings (the most accurate in my opinion), Edinburgh is in the top 20 both as a university and as a law school and Notts well below..
Posted Jul 07, 2016 05:40
0
Edinburgh university has also a better worldwide reputation and prestige and it is only comparable to oxbridge and london colleges.
No it is not. The reputation certainly is not comparable to Oxbridge.
Bye
flori
P. S.
For some nitpicking: Yes, technically one can compare the reputation to the one held by Oxbridge -> Oxbridge one's is better.
<blockquote> Edinburgh university has also a better worldwide reputation and prestige and it is only comparable to oxbridge and london colleges. </blockquote>
No it is not. The reputation certainly is not comparable to Oxbridge.
Bye
flori
P. S.
For some nitpicking: Yes, technically one can compare the reputation to the one held by Oxbridge -> Oxbridge one's is better.
No it is not. The reputation certainly is not comparable to Oxbridge.
Bye
flori
P. S.
For some nitpicking: Yes, technically one can compare the reputation to the one held by Oxbridge -> Oxbridge one's is better.
Posted Jul 07, 2016 07:47
0
I didn't say that edinburgh is better than oxbridge because it is not. I just said that its reputation and prestige falls in the same category as oxbridge, lse, ucl, kings. Dont forget that its one of the oldest universities in the english speaking world
I didn't say that edinburgh is better than oxbridge because it is not. I just said that its reputation and prestige falls in the same category as oxbridge, lse, ucl, kings. Dont forget that its one of the oldest universities in the english speaking world
Posted Jul 07, 2016 18:31
0
I just said that its reputation and prestige falls in the same category as oxbridge, lse, ucl, kings. Dont forget that its one of the oldest universities in the english speaking world
Hello Myias,
no - the prestige does not fall in the same category as Oxbridge. It simply does not. Oxbridge is in a different category.
The same goes for "seniority" - there is a huge gap between Oxbridge and Edinburgh. And what does the founding date signify, anyway - that Edinburgh has more reputation/prestige than Harvard or Stanford because it is older/ much older?
Bye
flori
<blockquote>I just said that its reputation and prestige falls in the same category as oxbridge, lse, ucl, kings. Dont forget that its one of the oldest universities in the english speaking world</blockquote>
Hello Myias,
no - the prestige does not fall in the same category as Oxbridge. It simply does not. Oxbridge is in a different category.
The same goes for "seniority" - there is a huge gap between Oxbridge and Edinburgh. And what does the founding date signify, anyway - that Edinburgh has more reputation/prestige than Harvard or Stanford because it is older/ much older?
Bye
flori
Hello Myias,
no - the prestige does not fall in the same category as Oxbridge. It simply does not. Oxbridge is in a different category.
The same goes for "seniority" - there is a huge gap between Oxbridge and Edinburgh. And what does the founding date signify, anyway - that Edinburgh has more reputation/prestige than Harvard or Stanford because it is older/ much older?
Bye
flori
Posted Jul 08, 2016 01:00
0
I think you dont really know how good the law school of edinburgh is. I cannot explain it in other words.
Again, im talking about REPUTATION. And as far as i know EVERY employer knows that Edinburgh university is among the best. And thats way i said that it is in the same reputation category with oxbridge, lse etc. because every employer knows these universities and how good they are. Thats what reputation means. I dont compare them, i just put them in the same category of recognition. If someone knows oxbridge, harvard etc he surely knows Edinburgh too.
If i would classify them they way you do i will surelly put oxbridge and harvard ahead of edinburgh. Stanford no because it relies on its marketing and not on its teaching
P.s as for the date, generally speaking, older universities have more reputation in teaching traditional courses such as law , medicine etc. and they build their reputation throught years of teaching and their research output.
I think you dont really know how good the law school of edinburgh is. I cannot explain it in other words.
