Discovering Higher and Degree Apprenticeships with UWE Bristol, get free advice >>

LSE Low Entry Requirements

I was looking at the entry requirements for LSE for maths related degrees and I found they are very low compared to the other target universities such as Oxbridge and Warwick.

Warwick and Oxbridge require A*A*A plus further tests however LSE only require A*AA/AAA. Is it easier to get into LSE? If LSE is so good for IB why doesn't everyone go into LSE as the entry requirements are so much lower.

Am I missing something or is it really that easy to get into LSE compared to the other targets?

Reply 1

22chicken

Original post by JohnGreek

Ugh

Offer grade =/= how easy it is to get an offer in the first place
LSE Maths is said to be easier than the others and is more statistically oriented

With your logic, Oxford Law should be piss easy to get into because it only requires AAA

Don't judge the difficulty of a course only by its entry requirements. The PS and average grades of the other applicants are a much better start.

What is the point of the university making the entry requirements so low when they are only going to except much higher grades? Or do they look for things such as extra curricula activities more than those top grades?

What does PS mean and how would one find the average grades of other applicants?

Reply 2

username2752874

Original post by 22chicken

They may have more applicants per place as a result, hence the PS may have more weighting for LSE.

Imperial is probably better.

Reply 3

username2752874

Original post by JohnGreek

He never said it was "easy" to get into, he said it was "easier". No one is stating that A*AA/AAA is easy.

It's subjective on whether getting an offer is more difficult than meeting one. Sure, getting an AAA offer from Oxford is difficult, but meeting an A*A*A offer from Warwick/Imperial/Oxbridge in maths with a 1 In STEP paper is arguably harder, once you've gotten an offer.

Reply 4

Ladbants

Just because the entry requirements say A*AA doesn't mean you can just get an offer with an A*AA prediction since so many applicants will exceed this and there is quite a lot of competition for places.

Reply 5

fatimamansoor98

Original post by 22chicken

Another point to be noted is whilst the LSE entry requirements seem "easier" they are relatively good grades and many many students still find it difficult to meet their offer (a very small percentage attain 3A*s or whatever- maybe they're trying to be realistic). Moreover, not everyone takes the same A levels, so although there may be a requirement for say Maths, someone may have taken two 'easier' options for their A levels, just may be a way of levelling the playing field. They might even want all rounded students who are academic but also involved with the community. Another point to note, just because you achieve 3A*s, doesn't guarantee a smart, open-minded student. I have come across very dry/dull students who can memorise their way to high 40s (I did the IB) but cannot sustain a very intellectual conversation. Also as many people mentioned, they might just be encouraging people to apply with diverse academic backgrounds.
And who knows, maybe the LSE course is slightly less demanding than the Warwick ones, unlikely but possible.

These are all guesses i dont actually know lmao and you could apply these arguments to any uni tbh

Reply 6

Mike_123

lse is so much harder to get an offer from. warwick not on same level

Reply 7

22chicken

Original post by Mike_123

lse is so much harder to get an offer from. warwick not on same level

what do you mean by warwick is not on the same level?

Reply 8

midgetspinner

Original post by 22chicken

what do you mean by warwick is not on the same level?

The admission process is easier, because the majority do indeed receive offers. Furthermore, at top tier universities grades are usually redundant, since most get them. The hard part is to differentiate yourself, because there are a lot of individuals who are intellectually dry and lack rigor, yet manage to get stellar grades because they work extremely hard (that's me). So in this case, grades form a very small proportion of ones ability to get an offer since they assume everyone will get the grades. This can be illustrated with A&F at LSE with AAA, yet a 14% offer rate. Hope this can provide some of you with some clarity.

Reply 9

Paraphilos

I'm studying a masters at LSE in mathematics at the moment and what I covered in undergraduate at Warwick indeed far surpasses some of what I've encountered at a postgraduate level here. Although, you have to appreciate that Warwick is very focused on pure mathematics and is quite strong in that area.

Reply 10

bdotjelly

Hey, I’m at LSE (reading law) but I’m pleased to be friends with quite a few mathematicians at LSE.
Firstly, the minimum grade required for Mathematics at LSE is A*AA not AAA.

Secondly, my friend and I were actually just discussing a couple weeks ago about how odd it is that the minimum entry requirement isn’t stupendously high as one would have thought. Turns out although the minimum grade offer may be relatively average, that doesn’t mean the people who DO get offers don’t surpass the grades.I can give you the example of Economic History (a course my close friend studies) which has the entry requirement of AAB (She got A*AA btw). The reality is that many people on that course actually have straight As and A*s. There are people on the course with A*A*A* - the average grade of people on the course is probably A*AA or even higher.In fact, someone my friend knew was predicted AAB and applied for the Economic History course but was unsuccessful. When she enquired about the reason, she was told that her grades were not competitive enough in comparison to other applicants who were predicted As and A*s.They said although she her predicted grades met the entry requirement, she was also up against other candidates.You have to be reminded that you are pretty much up against the whole world if you apply.The acceptance rate for law in 2016 was 6.7% according to data provided. I imagine it’s a similar rate for Maths and Econ courses. It’s not enough to just meet the grade requirements.I imagine one reason it’s like this is because they want to attract people for the less competitive courses. However, I must stress that LSE is not short of qualified applicants. They would rather take 19 qualified applicants than 100 average applicants. It’s a competitive university to gain admissions for no matter what course you’re applying for. I think the fundamental reasoning behind this would be their desire to attract students from disadvantaged backgrounds who may have a number of extenuating circumstances and challenges affecting their academic attainment. Nonetheless, out of the many people who I’ve met here at LSE, I really couldn’t point to you anyone I know who got less than AAA. There is this one guy on the Economic History course who met his offer of AAB but if I heard correctly he had mitigating circumstances. Everyone's case is unique though. I have had many mitigating circumstances over the course of my education; I am pretty much your average ‘social mobility’ candidate. Still, I needed a minimum A*AA for law (which I thankfully exceeded like many other students studying law).My best advice is if you can do it, do it. If you can get higher grades, get higher grades! Nobody ever gets rejected for being too outstanding. You can however be rejected for not matching up to the level of other outstanding applications who are competing with you.I hope my explanation helped a little.