Admission Consultants


Law1985
Hi everyone,

Despite the fact that I know some of you will say just do it yourself, can someone please comment on their experience with LLM admission consultant companies. I have found several such as Weston Ivy, Advantas, go-LLM, admission consultants.com, etc.

If someone has used the services of an admission consultant, can you please comment. Is it worth it? Any substantive review would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!
Hi everyone,

Despite the fact that I know some of you will say just do it yourself, can someone please comment on their experience with LLM admission consultant companies. I have found several such as Weston Ivy, Advantas, go-LLM, admission consultants.com, etc.

If someone has used the services of an admission consultant, can you please comment. Is it worth it? Any substantive review would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!
quote
mdm31
I have a lot of friends that engaged the services of consultants in the past and all of them (no exception) said it wasnt worth the price and they could have done everything by themselves. All of them were accepted to at least one of their top 3 choices, so I dont know to what extent their opinion is valid.

They say consultants are helpful to assist you through the whole process, which can be very stressful. The consultant reminds you of the deadlines, explains which schools request certain specific documents, etc.

As regards your personal statement, letters of recommendation, etc, they help you improve the text. But if you ask any native speaker or english teacher to review it for you, the result will be pretty much the same.

I have talked to a few consultants (none of these websites you mentioned). At first, they make you feel very insecure, say your references are not that good, your academic side is not that strong, and that you probably will not be admitted without their help. Then they charge you a LOT of money to help you with your application.

I'm still uncertain whether or not to hire a consultant, as this could get VERY expensive.
I have a lot of friends that engaged the services of consultants in the past and all of them (no exception) said it wasnt worth the price and they could have done everything by themselves. All of them were accepted to at least one of their top 3 choices, so I dont know to what extent their opinion is valid.

They say consultants are helpful to assist you through the whole process, which can be very stressful. The consultant reminds you of the deadlines, explains which schools request certain specific documents, etc.

As regards your personal statement, letters of recommendation, etc, they help you improve the text. But if you ask any native speaker or english teacher to review it for you, the result will be pretty much the same.

I have talked to a few consultants (none of these websites you mentioned). At first, they make you feel very insecure, say your references are not that good, your academic side is not that strong, and that you probably will not be admitted without their help. Then they charge you a LOT of money to help you with your application.

I'm still uncertain whether or not to hire a consultant, as this could get VERY expensive.


quote
Law1985
Thanks mdm31.
Thanks mdm31.
quote
hawkme
I have no idea what these consultants do, but let me tell you something: it is WAY better to work your a** off and deal with the process yourself, as opposed to paying someone to consult you. Practice makes perfect.
I have no idea what these consultants do, but let me tell you something: it is WAY better to work your a** off and deal with the process yourself, as opposed to paying someone to consult you. Practice makes perfect.
quote
flori
Hello everyone,
well, it seems to me that the agencies are definitely worth their price
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/universityeducation/9357875/How-foreign-students-with-lower-grades-jump-the-university-queue.html

;-)
Don't get me wrong, I am not approving of this kind of business at all. For me, that is just a sign that the standards of postgraduate education in general and the respective admission requirements in particular at many (_NOT ALL_) British universities have been sacrificed to the purpose of generating tuition fees.

Pay your fee, get your degree - the sad truth at many (once again _NOT ALL_) LLM programmes...
Bye
flori
Hello everyone,
well, it seems to me that the agencies are definitely worth their price
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/universityeducation/9357875/How-foreign-students-with-lower-grades-jump-the-university-queue.html

;-)
Don't get me wrong, I am not approving of this kind of business at all. For me, that is just a sign that the standards of postgraduate education in general and the respective admission requirements in particular at many (_NOT ALL_) British universities have been sacrificed to the purpose of generating tuition fees.

Pay your fee, get your degree - the sad truth at many (once again _NOT ALL_) LLM programmes...
Bye
flori
quote
hawkme
Not quite, flori.

Upon reading it and based on my knowledge, that seems like a flaw of the current UK legislation. Overseas students are billed more and this is why those undergrads wannabes are accepted with CCC. For most of those prospective students, I bet they can hardly speak English.

Universities are forced to favor them because they get higher revenues, and the student body (in numbers) is the same, so they don't need to hire other academia. Bottom line: universities get more money.

Those "consultancies" are in many cases accepted or favored by the universities themselves. Again, hardly an argument in favor of the consultancies.