Again, im talking about REPUTATION. And as far as i know EVERY employer knows that Edinburgh university is among the best. And thats way i said that it is in the same reputation category with oxbridge, lse etc. because every employer knows these universities and how good they are. Thats what reputation means. I dont compare them, i just put them in the same category of recognition. If someone knows oxbridge, harvard etc he surely knows Edinburgh too.
If i would classify them they way you do i will surelly put oxbridge and harvard ahead of edinburgh. Stanford no because it relies on its marketing and not on its teaching
P.s as for the date, generally speaking, older universities have more reputation in teaching traditional courses such as law , medicine etc. and they build their reputation throught years of teaching and their research output.
Again, im talking about REPUTATION. And as far as i know EVERY employer knows that Edinburgh university is among the best. And thats way i said that it is in the same reputation category with oxbridge, lse etc. because every employer knows these universities and how good they are. Thats what reputation means. I dont compare them, i just put them in the same category of recognition. If someone knows oxbridge, harvard etc he surely knows Edinburgh too.
If i would classify them they way you do i will surelly put oxbridge and harvard ahead of edinburgh. Stanford no because it relies on its marketing and not on its teaching
P.s as for the date, generally speaking, older universities have more reputation in teaching traditional courses such as law , medicine etc. and they build their reputation throught years of teaching and their research output.
Posted Jul 08, 2016 05:26
0
I think you dont really know how good the law school of edinburgh is. I cannot explain it in other words.
(...)
If i would classify them they way you do i will surelly put oxbridge and harvard ahead of edinburgh.
http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/university-subject-rankings/2016/law-legal-studies#sorting=rank+region=+country=+faculty=+stars=false+search=
2. Oxford
3. Cambridge
....
....
....
....
...
28. Edinburgh
Btw, LSE 7th and UCL 14th.
I think it's pretty clear that they do not consider Edinburgh to be in the same category as Oxbridge...
Old university: Does it make a significant difference whether a university was founded in the 16th century or in the 18th/19th century? If so, why would it make no significant difference whether a university was founded in the 11/12th century or 1583?
<blockquote>I think you dont really know how good the law school of edinburgh is. I cannot explain it in other words.
(...)
If i would classify them they way you do i will surelly put oxbridge and harvard ahead of edinburgh. </blockquote>
http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/university-subject-rankings/2016/law-legal-studies#sorting=rank+region=+country=+faculty=+stars=false+search=
2. Oxford
3. Cambridge
....
....
....
....
...
28. Edinburgh
Btw, LSE 7th and UCL 14th.
I think it's pretty clear that they do not consider Edinburgh to be in the same category as Oxbridge...
Old university: Does it make a significant difference whether a university was founded in the 16th century or in the 18th/19th century? If so, why would it make no significant difference whether a university was founded in the 11/12th century or 1583?
(...)
If i would classify them they way you do i will surelly put oxbridge and harvard ahead of edinburgh. </blockquote>
http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/university-subject-rankings/2016/law-legal-studies#sorting=rank+region=+country=+faculty=+stars=false+search=
2. Oxford
3. Cambridge
....
....
....
....
...
28. Edinburgh
Btw, LSE 7th and UCL 14th.
I think it's pretty clear that they do not consider Edinburgh to be in the same category as Oxbridge...
Old university: Does it make a significant difference whether a university was founded in the 16th century or in the 18th/19th century? If so, why would it make no significant difference whether a university was founded in the 11/12th century or 1583?
Posted Jul 08, 2016 10:31
0
I think you dont really know how good the law school of edinburgh is. I cannot explain it in other words.
(...)
If i would classify them they way you do i will surelly put oxbridge and harvard ahead of edinburgh.
http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/university-subject-rankings/2016/law-legal-studies#sorting=rank+region=+country=+faculty=+stars=false+search=
2. Oxford
3. Cambridge
....
....
....
....
...
28. Edinburgh
Btw, LSE 7th and UCL 14th.
I think it's pretty clear that they do not consider Edinburgh to be in the same category as Oxbridge...
