Top(30) universities to study law?

flawed how?? point of view that UCL's extremely wide range of masters that exceeds LSE's topped with a marginal difference of quality of both instutions in my mind gives UCL slightly better department. I did not give ranking that much weight otherwise manchester allegedly would have been 33rd

you are right in saying they did not give me much but out of ten well performing MC firms i.e slaugheter, allen, hogan lov's ect all gave me a preferred list but they highlighted they will recruit beyond this as not to discriminate but it is less likely you will get an interview...my age does not really become an issue when asking a question about universities??

Average UCAS was 400--10 points below QMUL and Exeter, on par with SOAS. - you have the wrong idea, i meant what people finish with i.e 1sts, 2:1's...leicester is fairly low on both year on year.

the high take of international students is not sustainable because they are lowering the entrance requirements this could possibly be some evidence towards the lower grade achievements too?? but this will inevitably bring the law school down

looks like quite a few firms sponsor various events (debating, etc.). -sponsorship is not recruitment

Doubt he got much of anything. These firms aren't sending out their entire recruiting strategy to 18 yr olds.]- they are not but the question i asked was if would be dissadvantaged at a particular uni(hence being given a preffered list) and being a potential applicant one cannot imagine being given the wrong advice

x

flawed how?? point of view that UCL's extremely wide range of masters that exceeds LSE's topped with a marginal difference of quality of both instutions in my mind gives UCL slightly better department. I did not give ranking that much weight otherwise manchester allegedly would have been 33rd

Interested to know what you make of this...

Interested to know what you make of this...

So let me get this strait. The quantity of masters programs offered by the university as a whole, makes its law school better?

1. I'm guessing the "preferred list" they sent you is a list of universities where they actively hold recruiting events, etc.?

2. I don't exactly understand the purpose of this argument. You do understand that Leicester has about the same breakdown of classifcations as most other unis?

First Class:
Upper Second:

Nottingham
8%
63%
Bristol
6%
64%
Leicester
8%
59%


3. Cross-apply the argument I was making about UCAS points. They are only 10 points less than Exeter/QMUL, and on par with SOAS--thus, no evidence of overall standards dropping.

4. Let me give you a quick overview of how HR/Recruiting works. A firm sponsors an event. They do this to get the name out to the student body. They don't do this for charity or the kindness of their heart. If they weren't getting any intake from their sponsored/recruiting events, they would just cease it. What makes you believe Leicester grads aren't landing TC's?

If I may interject, I laughed a lot.

yeh i'v seen it, and reading is number 8.... as if, this is why i take only vague notice of league tables

Interested to know what you make of this...

You may, and I'm very glad to hear it. Laughter will soothe the pain of holding an offer from a second-rate university



I understand. I'm sure your table, which manages the amazing feat of being both "subjective" and "impartial", is far superior to the one slaved over by a crack team of educational experts over the course of many months

ummmm experts??? do you know this...the point is reading is not a top ten uni for...ever and some of the others are exaggerated ...can you really rate student satisfaction ?? a survey from a student after freshers week is bound to give an amazing rating to their uni...and its not as if they will beat up on their on course.
Dont lynch me to much but i have found a general rule of thumb for uni quality is entry points...even though its not entirely accurate it does give a pretty good guideline to go by

ummmm experts??? do you know this...the point is reading is not a top ten uni for...ever and some of the others are exaggerated ...can you really rate student satisfaction ?? a survey from a student after freshers week is bound to give an amazing rating to their uni...and its not as if they will beat up on their on course.
Dont lynch me to much but i have found a general rule of thumb for uni quality is entry points...even though its not entirely accurate it does give a pretty good guideline to go by

You may, and I'm very glad to hear it. Laughter will soothe the pain of holding an offer from a second-rate university

Student Satisfaction is a survey on final year students not "students after freshers week". Moreover, LSE has higher entry standards of 536, whilst UCL's is 522. So you aren't basing your ranking on entry standards then.

How does it feel to be going to a uni that only has 10 higher entry points than Leicester? Do you feel as if you are are attending a university in DECLINE and a VOLATILE institution?

How does it feel to be going to a uni that only has 10 higher entry points than Leicester? Do you feel as if you are are attending a university in DECLINE and a VOLATILE institution?

no you did not read my blog properly. I said a good guideline, itwas more to disprove universities like reading and lancaster belonging in the top ten...it gets frightfully fuzzy in the top ten catergory, even im prepared to admit this...but you do seem awfully offended about the rating of LSE...im sorry if this is the case I just prefered UCLs 'assets' compared to LSEs not that there was a great difference...i really cannot stress this enough

Oh, always with the digs
I also found some other parts funny though, like generally QMUL>Reading>king's>bristol>SOAS>Leicester> Warwick

And there's this place I've never heard of at third. Must be some kind of ex-poly :s

What blog are you referring to?
And no, I'm not "awfully offended". I simply don't believe that UCL should be in a higher tier to LSE and would be open to thinking otherwise if you had put forward a valid and accurate argument for this, however, you haven't. And I also don't believe your comment actually responded to my point that LSE's entry standards are higher, and so with your reasoning should be higher in your table than UCL.

EDIT: Instead of negging me could you offer an opinion.