London School of Economics
London
Reasons for failing LSE modules
I've been looking up quite a bit about pass rates for various LSE courses, mostly because I'm worried about MA100 and Econ B without having any further maths experience.
After the visit day it was made pretty clear I have my work cut out for me, and I should definitely learn the pure further maths topics over summer. But even so, I imagine the general academic ability of LSE first year students to be around the same level, and I assume those with FM A level are among those failing. So, for any LSE first year module, why do students fail? Adapting to uni standard work? Carried away with student life and neglecting studies? LSE exam standard too high? Any insight would be appreciated.
After the visit day it was made pretty clear I have my work cut out for me, and I should definitely learn the pure further maths topics over summer. But even so, I imagine the general academic ability of LSE first year students to be around the same level, and I assume those with FM A level are among those failing. So, for any LSE first year module, why do students fail? Adapting to uni standard work? Carried away with student life and neglecting studies? LSE exam standard too high? Any insight would be appreciated.
Scroll to see replies
Original post by North Irelandman
I've been looking up quite a bit about pass rates for various LSE courses, mostly because I'm worried about MA100 and Econ B without having any further maths experience.
After the visit day it was made pretty clear I have my work cut out for me, and I should definitely learn the pure further maths topics over summer. But even so, I imagine the general academic ability of LSE first year students to be around the same level, and I assume those with FM A level are among those failing. So, for any LSE first year module, why do students fail? Adapting to uni standard work? Carried away with student life and neglecting studies? LSE exam standard too high? Any insight would be appreciated.
After the visit day it was made pretty clear I have my work cut out for me, and I should definitely learn the pure further maths topics over summer. But even so, I imagine the general academic ability of LSE first year students to be around the same level, and I assume those with FM A level are among those failing. So, for any LSE first year module, why do students fail? Adapting to uni standard work? Carried away with student life and neglecting studies? LSE exam standard too high? Any insight would be appreciated.
So let me get this clear.
Does MA100 start from a ground work knowledge of FM A level because here:http://www.lse.ac.uk/resources/calendar/courseGuides/MA/2011_MA100.htm
It just says
Pre-requisites
This course assumes knowledge of the elementary techniques of mathematics including calculus, as evidenced for example by a good grade in A Level Mathematics.
This course assumes knowledge of the elementary techniques of mathematics including calculus, as evidenced for example by a good grade in A Level Mathematics.
So I thought you just needed to have vanilla maths A-level knowledge...
If you're right then yeah I need to catch up like $@^$
London School of Economics
London
Original post by North Irelandman
I've been looking up quite a bit about pass rates for various LSE courses, mostly because I'm worried about MA100 and Econ B without having any further maths experience.
After the visit day it was made pretty clear I have my work cut out for me, and I should definitely learn the pure further maths topics over summer. But even so, I imagine the general academic ability of LSE first year students to be around the same level, and I assume those with FM A level are among those failing. So, for any LSE first year module, why do students fail? Adapting to uni standard work? Carried away with student life and neglecting studies? LSE exam standard too high? Any insight would be appreciated.
After the visit day it was made pretty clear I have my work cut out for me, and I should definitely learn the pure further maths topics over summer. But even so, I imagine the general academic ability of LSE first year students to be around the same level, and I assume those with FM A level are among those failing. So, for any LSE first year module, why do students fail? Adapting to uni standard work? Carried away with student life and neglecting studies? LSE exam standard too high? Any insight would be appreciated.
standard of uni work is far beyond anything expected, the type of work and way we're meant to learn is completely different to a levels
in further maths, maths and any other maths module you're pretty much learning the same method that you repeat over and over in similar sort of questions, further maths has some more depth to it, but it is still repetitive topics which arent too difficult
with MA100 its nothing weird or new its just the way we're expected to understand fully the topic so that any question thrown at us, we can do, no past paper is the same and no question comes up twice ever
Original post by noojoo
So let me get this clear.