Old university: Does it make a significant difference whether a university was founded in the 16th century or in the 18th/19th century? If so, why would it make no significant difference whether a university was founded in the 11/12th century or 1583?
Hi, rankings cannot be seen as the only one marker. For example, one of the most reliable and respected rankings, QS World Universirty overall ranking, puts LSE only to 35th place wheras Edinburgh is 21th. Furthermore, another the most recognisble in terms of comparing research, hence scientific, power ARWU ranking (mostly known as Shanghair ranking) puts LSE only to 101-150 position, even without a definte place. KCL is only the 55th, while Edinburgh is 47th. And Oxford is also well below its typical second place, it's on the 10th. Considering these, it seems your opponet has a point when trying to say that rankings is not the only thing to take into account and that reputation is simply not the same as the place in a ranking.
<blockquote><blockquote>I think you dont really know how good the law school of edinburgh is. I cannot explain it in other words.
(...)
If i would classify them they way you do i will surelly put oxbridge and harvard ahead of edinburgh. </blockquote>
http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/university-subject-rankings/2016/law-legal-studies#sorting=rank+region=+country=+faculty=+stars=false+search=
2. Oxford
3. Cambridge
....
....
....
....
...
28. Edinburgh
Btw, LSE 7th and UCL 14th.
I think it's pretty clear that they do not consider Edinburgh to be in the same category as Oxbridge...
Old university: Does it make a significant difference whether a university was founded in the 16th century or in the 18th/19th century? If so, why would it make no significant difference whether a university was founded in the 11/12th century or 1583?
</blockquote>
Hi, rankings cannot be seen as the only one marker. For example, one of the most reliable and respected rankings, QS World Universirty overall ranking, puts LSE only to 35th place wheras Edinburgh is 21th. Furthermore, another the most recognisble in terms of comparing research, hence scientific, power ARWU ranking (mostly known as Shanghair ranking) puts LSE only to 101-150 position, even without a definte place. KCL is only the 55th, while Edinburgh is 47th. And Oxford is also well below its typical second place, it's on the 10th. Considering these, it seems your opponet has a point when trying to say that rankings is not the only thing to take into account and that reputation is simply not the same as the place in a ranking.
(...)
If i would classify them they way you do i will surelly put oxbridge and harvard ahead of edinburgh. </blockquote>
http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/university-subject-rankings/2016/law-legal-studies#sorting=rank+region=+country=+faculty=+stars=false+search=
2. Oxford
3. Cambridge
....
....
....
....
...
28. Edinburgh
Btw, LSE 7th and UCL 14th.
I think it's pretty clear that they do not consider Edinburgh to be in the same category as Oxbridge...
Old university: Does it make a significant difference whether a university was founded in the 16th century or in the 18th/19th century? If so, why would it make no significant difference whether a university was founded in the 11/12th century or 1583?
</blockquote>
Hi, rankings cannot be seen as the only one marker. For example, one of the most reliable and respected rankings, QS World Universirty overall ranking, puts LSE only to 35th place wheras Edinburgh is 21th. Furthermore, another the most recognisble in terms of comparing research, hence scientific, power ARWU ranking (mostly known as Shanghair ranking) puts LSE only to 101-150 position, even without a definte place. KCL is only the 55th, while Edinburgh is 47th. And Oxford is also well below its typical second place, it's on the 10th. Considering these, it seems your opponet has a point when trying to say that rankings is not the only thing to take into account and that reputation is simply not the same as the place in a ranking.
Posted Jul 08, 2016 17:51
0
I think you dont really know how good the law school of edinburgh is. I cannot explain it in other words.
(...)
If i would classify them they way you do i will surelly put oxbridge and harvard ahead of edinburgh.
http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/university-subject-rankings/2016/law-legal-studies#sorting=rank+region=+country=+faculty=+stars=false+search=
2. Oxford
3. Cambridge
....
....
....
....
...