If you read it carefully enough you'll understand it is NOT the consulting agency that does a MAGNIFICENT job, but, rather, it's the university who's willing to lower the entry standards in order to get more money from an overseas student (as opposed to a UK one).

PS: One more thing... anyone wonder why Cam, Ox, LSE, UCL, KCL. Imperial, etc are not included in the article? Anyone?
Not quite, flori.

Upon reading it and based on my knowledge, that seems like a flaw of the current UK legislation. Overseas students are billed more and this is why those undergrads wannabes are accepted with CCC. For most of those prospective students, I bet they can hardly speak English.

Universities are forced to favor them because they get higher revenues, and the student body (in numbers) is the same, so they don't need to hire other academia. Bottom line: universities get more money.

Those "consultancies" are in many cases accepted or favored by the universities themselves. Again, hardly an argument in favor of the consultancies.

If you read it carefully enough you'll understand it is NOT the consulting agency that does a MAGNIFICENT job, but, rather, it's the university who's willing to lower the entry standards in order to get more money from an overseas student (as opposed to a UK one).

PS: One more thing... anyone wonder why Cam, Ox, LSE, UCL, KCL. Imperial, etc are not included in the article? Anyone?
quote
flori
Hello Hawkme,

Not quite, flori.


Well, you seem to have missed the smiley.

If you read it carefully enough you'll understand it is NOT the consulting agency that does a MAGNIFICENT job, but, rather, it's the university who's willing to lower the entry standards in order to get more money from an overseas student (as opposed to a UK one).


1. Even though you seem to suppose otherwise, I have understood the article (see above - I have never said and would never say that the agencies do a magnificent job. In the end the whole agency thing is just a way to wash one's hands of responsibility for the university. Sure, they will end up with a bunch of students incapable of following the lectures - but they don't care, as long as the money flows in.
2. As long as we don't have a statistically significant survey (x CCC students applying on their own, x CCC students applying via agency -> admission results for group a and group b), nobody knows whether the agencies deliver a magnificent job. Actually they might be quite good at what they are doing...


PS: One more thing... anyone wonder why Cam, Ox, LSE, UCL, KCL. Imperial, etc are not included in the article? Anyone?


No - both the article and my posting have been fairly clear on this issue. Still, most of the "How do I get into?", "What are the admission criteria for...?" postings do not deal with the universities mentioned by you (partly due to the disproportional amount of postings dealing with oil&gas respectively maritime law). The universities mentioned above offer top-notch programmes, others (and that is the majority) don't.
Bye
flori
Hello Hawkme,

<blockquote>Not quite, flori.
</blockquote>

Well, you seem to have missed the smiley.

<blockquote>If you read it carefully enough you'll understand it is NOT the consulting agency that does a MAGNIFICENT job, but, rather, it's the university who's willing to lower the entry standards in order to get more money from an overseas student (as opposed to a UK one).</blockquote>

1. Even though you seem to suppose otherwise, I have understood the article (see above - I have never said and would never say that the agencies do a magnificent job. In the end the whole agency thing is just a way to wash one's hands of responsibility for the university. Sure, they will end up with a bunch of students incapable of following the lectures - but they don't care, as long as the money flows in.
2. As long as we don't have a statistically significant survey (x CCC students applying on their own, x CCC students applying via agency -> admission results for group a and group b), nobody knows whether the agencies deliver a magnificent job. Actually they might be quite good at what they are doing...


<blockquote> PS: One more thing... anyone wonder why Cam, Ox, LSE, UCL, KCL. Imperial, etc are not included in the article? Anyone?</blockquote>

No - both the article and my posting have been fairly clear on this issue. Still, most of the "How do I get into?", "What are the admission criteria for...?" postings do not deal with the universities mentioned by you (partly due to the disproportional amount of postings dealing with oil&gas respectively maritime law). The universities mentioned above offer top-notch programmes, others (and that is the majority) don't.
Bye
flori
quote
hawkme
"Well, you seem to have missed the smiley." - Damn, I did miss it :)

"Nobody knows whether the agencies deliver a magnificent job. Actually they might be quite good at what they are doing".