Does MA100 start from a ground work knowledge of FM A level because here:http://www.lse.ac.uk/resources/calendar/courseGuides/MA/2011_MA100.htm
It just says
So I thought you just needed to have vanilla maths A-level knowledge...
If you're right then yeah I need to catch up like $@^$
Does MA100 start from a ground work knowledge of FM A level because here:http://www.lse.ac.uk/resources/calendar/courseGuides/MA/2011_MA100.htm
It just says
So I thought you just needed to have vanilla maths A-level knowledge...
If you're right then yeah I need to catch up like $@^$
you dont need further maths a level, it is an advantage but we learn the necessary things from it
and if you're accounting and finance, you dont have to take ma100... unless you want to
(edited 12 years ago)
Original post by Milan.
you dont need further maths a level, it is an advantage but we learn the necessary things from it
and if you're accounting and finance, you dont have to take ma100... unless you want to
you dont need further maths a level, it is an advantage but we learn the necessary things from it
and if you're accounting and finance, you dont have to take ma100... unless you want to
I'm planning to do ac100, ec102, st102, ma100 as it gives me the option to switch from af to eco in the 2nd year if I decide to change degree... :P
1) Don't bother learning all of further maths. So much of it is centred around integration, which is almost completely ignored in 1st year at LSE - 95% of the course is about differentiation and the other 5% is simple integration you're already familiar with from C4.
What you should learn is the part on matrices and vectors (all of it apart from the geometry related questions related to calculating volume/area). This will prove to be very useful indeed. Don't bother with anything else including complex numbers.
2) The main reason people fail MA100 is that they don't keep up with it week by week. It's the type of course where if you get lazy 1 week, then you can quite easily be lost forever unless you spend quite a lot of hours catching up in 1 go (which a lot of people don't do because they get carried away with the fun part of university life I guess).
Another reason why people fail is that they don't do the homeworks - they find the solutions, copy them and hand them in. Then each week they get a "very good", so they fool themselves into thinking that "I'm doing ok in the course, I can kind of follow my classes, I'll learn it in the holidays". When the holidays come, you realise just how much stuff there is to learn and it becomes so daunting that you basically give up. I've heard of people with 90%+ marks in A-level further maths scoring 45% in MA100 for this reason. It's not to do with being smart/your A-level background, it's all to do with keeping up week by week.
I think the MA100 exam is actually really predictable, you just need a good memory + you just need to put the hours in. It's not that many hours anyway, probably like 2 hours of lectures + 1 hour of class + 1.5 hours of independent study each week. Hardly a lot when you only have 12 hours a week of lectures + classes.
3) EC102 has almost no maths in it, nobody fails it because they're weak at maths (on the rare occasion, you'll have to solve a quadratic, that's about as hard as it gets).
It's hard to say why EC102 is so hard, but it's a lot to do with not understanding how to apply what you learn in lectures to the type of questions you're asked. Quite often, sitting there even with all your notes + books, you have no idea how to start a question. It can be really frustrating and it's a big test of character (a lot of people just give up if they can't see how to do begin the question within 2 mins).
The way I did well in this course was by going to office hours every week in the 2nd term + reading the solutions to the questions over and over and over again. The solutions are good because they not only explain how to solve the problem but actually all the theory is first explained there. Most of what I learnt was from the solutions - I more or less ignored the lecture slides for a long time. I would just sit there and memorise the solutions (moreover, I tried to understand HOW the solutions were constructed, i.e. tried to understand the thought process).
If you've not done A-level economics, go and teach yourself the microeconomics parts of A-level. Don't bother at all with macro.
What you should learn is the part on matrices and vectors (all of it apart from the geometry related questions related to calculating volume/area). This will prove to be very useful indeed. Don't bother with anything else including complex numbers.
2) The main reason people fail MA100 is that they don't keep up with it week by week. It's the type of course where if you get lazy 1 week, then you can quite easily be lost forever unless you spend quite a lot of hours catching up in 1 go (which a lot of people don't do because they get carried away with the fun part of university life I guess).