28. Edinburgh
Btw, LSE 7th and UCL 14th.
I think it's pretty clear that they do not consider Edinburgh to be in the same category as Oxbridge...
Old university: Does it make a significant difference whether a university was founded in the 16th century or in the 18th/19th century? If so, why would it make no significant difference whether a university was founded in the 11/12th century or 1583?
Hi, rankings cannot be seen as the only one marker. For example, one of the most reliable and respected rankings, QS World Universirty overall ranking, puts LSE only to 35th place wheras Edinburgh is 21th. Furthermore, another the most recognisble in terms of comparing research, hence scientific, power ARWU ranking (mostly known as Shanghair ranking) puts LSE only to 101-150 position, even without a definte place. KCL is only the 55th, while Edinburgh is 47th. And Oxford is also well below its typical second place, it's on the 10th. Considering these, it seems your opponet has a point when trying to say that rankings is not the only thing to take into account and that reputation is simply not the same as the place in a ranking.
This is exactly what im trying to say. I totally agree with you and thats why i consider overall reputation more valuable than domestic rankings.
<blockquote><blockquote><blockquote>I think you dont really know how good the law school of edinburgh is. I cannot explain it in other words.
(...)
If i would classify them they way you do i will surelly put oxbridge and harvard ahead of edinburgh. </blockquote>
http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/university-subject-rankings/2016/law-legal-studies#sorting=rank+region=+country=+faculty=+stars=false+search=
2. Oxford
3. Cambridge
....
....
....
....
...
28. Edinburgh
Btw, LSE 7th and UCL 14th.
I think it's pretty clear that they do not consider Edinburgh to be in the same category as Oxbridge...
Old university: Does it make a significant difference whether a university was founded in the 16th century or in the 18th/19th century? If so, why would it make no significant difference whether a university was founded in the 11/12th century or 1583?
</blockquote>
Hi, rankings cannot be seen as the only one marker. For example, one of the most reliable and respected rankings, QS World Universirty overall ranking, puts LSE only to 35th place wheras Edinburgh is 21th. Furthermore, another the most recognisble in terms of comparing research, hence scientific, power ARWU ranking (mostly known as Shanghair ranking) puts LSE only to 101-150 position, even without a definte place. KCL is only the 55th, while Edinburgh is 47th. And Oxford is also well below its typical second place, it's on the 10th. Considering these, it seems your opponet has a point when trying to say that rankings is not the only thing to take into account and that reputation is simply not the same as the place in a ranking. </blockquote>
This is exactly what im trying to say. I totally agree with you and thats why i consider overall reputation more valuable than domestic rankings.
(...)
If i would classify them they way you do i will surelly put oxbridge and harvard ahead of edinburgh. </blockquote>
http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/university-subject-rankings/2016/law-legal-studies#sorting=rank+region=+country=+faculty=+stars=false+search=
2. Oxford
3. Cambridge
....
....
....
....
...
28. Edinburgh
Btw, LSE 7th and UCL 14th.
I think it's pretty clear that they do not consider Edinburgh to be in the same category as Oxbridge...
Old university: Does it make a significant difference whether a university was founded in the 16th century or in the 18th/19th century? If so, why would it make no significant difference whether a university was founded in the 11/12th century or 1583?
</blockquote>
Hi, rankings cannot be seen as the only one marker. For example, one of the most reliable and respected rankings, QS World Universirty overall ranking, puts LSE only to 35th place wheras Edinburgh is 21th. Furthermore, another the most recognisble in terms of comparing research, hence scientific, power ARWU ranking (mostly known as Shanghair ranking) puts LSE only to 101-150 position, even without a definte place. KCL is only the 55th, while Edinburgh is 47th. And Oxford is also well below its typical second place, it's on the 10th. Considering these, it seems your opponet has a point when trying to say that rankings is not the only thing to take into account and that reputation is simply not the same as the place in a ranking. </blockquote>
This is exactly what im trying to say. I totally agree with you and thats why i consider overall reputation more valuable than domestic rankings.
