Law- competative??

I was just wondering if law is even that competative since at my school we got quite a few people who are going to do law at uni and to say the least they are not the brightest bunch.

Do they know how to spell competitive?

You forgot Oxford in your list........

You can't apply to cambridge and oxford

I was just wondering if law is even that competative since at my school we got quite a few people who are going to do law at uni and to say the least they are not the brightest bunch. I know people who have opted for subjects such as AVCE business and sociology who are applying for law, are there law schools who will actually take people on with weak subjects since i thought law required English???

Do they know how to spell competitive?

You'd be more accurate in saying that Law is easy than uncompetitive.

It received the most applications of any course in the UK for 2005 entry; and a large proportion of those applications came from straight-A students. However, Law is a degree also offered by a number of lack-lustre institutions, in which case it is fair to say that an applicant to such institutions is unlikely to face much competition; but that applies to all subjects generally.

In comparison to most degrees, Law is extremely competitive.

Depending on the standard of our hypothetical 'applicant', mind, relative to their academic peers: it suffices to say that, wherever Law is offered, it will almost invariably be formidably over-subscribed. That doesn't necessarily make it more 'competitive' than Medicine, where most such applications would not even exist in any tenable sense: in the vast majority of cases, it stands to reason that Law be comparatively much less so. However, presuming ambitions with regard to the 'top ten', no definite assurance can be given as to your prospects; and that much is, as they say, a certainty.

You know what Profesh... you should draft legislation when you're older. Perfect. Seems like you're reading a lot of complex information, but actually doesn't mean much past the first sentence.

Depending on the standard of our hypothetical 'applicant', mind, relative to their academic peers: it suffices to say that, wherever Law is offered, it will almost invariably be formidably over-subscribed. That doesn't necessarily make it more 'competitive' than Medicine, where most such applications would not even exist in any tenable sense: in the vast majority of cases, it stands to reason that Law be comparatively much less so. However, presuming ambitions with regard to the 'top ten', no definite assurance can be given as to your prospects; and that much is, as they say, a certainty.

Law is less competetive than medicine, but it's still difficult to get into a good uni?

Not necessarily so; more that Medicine, unlike Law, exhibits a definite 'cut-off point' [anything below 'AAB', or thereabouts, if memory serves]. Thus the 'competitive' nature of Law is relative, whereas Medicine's might be deemed normative.

So medicine is more about grades than law?

By default, pretty much. There are 'Law' courses available to applicants who would be deemed insufficiently qualified to study 'Medicine' anywhere that offers it.