Another reason why people fail is that they don't do the homeworks - they find the solutions, copy them and hand them in. Then each week they get a "very good", so they fool themselves into thinking that "I'm doing ok in the course, I can kind of follow my classes, I'll learn it in the holidays". When the holidays come, you realise just how much stuff there is to learn and it becomes so daunting that you basically give up. I've heard of people with 90%+ marks in A-level further maths scoring 45% in MA100 for this reason. It's not to do with being smart/your A-level background, it's all to do with keeping up week by week.
I think the MA100 exam is actually really predictable, you just need a good memory + you just need to put the hours in. It's not that many hours anyway, probably like 2 hours of lectures + 1 hour of class + 1.5 hours of independent study each week. Hardly a lot when you only have 12 hours a week of lectures + classes.
3) EC102 has almost no maths in it, nobody fails it because they're weak at maths (on the rare occasion, you'll have to solve a quadratic, that's about as hard as it gets).
It's hard to say why EC102 is so hard, but it's a lot to do with not understanding how to apply what you learn in lectures to the type of questions you're asked. Quite often, sitting there even with all your notes + books, you have no idea how to start a question. It can be really frustrating and it's a big test of character (a lot of people just give up if they can't see how to do begin the question within 2 mins).
The way I did well in this course was by going to office hours every week in the 2nd term + reading the solutions to the questions over and over and over again. The solutions are good because they not only explain how to solve the problem but actually all the theory is first explained there. Most of what I learnt was from the solutions - I more or less ignored the lecture slides for a long time. I would just sit there and memorise the solutions (moreover, I tried to understand HOW the solutions were constructed, i.e. tried to understand the thought process).
If you've not done A-level economics, go and teach yourself the microeconomics parts of A-level. Don't bother at all with macro.
(edited 12 years ago)
Thanks for the replies, some things I will definitely be taking note of. I study Maths, Economics and Physics at A level, so hopefully by learning specific FM topics (thanks for the pointers Swayum) and keeping microeconomics fresh in my head I'll be alright. I still imagine I'll have a lot on my plate in first year, learning how to write proper essays along with the MA100 maths and ST102 stats - brand new to me (although apparently I shouldn't worry).
I have a safety net in that I've been told I can switch from Economics & Economic History to Econ Hist /(with Econ) if I am struggling, and on the other hand, I may have the opportunity to switch into L101 after first year exam results
I have a safety net in that I've been told I can switch from Economics & Economic History to Econ Hist /(with Econ) if I am struggling, and on the other hand, I may have the opportunity to switch into L101 after first year exam results
Original post by noojoo
I'm planning to do ac100, ec102, st102, ma100 as it gives me the option to switch from af to eco in the 2nd year if I decide to change degree... :P
To change into the Econ dept you will need to 2 2.1s and 2 1sts in your 1st year at least FYI.
Original post by North Irelandman
I've been looking up quite a bit about pass rates for various LSE courses, mostly because I'm worried about MA100 and Econ B without having any further maths experience.
After the visit day it was made pretty clear I have my work cut out for me, and I should definitely learn the pure further maths topics over summer. But even so, I imagine the general academic ability of LSE first year students to be around the same level, and I assume those with FM A level are among those failing. So, for any LSE first year module, why do students fail? Adapting to uni standard work? Carried away with student life and neglecting studies? LSE exam standard too high? Any insight would be appreciated.
After the visit day it was made pretty clear I have my work cut out for me, and I should definitely learn the pure further maths topics over summer. But even so, I imagine the general academic ability of LSE first year students to be around the same level, and I assume those with FM A level are among those failing. So, for any LSE first year module, why do students fail? Adapting to uni standard work? Carried away with student life and neglecting studies? LSE exam standard too high? Any insight would be appreciated.
You doing straight Econ? If so, you are lucky you're 4th module is an outside option. Do Logic (PH101) ... it's supposedly piss easy.