Posted Jul 08, 2016 22:14
0
Well, let's sum it up:
1. The ratings may be innaccurate.
2. However, according to the ratings quoted so far (including the "scientific" ARWU rating) Oxbridge is in a different category from Edinburgh and it is always a better one (Cambridge is 5th by the way; http://www.shanghairanking.com).
3. So far, no empirical evidence whatsoever has been produced for the ominous "overall reputation comparable to Oxbridge" allegedly held by Edinburgh.
4. However, it appears that - in general and based on the UCAS score - it is significantly "easier" to get into Edinburgh than into Oxbridge. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2016/03/14/the-10-hardest-universities-to-get-into/
4. During the discussion the "seniority argument" was mentioned in order to place Edinburgh in the same category as Oxbridge -> however, a difference of 300-400 years would be both insignificant (1583 - 300/400years -> Oxbridge) and very significant (1583 + 300/400 years -> "new universities"). This might be the case, however it is far from self-evident.
The discussion is certainly very interesting, but in the end the "entry level requirements market" has put an academic price on the entry to Oxbridge and the entry to Edinburgh.
Either there is a huge market failure at work or Oxbridge is indeed in a different category - what is more likely?
I am not saying that Edinburgh is not an excellent university. However, given that some people do actually take the posts on this forum into account when selecting their LLM programs (they probably should not ;-)), I think that claims such as "X is way better than Y/ Z is comparable to A/ You will get a horrible experience at B and so on" should be backed up by more than hearsay/ anecdotal evidence.
(This is by no means restricted to this thread and I assume that all/ most of such postings are sincere).
Bye
flori
P.S.
As far as ratings are concerned:
1.If I am not mistaken, the "QS ranking"-argument was used pro Edinburgh and contra Nottingham by a certain poster. Quote:
"In QS world rankings (the most accurate in my opinion), Edinburgh is in the top 20 both as a university and as a law school and Notts well below.." Unquote (Wed Jul 06, 2016 08:56 PM)
2. Now, that someone else continues this line of argumentation and turns it "against Edinburgh", it becomes invalid?
Well, let's sum it up:
1. The ratings may be innaccurate.
2. However, according to the ratings quoted so far (including the "scientific" ARWU rating) Oxbridge is in a different category from Edinburgh and it is always a better one (Cambridge is 5th by the way; http://www.shanghairanking.com).
3. So far, no empirical evidence whatsoever has been produced for the ominous "overall reputation comparable to Oxbridge" allegedly held by Edinburgh.
4. However, it appears that - in general and based on the UCAS score - it is significantly "easier" to get into Edinburgh than into Oxbridge. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2016/03/14/the-10-hardest-universities-to-get-into/
4. During the discussion the "seniority argument" was mentioned in order to place Edinburgh in the same category as Oxbridge -> however, a difference of 300-400 years would be both insignificant (1583 - 300/400years -> Oxbridge) and very significant (1583 + 300/400 years -> "new universities"). This might be the case, however it is far from self-evident.
The discussion is certainly very interesting, but in the end the "entry level requirements market" has put an academic price on the entry to Oxbridge and the entry to Edinburgh.
Either there is a huge market failure at work or Oxbridge is indeed in a different category - what is more likely?
I am not saying that Edinburgh is not an excellent university. However, given that some people do actually take the posts on this forum into account when selecting their LLM programs (they probably should not ;-)), I think that claims such as "X is way better than Y/ Z is comparable to A/ You will get a horrible experience at B and so on" should be backed up by more than hearsay/ anecdotal evidence.
(This is by no means restricted to this thread and I assume that all/ most of such postings are sincere).
Bye
flori
P.S.
