2:2 from LSE - choices?

lol what do you even know about IB?

Without being too rude, a monolingual 21/22 year old from one of those 'Top 5 unis' you mention is not all that special anymore. There is the whole of continental Europe (and non-Europeans studying at European universities) for them to compete with.

There are only so many openings for UK-focused M&A analysts and UK-focused salespeople.

This is just absolute fantasy and demonstrates incredible naivety on two accounts.

The first is that the idea that in the current economic climate any companies are 'begging' people to work for them is a load of nonsense. If you are at Oxbridge or one of the big London three, you are at the top five universities but those five combined each year dish out a hell of a lot more graduates than there are front office bulge bracket bank jobs. And if you have a degree from one of those institutions and that is your mindset, the only golden ticket you will have is one to unemployment. Today for example I heard of a candidate with a First from Oxford who graduated in 2012 and is still out of work.

Once you get to this level, it becomes about who you are as a candidate, not where you degree is from and what it is from. I'm at a Top 10ish Russell and many current third years I've spoke to have jobs lined up high up in the public sector, MA's at Cambridge, Big Four firms, one is even going to work for Merrill Lynch. So to the person that argued all the jobs go to Oxbridge/LSE candidates, it's simply fantasy.

The crux is that you get into the best university you can, a Russell around the Top 10/20, you get a 2:1 or higher, then it becomes a case of a) what else have you got (Internships, Summer Schools, International Experience, Work Experience, other things), and what are you like as a candidate.

A 2:2 doesn't finish you off, and as a First Year who just currently scraped a 2:1 I sympathise. It's a monster step up to a Russell uni.I know candidates with A*AA who have got 2:2's, because they write essays descriptive rather than analytical. A 2:2 is an uphill struggle as you'll likely be filtered out of most grad scheme places. What you want to be doing is building up a CV, as much work experience and other stuff as you can.

A 2:2 isn't a reflection of how smart/not smart you are, it just means you didn't do as well at writing academic essays. Did you feel you worked hard? Carol Vorderman, has a Third from Cambridge, and I'd bet she'd beet most people with First's (from Cambridge) in a Maths quick fire quiz. University education just doesn't suit some as well as others.

Only because UK A levels are an absolute joke.

When an employer sees 2:2, they dont see the LSE attached to it anymore.

Sorry mate you blew your chance.....

Too much clubbing was it? Love it when i see the first question students ask about their choice of uni. Whats the clubbing scene like??? Are there loads of bars around?

They pay a heavy price later

YES they do - IB takes grads of ALL disciplines, note that.

I happily drank my way through my undergraduate. Not paying a heavy price yet mate.

A 2:2 doesn't finish you off, and as a First Year who just currently scraped a 2:1 I sympathise. It's a monster step up to a Russell uni. I know candidates with A*AA who have got 2:2's, because they write essays descriptive rather than analytical. A 2:2 is an uphill struggle as you'll likely be filtered out of most grad scheme places. What you want to be doing is building up a CV, as much work experience and other stuff as you can.

A 2:2 isn't a reflection of how smart/not smart you are, it just means you didn't do as well at writing academic essays. Did you feel you worked hard? Carol Vorderman, has a Third from Cambridge, and I'd bet she'd beet most people with First's (from Cambridge) in a Maths quick fire quiz. University education just doesn't suit some as well as others.

Good for you. It works for some and they could be inherently smart and make the most of it. A sizeable proportion are not and therefore suffer.

Forums like these glorify the drinking aspect of university life. The uni visits questions is dominated by clubs/pubs/drinking. It appears to be all that students ask about.

students do suffer in the long term because of it.

Only country in the world where you have three for-profit providers of exams who
- make them easier each year so that people go for them instead of the 2 others
- divide one topic e.g. Maths in many submodules that you take separately so that you are never examined on more than 20 pages of the book at the same time
- let you retake infinitely your modules because as you long as you pay for it they make more profit

And they are one of the countries who pays the most for this worthless secondary education

Neoclassical bull**** about having competition in education and letting the consumer choose done right...

Only because UK A levels are an absolute joke.

If a Russel Group university 2:1 is a "monster step up" then you must have some issues, especially when it comes to writing essays. 2:2 is basically sitting around doing almost nothing for most people, regardless of how prestigious their university is, and it serves as a good indicator for any potential employer. I think we all met people who worked extremely hard to get their AAAs and I think that we all understand that it shouldn't be like that.

2:2 is a great reflection of your determination/ability, if your natural ability to grasp things quickly is well-developed (and it should be) you would not experience any "uphill battles" and the like. If you can't write a decent academic essay (which is very strange given the immense amount of support you may potentially get) it says a lot about you.

I am more hardline on this. There is a distinction between intellectuals drinking their way through, and people 'going for a good time' - I may have spent a lot of time drunk, but ultimately I wish to pursue an academic career - the drinking etc which was a major part of my BA, wasn't particularly high on my list when I wanted to apply.

People who apply to university purely for 'job prospects' (especially in subjects like 'management') and with no interest in their subject, or else for the 'university experience' should, in my opinion, not be going at all.

I know, but they still don't have enough grads with relevant skills.

I'd agree that A Levels are too easy, and that I'd also agree the exam boards shouldn't be run like a business. But I see nothing wrong with re-sits. I mean I understand the sheer volume of applicants unis like Oxford get which is why they have to look at any ways they can to filter people out (including no resists), but if you've got the will to pick yourself up and try again, fair play.



They are too easy.



I mean I'm a First Year, I was getting the top A grades, but I'm scraping 2:1s at the moment, and the key issue is I parrot the facts. I am more descriptive rather than analytical. Which is what is required for A Level and not degree level. That's the difference. At A Level, I was getting 95 or above and I certainly didn't do any analysing. The question might be: 'What factors led to Mao Zedong and his troops winning the Chinese Civil War', you real off three or four factors and thats minium 95. At A Level at the top unis, they take it for granted that you can name all the EU institutions and what they do. The question becomes, how can you analyse them, how can you critique them, how can you say which ones are more important than others, how can you fit scholars views into your own. Skills your not taught at A Level, that is the problem for me.

I mean Russell Group universities (and others similar). There is a 116 universities in the UK, and people on my course mostly have A*AA or something similar. They are not mugs. But many are on 2:2s/low 2:1s at this time, and for me the cause is because it's significantly harder than A Level, and because you're not taught necessary skills required for uni at A Level (at least, not at my state school/college).

Dumbing down RG unis isn't an answer. So they need to make A Levels tougher, and more like university exams.

Although as I said, I'm First Year, most peoples grades go up by year 3. But there is nothing wrong with a low 2:1 from a Russell. It means your pretty good.

Depends which part of the RG doesn't it ? RG1 yes but RG 2 ... no

I mean there is no such thing to employers, but I'd be interested to hear which universities you believe are RG1 and RG2 and how you came up with the formula for deciding which university fits into which category.

Without being too rude, a monolingual 21/22 year old from one of those 'Top 5 unis' you mention is not all that special anymore. There is the whole of continental Europe (and non-Europeans studying at European universities) for them to compete with.

There are only so many openings for UK-focused M&A analysts and UK-focused salespeople.

This.

Anyone who has attended ACs for Front Office positions for not just the top BBs but right the way down to the European banks the last 2/3 years has no doubt found that as a British national you are a minority.

Given the consolidation in London as the hub and with cost cutting at the spokes, EU grads, most of which speak 2 languages fluently + English, will be applying for the same position as you. And with similar grades and work experience they are much more competitive. Added that there is a culture in Europe to do a Masters on top of your Bachelors degree they come out better on paper.