Also (as long as you pass) only your best 3 modules actually matter. I ****ed up MA100 (because of reasons stated above such as not doing work throughout year and using solutions) but still got a good 1st year class because I did well in the other 3. Chill out!
Original post by AndiB
You doing straight Econ? If so, you are lucky you're 4th module is an outside option. Do Logic (PH101) ... it's supposedly piss easy.
Also (as long as you pass) only your best 3 modules actually matter. I ****ed up MA100 (because of reasons stated above such as not doing work throughout year and using solutions) but still got a good 1st year class because I did well in the other 3. Chill out!
Also (as long as you pass) only your best 3 modules actually matter. I ****ed up MA100 (because of reasons stated above such as not doing work throughout year and using solutions) but still got a good 1st year class because I did well in the other 3. Chill out!
It's best to not pick Logic in 1st year tbh if you're trying to cop out with easy courses - leave it till 2nd year and then it counts for as much as the whole 1st year combined! Otherwise, if you pick it in 1st year, it just gets averaged with stuff like EC102/MA100 and so it was pointless doing it really.
MA100 is hard because it is easy to get completely lost. I didnt understand a couple of lectures around christmas time and then for the whole of the summer term I had no idea what was going on in alebra. But after working through it in the last couple of weeks I don't think it is too bad at all. There isn't much point in learning FM over summer you may as well start learning MA100 if you want to get a head start, buy the books or Ill spend you some pdfs if you want.
Econ B is hard because it tricks you into thinking you understand it all when really you don't. You can go to the lectures and understand everything he says and think it is all going perfectly but then you look at a problem set or exam and you don't know where to start. It is a great course though, every question is like a good puzzle. Econ B would be a good IQ tester you can feel how hard it pushes your brain when you are answering the questions. Someone who isnt very clever could spend as much time as they wanted learning econ B and they still would do badly at it.
And don't pick AC100.
Econ B is hard because it tricks you into thinking you understand it all when really you don't. You can go to the lectures and understand everything he says and think it is all going perfectly but then you look at a problem set or exam and you don't know where to start. It is a great course though, every question is like a good puzzle. Econ B would be a good IQ tester you can feel how hard it pushes your brain when you are answering the questions. Someone who isnt very clever could spend as much time as they wanted learning econ B and they still would do badly at it.
And don't pick AC100.
Original post by Sternumator
And don't pick AC100.
And don't pick AC100.
Why not ?
Original post by member910132
Why not ?
its boring
Original post by Swayum
It's best to not pick Logic in 1st year tbh if you're trying to cop out with easy courses - leave it till 2nd year and then it counts for as much as the whole 1st year combined! Otherwise, if you pick it in 1st year, it just gets averaged with stuff like EC102/MA100 and so it was pointless doing it really.
Yep totally agree. Best to save for second year so counts as whole module. Only reason to do in 1st year is if you are worried you won't do well in other options available (but then you really shouldn't be here!).
Original post by Swayum
It's best to not pick Logic in 1st year tbh if you're trying to cop out with easy courses - leave it till 2nd year and then it counts for as much as the whole 1st year combined! Otherwise, if you pick it in 1st year, it just gets averaged with stuff like EC102/MA100 and so it was pointless doing it really.
Original post by AndiB
Yep totally agree. Best to save for second year so counts as whole module. Only reason to do in 1st year is if you are worried you won't do well in other options available (but then you really shouldn't be here!).
Can I ask what you mean by this ?
Am I wrong in thinking that in your first year you do 4 options and they are all equally weighted ?
How come logic is better to take in the 2nd ? How come if you take it in the 2nd then it counts are the whole first year put together ?
Original post by AndiB
You doing straight Econ? If so, you are lucky you're 4th module is an outside option. Do Logic (PH101) ... it's supposedly piss easy.
Also (as long as you pass) only your best 3 modules actually matter. I ****ed up MA100 (because of reasons stated above such as not doing work throughout year and using solutions) but still got a good 1st year class because I did well in the other 3. Chill out!