As far as ratings are concerned:
1.If I am not mistaken, the "QS ranking"-argument was used pro Edinburgh and contra Nottingham by a certain poster. Quote:
"In QS world rankings (the most accurate in my opinion), Edinburgh is in the top 20 both as a university and as a law school and Notts well below.." Unquote (Wed Jul 06, 2016 08:56 PM)
2. Now, that someone else continues this line of argumentation and turns it "against Edinburgh", it becomes invalid?
1. The ratings may be innaccurate.
2. However, according to the ratings quoted so far (including the "scientific" ARWU rating) Oxbridge is in a different category from Edinburgh and it is always a better one (Cambridge is 5th by the way; http://www.shanghairanking.com).
3. So far, no empirical evidence whatsoever has been produced for the ominous "overall reputation comparable to Oxbridge" allegedly held by Edinburgh.
4. However, it appears that - in general and based on the UCAS score - it is significantly "easier" to get into Edinburgh than into Oxbridge. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2016/03/14/the-10-hardest-universities-to-get-into/
4. During the discussion the "seniority argument" was mentioned in order to place Edinburgh in the same category as Oxbridge -> however, a difference of 300-400 years would be both insignificant (1583 - 300/400years -> Oxbridge) and very significant (1583 + 300/400 years -> "new universities"). This might be the case, however it is far from self-evident.
The discussion is certainly very interesting, but in the end the "entry level requirements market" has put an academic price on the entry to Oxbridge and the entry to Edinburgh.
Either there is a huge market failure at work or Oxbridge is indeed in a different category - what is more likely?
I am not saying that Edinburgh is not an excellent university. However, given that some people do actually take the posts on this forum into account when selecting their LLM programs (they probably should not ;-)), I think that claims such as "X is way better than Y/ Z is comparable to A/ You will get a horrible experience at B and so on" should be backed up by more than hearsay/ anecdotal evidence.
(This is by no means restricted to this thread and I assume that all/ most of such postings are sincere).
Bye
flori
P.S.
As far as ratings are concerned:
1.If I am not mistaken, the "QS ranking"-argument was used pro Edinburgh and contra Nottingham by a certain poster. Quote:
"In QS world rankings (the most accurate in my opinion), Edinburgh is in the top 20 both as a university and as a law school and Notts well below.." Unquote (Wed Jul 06, 2016 08:56 PM)
2. Now, that someone else continues this line of argumentation and turns it "against Edinburgh", it becomes invalid?
Posted Jul 09, 2016 02:26
0
Well, let's sum it up:
1. The ratings may be innaccurate.
2. However, according to the ratings quoted so far (including the "scientific" ARWU rating) Oxbridge is in a different category from Edinburgh and it is always a better one (Cambridge is 5th by the way; http://www.shanghairanking.com).
3. So far, no empirical evidence whatsoever has been produced for the ominous "overall reputation comparable to Oxbridge" allegedly held by Edinburgh.
4. However, it appears that - in general and based on the UCAS score - it is significantly "easier" to get into Edinburgh than into Oxbridge. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2016/03/14/the-10-hardest-universities-to-get-into/
4. During the discussion the "seniority argument" was mentioned in order to place Edinburgh in the same category as Oxbridge -> however, a difference of 300-400 years would be both insignificant (1583 - 300/400years -> Oxbridge) and very significant (1583 + 300/400 years -> "new universities"). This might be the case, however it is far from self-evident.
The discussion is certainly very interesting, but in the end the "entry level requirements market" has put an academic price on the entry to Oxbridge and the entry to Edinburgh.
Either there is a huge market failure at work or Oxbridge is indeed in a different category - what is more likely?
I am not saying that Edinburgh is not an excellent university. However, given that some people do actually take the posts on this forum into account when selecting their LLM programs (they probably should not ;-)), I think that claims such as "X is way better than Y/ Z is comparable to A/ You will get a horrible experience at B and so on" should be backed up by more than hearsay/ anecdotal evidence.
(This is by no means restricted to this thread and I assume that all/ most of such postings are sincere).
Bye
flori
P.S.