A. They don't, that's the whole idea. They act as marketing reps not as PURE educational advisers.

B. To be good at what they CLAIM to be, they should be able to "advise" a pathetic student and get him/her into Cambridge, Sorbonne, Harvard or Chicago. But then again, most universities in the world (I mean UNIVERSITIES - not money-making degree generators) will always look at academic accomplishment as the FIRST proof of the student's ability. 2. References 3. Personal Statement 4. Language skills (if applicable).

So the consultants can claim the moon, they're just liars. Unless the academic background is falsified, a stellar personal statement will NEVER be enough.

The article you linked to provides an accurate description of how bottom UK universities get increased income by discriminating their own citizens. And their "partners" overseas (these magnificent consulting agencies) do get their commission - one form or another, you can bet on that :)
"Well, you seem to have missed the smiley." - Damn, I did miss it :)

"Nobody knows whether the agencies deliver a magnificent job. Actually they might be quite good at what they are doing".

A. They don't, that's the whole idea. They act as marketing reps not as PURE educational advisers.

B. To be good at what they CLAIM to be, they should be able to "advise" a pathetic student and get him/her into Cambridge, Sorbonne, Harvard or Chicago. But then again, most universities in the world (I mean UNIVERSITIES - not money-making degree generators) will always look at academic accomplishment as the FIRST proof of the student's ability. 2. References 3. Personal Statement 4. Language skills (if applicable).

So the consultants can claim the moon, they're just liars. Unless the academic background is falsified, a stellar personal statement will NEVER be enough.

The article you linked to provides an accurate description of how bottom UK universities get increased income by discriminating their own citizens. And their "partners" overseas (these magnificent consulting agencies) do get their commission - one form or another, you can bet on that :)
quote
Law1985
Ok so it seems that these admission consultants are clearly not worth the buck :)
Ok so it seems that these admission consultants are clearly not worth the buck :)
quote
Cal24
I am using one of these services and, to my own surprise, am glad that I decided to do it. They can't change your grades, but they can make all your application documents perfect.
I am using one of these services and, to my own surprise, am glad that I decided to do it. They can't change your grades, but they can make all your application documents perfect.
quote
flori
Well, for many (not all) universities directly collaborating with those agencies the only relevant part of the application documents is the number of your Visa card (respectively the enclosed financial guarantee letter or etc)...

Bye
flori
Well, for many (not all) universities directly collaborating with those agencies the only relevant part of the application documents is the number of your Visa card (respectively the enclosed financial guarantee letter or etc)...

Bye
flori
quote
Law1985
Cal24 who are you using? With the discussions with Weston Ivy I am a bit hesitant regarding them as they have that "guarantee" - accordingly, they try to push you to apply for schools that you will definitely get into and therefore not have to refund any money to you. While it is a low-risk proposition, it potentially can be high-risk if you take their advice for face-value and go with the conservative approach of applying to the "safer" schools from their perspective. While they do provide helpful advice, if your grades have even a bit of a negativity factor, they will encourage you to apply for lower-tiered schools and are not willing to take the risk (which from a business standpoint, I can understand). But remember, that designation will be attached to your name forever and should not be decided by another based on their business motivations. From my perspective, you cannot risk such an approach that is motivated by business perspectives - so be wary. Just my thoughts.
Cal24 who are you using? With the discussions with Weston Ivy I am a bit hesitant regarding them as they have that "guarantee" - accordingly, they try to push you to apply for schools that you will definitely get into and therefore not have to refund any money to you. While it is a low-risk proposition, it potentially can be high-risk if you take their advice for face-value and go with the conservative approach of applying to the "safer" schools from their perspective. While they do provide helpful advice, if your grades have even a bit of a negativity factor, they will encourage you to apply for lower-tiered schools and are not willing to take the risk (which from a business standpoint, I can understand). But remember, that designation will be attached to your name forever and should not be decided by another based on their business motivations. From my perspective, you cannot risk such an approach that is motivated by business perspectives - so be wary. Just my thoughts.
quote
Cal24
I am using number three on the list in your first post.
I am using number three on the list in your first post.
quote
kcitschap
Hi everyone,

Despite the fact that I know some of you will say just do it yourself, can someone please comment on their experience with LLM admission consultant companies. I have found several such as Weston Ivy, Advantas, go-LLM, admission consultants.com, etc.

If someone has used the services of an admission consultant, can you please comment. Is it worth it? Any substantive review would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!