Also (as long as you pass) only your best 3 modules actually matter. I ****ed up MA100 (because of reasons stated above such as not doing work throughout year and using solutions) but still got a good 1st year class because I did well in the other 3. Chill out!
What do you mean only the best 3 matter ? So in the first year my score is an average of my best three scores and the fourth is of no use?
Original post by member910132
Can I ask what you mean by this ?
Am I wrong in thinking that in your first year you do 4 options and they are all equally weighted ?
How come logic is better to take in the 2nd ? How come if you take it in the 2nd then it counts are the whole first year put together ?
What do you mean only the best 3 matter ? So in the first year my score is an average of my best three scores and the fourth is of no use?
Am I wrong in thinking that in your first year you do 4 options and they are all equally weighted ?
How come logic is better to take in the 2nd ? How come if you take it in the 2nd then it counts are the whole first year put together ?
What do you mean only the best 3 matter ? So in the first year my score is an average of my best three scores and the fourth is of no use?
For your final classification 9 "modules" count.
They are all modules in 2nd and 3rd year.
Then the final "module" is the average of your best 3 grades in 1st year.
Obviously you do need to pass all your 1st year modules though.
Original post by member910132
Can I ask what you mean by this ?
Am I wrong in thinking that in your first year you do 4 options and they are all equally weighted ?
How come logic is better to take in the 2nd ? How come if you take it in the 2nd then it counts are the whole first year put together ?
What do you mean only the best 3 matter ? So in the first year my score is an average of my best three scores and the fourth is of no use?
Am I wrong in thinking that in your first year you do 4 options and they are all equally weighted ?
How come logic is better to take in the 2nd ? How come if you take it in the 2nd then it counts are the whole first year put together ?
What do you mean only the best 3 matter ? So in the first year my score is an average of my best three scores and the fourth is of no use?
Just to further clarify this:
You study 4 modules in each year at LSE.
In first year, they ignore your lowest mark and take an average of your top 3. Therefore, you get just 1 grade (the average).
In second and third year, each module gives you a separate grade (so you get 4 grades in 2nd year + 4 grades in 3rd year).
i.e. LSE weights the degree 1 : 4 : 4.
If you take Logic in 2nd year then, it counts for 1 full grade, which is equivalent to all the work you did in 1st year essentially (as you only get 1 full grade from your entire first year). I have no idea why anyone picks Logic in 1st year (unless you REALLY want to pick 2nd/3rd year level outside options in your 2nd and 3rd year).
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by Milan.
its boring
Original post by Swayum
Just to further clarify this:
You study 4 modules in each year at LSE.
In first year, they ignore your lowest mark and take an average of your top 3. Therefore, you get just 1 grade (the average).
In second and third year, each module gives you a separate grade (so you get 4 grades in 2nd year + 4 grades in 3rd year).
i.e. LSE weights the degree 1 : 4 : 4.
If you take Logic in 2nd year then, it counts for 1 full grade, which is equivalent to all the work you did in 1st year essentially (as you only get 1 full grade from your entire first year). I have no idea why anyone picks Logic in 1st year (unless you REALLY want to pick 2nd/3rd year level outside options in your 2nd and 3rd year).
You study 4 modules in each year at LSE.
In first year, they ignore your lowest mark and take an average of your top 3. Therefore, you get just 1 grade (the average).
In second and third year, each module gives you a separate grade (so you get 4 grades in 2nd year + 4 grades in 3rd year).
i.e. LSE weights the degree 1 : 4 : 4.
If you take Logic in 2nd year then, it counts for 1 full grade, which is equivalent to all the work you did in 1st year essentially (as you only get 1 full grade from your entire first year). I have no idea why anyone picks Logic in 1st year (unless you REALLY want to pick 2nd/3rd year level outside options in your 2nd and 3rd year).
Original post by AndiB
For your final classification 9 "modules" count.