As far as ratings are concerned:
1.If I am not mistaken, the "QS ranking"-argument was used pro Edinburgh and contra Nottingham by a certain poster. Quote:
"In QS world rankings (the most accurate in my opinion), Edinburgh is in the top 20 both as a university and as a law school and Notts well below.." Unquote (Wed Jul 06, 2016 08:56 PM)
2. Now, that someone else continues this line of argumentation and turns it "against Edinburgh", it becomes invalid?
There was no argument until you came up. I was just advising the guy on his question "edinburgh or nottingham" because this is the main reason of the existence of this group. You on the other hand, did not provide any answer to his original question but you prefered to start arguing. And as you can see in my comments i said again and again that oxbridge unis are better than Edinburgh but all 3 are known from the employers to be among the best (reputation). I dont understand why you try to convice me that oxford or cambridge are better than edinburgh. I already know that they are!!!
<blockquote>Well, let's sum it up:
1. The ratings may be innaccurate.
2. However, according to the ratings quoted so far (including the "scientific" ARWU rating) Oxbridge is in a different category from Edinburgh and it is always a better one (Cambridge is 5th by the way; http://www.shanghairanking.com).
3. So far, no empirical evidence whatsoever has been produced for the ominous "overall reputation comparable to Oxbridge" allegedly held by Edinburgh.
4. However, it appears that - in general and based on the UCAS score - it is significantly "easier" to get into Edinburgh than into Oxbridge. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2016/03/14/the-10-hardest-universities-to-get-into/
4. During the discussion the "seniority argument" was mentioned in order to place Edinburgh in the same category as Oxbridge -> however, a difference of 300-400 years would be both insignificant (1583 - 300/400years -> Oxbridge) and very significant (1583 + 300/400 years -> "new universities"). This might be the case, however it is far from self-evident.
The discussion is certainly very interesting, but in the end the "entry level requirements market" has put an academic price on the entry to Oxbridge and the entry to Edinburgh.
Either there is a huge market failure at work or Oxbridge is indeed in a different category - what is more likely?
I am not saying that Edinburgh is not an excellent university. However, given that some people do actually take the posts on this forum into account when selecting their LLM programs (they probably should not ;-)), I think that claims such as "X is way better than Y/ Z is comparable to A/ You will get a horrible experience at B and so on" should be backed up by more than hearsay/ anecdotal evidence.
(This is by no means restricted to this thread and I assume that all/ most of such postings are sincere).
Bye
flori
P.S.
As far as ratings are concerned:
1.If I am not mistaken, the "QS ranking"-argument was used pro Edinburgh and contra Nottingham by a certain poster. Quote:
"In QS world rankings (the most accurate in my opinion), Edinburgh is in the top 20 both as a university and as a law school and Notts well below.." Unquote (Wed Jul 06, 2016 08:56 PM)
2. Now, that someone else continues this line of argumentation and turns it "against Edinburgh", it becomes invalid?</blockquote>
There was no argument until you came up. I was just advising the guy on his question "edinburgh or nottingham" because this is the main reason of the existence of this group. You on the other hand, did not provide any answer to his original question but you prefered to start arguing. And as you can see in my comments i said again and again that oxbridge unis are better than Edinburgh but all 3 are known from the employers to be among the best (reputation). I dont understand why you try to convice me that oxford or cambridge are better than edinburgh. I already know that they are!!!
1. The ratings may be innaccurate.
2. However, according to the ratings quoted so far (including the "scientific" ARWU rating) Oxbridge is in a different category from Edinburgh and it is always a better one (Cambridge is 5th by the way; http://www.shanghairanking.com).
3. So far, no empirical evidence whatsoever has been produced for the ominous "overall reputation comparable to Oxbridge" allegedly held by Edinburgh.