Please don't waste your money on these services.
<blockquote>Hi everyone,

Despite the fact that I know some of you will say just do it yourself, can someone please comment on their experience with LLM admission consultant companies. I have found several such as Weston Ivy, Advantas, go-LLM, admission consultants.com, etc.

If someone has used the services of an admission consultant, can you please comment. Is it worth it? Any substantive review would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!</blockquote>

Please don't waste your money on these services.
quote
hawkme

Please don't waste your money on these services.


:)
<blockquote>
Please don't waste your money on these services.</blockquote>

:)
quote
llmapp1
quote
llmapp1
quote
llmapp1
Any experiences with any of the consultants mentioned?
Any experiences with any of the consultants mentioned?
quote
llmapp1
Please share your experiences with consultants. That's the only way to find accurate reviews about them before paying hefty fees. T
Please share your experiences with consultants. That's the only way to find accurate reviews about them before paying hefty fees. T
quote
SKVasan
I was trying to juggle a very demanding full time job along with my LLM applications at one point last year. I was extremely stressed and a cousin of mine had used a consultant to get into Business School and suggested that I try one so I did - Weston Ivy. I've never made a stupider mistake in my life.

Initially my consultant spoke with my lengthily and told me everything he would help me with, however - admin demanded money (4000$) upfront before they could get started. I decided to pay in 2 parts so made half the payment and "got started" - by which I mean I spend days and nights stalking my consultant, trying to call him and waiting for his call which finally came about 2 days before my first application was due, even though I'd contacted Weston over a month prior.

He told me that Weston had too many clients and he was finding it really hard to do his job. i cut him some slack. 24 hours before my first application was due, I'd still not received any news from him. I simultaneously typed up my own SOP using the pages and pages of information that I'd sent him and sent it across to him, hoping to be helpful. I was counting on him use ONLY that as a guideline for my Personal Statement. All I wanted is for him to edit and condense the ocean of information i'd typed up to a 750 word count.

An hour before my application was actually due, I was sent a "usable" personal statement. I quickly asked whether it would be wise to use mine instead, my consultant asked me to use his version. I sent it across to NYU. This school was my first option. My dream school; and the second i actually read the Personal Statement he had sent in, I knew I'd be rejected, as I was. It was un-researched, baseless and had no semblance of me.

I then just went about my own thing, Weston when they tried to contact me (which was ALWAYS only for the payment of the rest of the money) and typed up my my own Personal Statement using the information I'd sent Weston in the first place. Fortunately, I then got into one of my top 3 schools.

But please - don't ever make the mistake of hiring Weston Ivy. You'd rather take that money and pay your 5 year old neighbour to write a poem about you. That'd make for a better Personal Statement.
I was trying to juggle a very demanding full time job along with my LLM applications at one point last year. I was extremely stressed and a cousin of mine had used a consultant to get into Business School and suggested that I try one so I did - Weston Ivy. I've never made a stupider mistake in my life.

Initially my consultant spoke with my lengthily and told me everything he would help me with, however - admin demanded money (4000$) upfront before they could get started. I decided to pay in 2 parts so made half the payment and "got started" - by which I mean I spend days and nights stalking my consultant, trying to call him and waiting for his call which finally came about 2 days before my first application was due, even though I'd contacted Weston over a month prior.

He told me that Weston had too many clients and he was finding it really hard to do his job. i cut him some slack. 24 hours before my first application was due, I'd still not received any news from him. I simultaneously typed up my own SOP using the pages and pages of information that I'd sent him and sent it across to him, hoping to be helpful. I was counting on him use ONLY that as a guideline for my Personal Statement. All I wanted is for him to edit and condense the ocean of information i'd typed up to a 750 word count.

An hour before my application was actually due, I was sent a "usable" personal statement. I quickly asked whether it would be wise to use mine instead, my consultant asked me to use his version. I sent it across to NYU. This school was my first option. My dream school; and the second i actually read the Personal Statement he had sent in, I knew I'd be rejected, as I was. It was un-researched, baseless and had no semblance of me.

I then just went about my own thing, Weston when they tried to contact me (which was ALWAYS only for the payment of the rest of the money) and typed up my my own Personal Statement using the information I'd sent Weston in the first place. Fortunately, I then got into one of my top 3 schools.

But please - don't ever make the mistake of hiring Weston Ivy. You'd rather take that money and pay your 5 year old neighbour to write a poem about you. That'd make for a better Personal Statement.
quote

Reply to Post