They are all modules in 2nd and 3rd year.
Then the final "module" is the average of your best 3 grades in 1st year.
Obviously you do need to pass all your 1st year modules though.
They are all modules in 2nd and 3rd year.
Then the final "module" is the average of your best 3 grades in 1st year.
Obviously you do need to pass all your 1st year modules though.
This question is mainly for Milan, but if it applies to you too I would be grateful for an answer.
If you don't take MA103 in the first year would it make the 3 EC 202,210 and 221 (that's second year micro macro and econometrics) harder ?
I know it ins't a pre-req for those courses, whereas MA100 is but would not having it disadvantage me even ever so slightly ? Or does it make absolutely no difference ?
Similarly if I don't take MA 103 in the second year either, will that make the 3rd year a lot harder (I guess only Milan can answer this as you two will be doing mainly maths in your 3rd year) ? I am talking about the 3rd year courses that don't require MA103, would it be disadvantageous not to have even in the slightest ?
Thnx
Original post by member910132
This question is mainly for Milan, but if it applies to you too I would be grateful for an answer.
If you don't take MA103 in the first year would it make the 3 EC 202,210 and 221 (that's second year micro macro and econometrics) harder ?
I know it ins't a pre-req for those courses, whereas MA100 is but would not having it disadvantage me even ever so slightly ? Or does it make absolutely no difference ?
Similarly if I don't take MA 103 in the second year either, will that make the 3rd year a lot harder (I guess only Milan can answer this as you two will be doing mainly maths in your 3rd year) ? I am talking about the 3rd year courses that don't require MA103, would it be disadvantageous not to have even in the slightest ?
Thnx
If you don't take MA103 in the first year would it make the 3 EC 202,210 and 221 (that's second year micro macro and econometrics) harder ?
I know it ins't a pre-req for those courses, whereas MA100 is but would not having it disadvantage me even ever so slightly ? Or does it make absolutely no difference ?
Similarly if I don't take MA 103 in the second year either, will that make the 3rd year a lot harder (I guess only Milan can answer this as you two will be doing mainly maths in your 3rd year) ? I am talking about the 3rd year courses that don't require MA103, would it be disadvantageous not to have even in the slightest ?
Thnx
MA103 wouldn't affect your ability to do those courses. But you said you enjoy maths modules, right? If you wanted to do any in your 2nd or 3rd year chances are they would have MA103 as a pre-requisite (and if not then it would still be very useful).
Original post by AndiB
MA103 wouldn't affect your ability to do those courses. But you said you enjoy maths modules, right? If you wanted to do any in your 2nd or 3rd year chances are they would have MA103 as a pre-requisite (and if not then it would still be very useful).
I do enjoy maths, but I also want to take a language in my first year as in the real world it would be more handy.
I can always take MA 103 in my second year right ? And then do the more advanced modules that pre-req MA103 in my third.
The part in bold is what worries me, do you mean that if I take it then it will be useful in terms of making my 2nd/3rd year econ exams or any other exams that don't require it as a pre-req easier ? What I mean to ask is all the econ and maths exams that don't require MA103, will it be useful for me to take MA103 even though as you say it isn't necessary.
Thnx
Original post by member910132
I do enjoy maths, but I also want to take a language in my first year as in the real world it would be more handy.
I can always take MA 103 in my second year right ? And then do the more advanced modules that pre-req MA103 in my third.
The part in bold is what worries me, do you mean that if I take it then it will be useful in terms of making my 2nd/3rd year econ exams or any other exams that don't require it as a pre-req easier ? What I mean to ask is all the econ and maths exams that don't require MA103, will it be useful for me to take MA103 even though as you say it isn't necessary.
Thnx
I can always take MA 103 in my second year right ? And then do the more advanced modules that pre-req MA103 in my third.
The part in bold is what worries me, do you mean that if I take it then it will be useful in terms of making my 2nd/3rd year econ exams or any other exams that don't require it as a pre-req easier ? What I mean to ask is all the econ and maths exams that don't require MA103, will it be useful for me to take MA103 even though as you say it isn't necessary.