4. However, it appears that - in general and based on the UCAS score - it is significantly "easier" to get into Edinburgh than into Oxbridge. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2016/03/14/the-10-hardest-universities-to-get-into/
4. During the discussion the "seniority argument" was mentioned in order to place Edinburgh in the same category as Oxbridge -> however, a difference of 300-400 years would be both insignificant (1583 - 300/400years -> Oxbridge) and very significant (1583 + 300/400 years -> "new universities"). This might be the case, however it is far from self-evident.
The discussion is certainly very interesting, but in the end the "entry level requirements market" has put an academic price on the entry to Oxbridge and the entry to Edinburgh.
Either there is a huge market failure at work or Oxbridge is indeed in a different category - what is more likely?
I am not saying that Edinburgh is not an excellent university. However, given that some people do actually take the posts on this forum into account when selecting their LLM programs (they probably should not ;-)), I think that claims such as "X is way better than Y/ Z is comparable to A/ You will get a horrible experience at B and so on" should be backed up by more than hearsay/ anecdotal evidence.
(This is by no means restricted to this thread and I assume that all/ most of such postings are sincere).
Bye
flori
P.S.
As far as ratings are concerned:
1.If I am not mistaken, the "QS ranking"-argument was used pro Edinburgh and contra Nottingham by a certain poster. Quote:
"In QS world rankings (the most accurate in my opinion), Edinburgh is in the top 20 both as a university and as a law school and Notts well below.." Unquote (Wed Jul 06, 2016 08:56 PM)
2. Now, that someone else continues this line of argumentation and turns it "against Edinburgh", it becomes invalid?</blockquote>
There was no argument until you came up. I was just advising the guy on his question "edinburgh or nottingham" because this is the main reason of the existence of this group. You on the other hand, did not provide any answer to his original question but you prefered to start arguing. And as you can see in my comments i said again and again that oxbridge unis are better than Edinburgh but all 3 are known from the employers to be among the best (reputation). I dont understand why you try to convice me that oxford or cambridge are better than edinburgh. I already know that they are!!!
Posted Nov 06, 2016 20:24
0
Hi, I have an LL.B from the University of London external program and an LL.M from University of Sussex. I want to practice family law in the Uk and I need advice on whether I should do an LPC (which is quite expensive) or can I make do with a graduate diploma in legal practice? I will be grateful for any help or advice!
Hi, I have an LL.B from the University of London external program and an LL.M from University of Sussex. I want to practice family law in the Uk and I need advice on whether I should do an LPC (which is quite expensive) or can I make do with a graduate diploma in legal practice? I will be grateful for any help or advice!
Related Law Schools
Full Profile
Edinburgh, United Kingdom
499 Followers
515 Discussions
Nottingham, United Kingdom
121 Followers
275 Discussions
Full Profile
Oxford, United Kingdom
929 Followers
878 Discussions
Cambridge, United Kingdom
913 Followers
796 Discussions
London, United Kingdom
873 Followers
968 Discussions
London, United Kingdom
627 Followers
925 Discussions
Full Profile
London, United Kingdom
833 Followers
954 Discussions
Other Related Content
Living an International Life in England
Article Mar 23, 2016
Students from all over the world are drawn to England to pursue their LL.M.s while learning legal English and gaining international expertise.
Hot Discussions
-
MIDS - 2024-25
Nov 15 12:52 AM 1,837 16 -
Harvard LLM 2025-2026
22 hours ago 1,673 7 -
Indian Tribes as US Jurisdictions of law attorney admission?
Nov 08, 2024 765 6 -
LL.M. Scholarship Rates?
Nov 09, 2024 2,503 5 -
Scholarship Negotiation Strategy (BCL v. NYU LLM Dean's Graduate Scholarship)
Nov 09, 2024 1,038 4 -
EU citizen barred in the US -- will an LLM from an EU school help me practice law somewhere in the EU?
Nov 15 12:58 AM 137 4 -
NUS vs Peking
Nov 09, 2024 183 4 -
LLM in ADR
Oct 23, 2024 390 4