Thnx
AndiB answered your question perfectly
ma103 is useful for the courses that say it is required as a pre-requisite or desired
if it doesnt say, then you wont need it and wont be useful to those modules that dont require it as a prerequisite
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Getting kicked out of LSE
- An overview of LSE MSc Economics
- MORSE vs Eco and math.
- Can't Decide between my Foundation Year Choices
- Do I choose UCL or LSE ? For Politics and Philosophy
- UCL History Politics and Economics vs LSE International History
- LSE, SOAS or IDS for Development Studies?
- LSE PPE for 2024 entry
- Are my GCSES too low for LSE
- Official Economics Applicants Thread for 2024 Entry
- Stick at LSE or clearing
- Is a Politics and Economics degree quantitative enough to become an actuary
- Warwick MORSE
- Is Politics and Economics at LSE considered a quantitative degree
- Current LSE Student - happy to answer any questions
- Economics at Oxford: is there enough maths?
- Durham vs LSE
- Switching the course of an offer from LSE
- Appealing a grade in Masters?
- Realistic university options with BTEC qualification?
Latest
Last reply 1 minute ago
Accenture Degree Apprenticeship 2024Last reply 2 minutes ago
Official London School of Economics and Political Science 2024 Applicant ThreadLast reply 2 minutes ago
Amazon Apprenticeships 2024Last reply 5 minutes ago
Zoom to Zoology? Uni open days, applications & more 2021-Present - a parents takeLast reply 6 minutes ago
Official Dental Hygiene and Therapy (Oral Health Science) 2024 Entry ThreadDentistry
2839
Last reply 8 minutes ago
Edexcel A Level History Paper 1 (9HI0 1A-1H) - 23rd May 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 8 minutes ago
JK Rowling in ‘arrest me’ challenge over hate crime lawLast reply 10 minutes ago
University of Salford Student Life : Connect with Salford Ambassadors and Graduates!Last reply 11 minutes ago
Official LSE Offer Holders Thread for 2024 entryLast reply 13 minutes ago
Accomodation in UK for Royal Holloway student - Sep 2024Last reply 13 minutes ago
Psychology with foundation year -liverpool hope 2024Trending
Last reply 2 minutes ago
Official London School of Economics and Political Science 2024 Applicant ThreadLast reply 11 minutes ago
Official LSE Offer Holders Thread for 2024 entryLast reply 5 hours ago
LSE Economics L100 2024 EntryLast reply 8 hours ago
LSE International Social and Public Policy and Economics (LLK1) 2024 ThreadLast reply 20 hours ago
LSE anthropology and law 2024Last reply 21 hours ago
LSE Economic history departmentLast reply 2 days ago
Economics and Economic History 2024 ThreadLast reply 4 days ago
LSE september 2024 grad intakeLast reply 4 days ago
LSE Undergraduate Offer Holder Accommodation 2024/25Last reply 1 week ago
LSE politics and Economics 2023/2024Last reply 1 week ago
Switching the course of an offer from LSETrending
Last reply 2 minutes ago
Official London School of Economics and Political Science 2024 Applicant ThreadLast reply 11 minutes ago
Official LSE Offer Holders Thread for 2024 entryLast reply 5 hours ago
LSE Economics L100 2024 EntryLast reply 8 hours ago
LSE International Social and Public Policy and Economics (LLK1) 2024 ThreadLast reply 20 hours ago
LSE anthropology and law 2024Last reply 21 hours ago
LSE Economic history departmentLast reply 2 days ago
Economics and Economic History 2024 ThreadLast reply 4 days ago
LSE september 2024 grad intakeLast reply 4 days ago
LSE Undergraduate Offer Holder Accommodation 2024/25Last reply 1 week ago
LSE politics and Economics 2023/2024Last reply 1 week ago
Switching the course of an offer from LSE
