The Student Room Group
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>

MA at LSE with a 2:2 in second year

How realistic is it for me to apply to LSE for an econ history MSc after a 2:2 in my second year? I am on track to get at least a 2:1, hopefully a first in my disso...

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Mamataj
How realistic is it for me to apply to LSE for an econ history MSc after a 2:2 in my second year? I am on track to get at least a 2:1, hopefully a first in my disso...


How high was your 2.2 in second year - i.e.,how far off a 2.1 were you? Have you taken any exams before Christmas/in January, and received results from them to show that you have improved this year? Any extenuating circumstances etc? I'm just trying to get a view of what an admissions tutor would see, and get an idea of your academic capabilities.

I don't think the Economic History MSc is as competitive as some of LSE's other programmes, but applying with a 2.2 second year and without your final classification could make it tricky - they would essentially be taking a gamble on you. You would need very good references who can stress that your second-year marks were really not the best you can do, and that you're up to undertaking postgraduate study.
Reply 2
Avatar for ahllb
ahllb
6
Reapply next year once you've got the 2.1. Spend your gap year either working or taking an internship.
Original post by Mamataj
How realistic is it for me to apply to LSE for an econ history MSc after a 2:2 in my second year? I am on track to get at least a 2:1, hopefully a first in my disso...


LSE is probably the most competitive University for postgrad outside of Oxbridge. I think that you should apply, simply because you won't know whether or not you will get in without doing so, but bear in mind it is competitive.

A 2:2 certainty doesn't work in your favour. You could apply next year with your degree in hand as well.
Reply 4
Avatar for jm051014
jm051014
Will they take into account of my first year result as well? I only got 59 in average in first year and 69 in second year... any chance to get into LSE?
I m studying from a russell group university..(top 20 in uk)
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by jm051014
Will they take into account of my first year result as well? I only got 59 in average in first year and 69 in second year... any chance to get into LSE?
I m studying from a russell group university..(top 20 in uk)


Hey, I hold an offer from LSE so maybe I can give some input. :smile:

I applied with high 2:1s and several Firsts in first and second year.

You have a very high 2:1 in your second year. I think that you definitely stand a good shot depending on the course; if you have solid references and personal statement. Hopefully they will overlook your first year results.

Good luck!
Some of the people who were on the MSc Economic History program a few years back had some abysmal results (2.2s). If you want to stand out, here are a few pointers (I was made an unconditional offer on the MSc):

•

Make sure your personal statement is top notch. So, read a lot: Broadberry, O'Rourke, and Ferguson, although the latter isn't very popular amongst academics at the department. Here is a reading list I highly recommend you look at: http://www.lse.ac.uk/economicHistory/study/mastersProgrammes/newarrivals.aspx Acemoglu, Broadberry and Rosenthal are especially interesting.

•

Understand what reading economic history at masters level is about. Are you more interested in cliometrics (econometric history) or social history? What areas do you want to research? Make sure you speak about this and the direction you want to take your dissertation. Even if you're looking to then go into industry, the dissertation is very important and from what I've been told by a few of my classmates from undergraduate, this is where many students lose marks. Therefore, LSE is really looking for people who know what they want to research. Some of the world's leading economic historians teach there, e.g. Professor Tirthankar Roy who is one of the leading authorities on the economic history of South Asia, especially India. Try and align your research interests with those of current academics.

•

Learn about the department and its history. LSE was the first institution, if I remember correctly, to the treat the subject in its own right from both economics and/or history. This means that you focus almost entirely on studying economic history rather than as part of, say, an economics degree (which is more common than you may think).

•

Finally, there are a number of important journals and societies that focus on economic history; join them (if you're willing to pay LSE's tuition fees, then you can pay £21 for an annual membership):

- http://www.ehs.org.uk/
- http://ehes.org/

Good luck! It's an incredible program and a fantastic place to study economic history (I would say after Cambridge, it's probably the best place in the world to study it).
(edited 8 years ago)
Reply 7
Avatar for MB1976
MB1976
OP
11
Original post by gutenberg
How high was your 2.2 in second year - i.e.,how far off a 2.1 were you? Have you taken any exams before Christmas/in January, and received results from them to show that you have improved this year? Any extenuating circumstances etc? I'm just trying to get a view of what an admissions tutor would see, and get an idea of your academic capabilities.

I don't think the Economic History MSc is as competitive as some of LSE's other programmes, but applying with a 2.2 second year and without your final classification could make it tricky - they would essentially be taking a gamble on you. You would need very good references who can stress that your second-year marks were really not the best you can do, and that you're up to undertaking postgraduate study.


it was a mid 2:2, 55 I'm sure. I'm waiting on the marks for the essays I did over Dec/Jan, I suppose I could add them?

Thanks for advice on references, I think I've got ones that are quite good..
Reply 8
Avatar for MB1976
MB1976
OP
11
Original post by Aceadria
Some of the people who were on the MSc Economic History program a few years back had some abysmal results (2.2s). If you want to stand out, here are a few pointers (I was made an unconditional offer on the MSc):

•

Make sure your personal statement is top notch. So, read a lot: Broadberry, O'Rourke, and Ferguson, although the latter isn't very popular amongst academics at the department. Here is a reading list I highly recommend you look at: http://www.lse.ac.uk/economicHistory/study/mastersProgrammes/newarrivals.aspx Acemoglu, Broadberry and Rosenthal are especially interesting.

•

Understand what reading economic history at masters level is about. Are you more interested in cliometrics (econometric history) or social history? What areas do you want to research? Make sure you speak about this and the direction you want to take your dissertation. Even if you're looking to then go into industry, the dissertation is very important and from what I've been told by a few of my classmates from undergraduate, this is where many students lose marks. Therefore, LSE is really looking for people who know what they want to research. Some of the world's leading economic historians teach there, e.g. Professor Tirthankar Roy who is one of the leading authorities on the economic history of South Asia, especially India. Try and align your research interests with those of current academics.

•

Learn about the department and its history. LSE was the first institution, if I remember correctly, to the treat the subject in its own right from both economics and/or history. This means that you focus almost entirely on studying economic history rather than as part of, say, an economics degree (which is more common than you may think).

•

Finally, there are a number of important journals and societies that focus on economic history; join them (if you're willing to pay LSE's tuition fees, then you can pay £21 for an annual membership):

- http://www.ehs.org.uk/
- http://ehes.org/

Good luck! It's an incredible program and a fantastic place to study economic history (I would say after Cambridge, it's probably the best place in the world to study it).


First of all, thank you for your extremely helpful reply! and congrats on your offer!

Did you apply for the Econ History with Research or without?

Now, do you mean 2:2 as an overall degree or just in second year?
I've been working on my PS, I do have a research area that I want to go into and hopefully take further beyond the masters. I think I will tailor it a little more to suit their department as it is at the moment..

Also, do you think LSE have any bias on anyone who's applied before? I ask because I will most likely make an application to the same course next year.
Original post by Mamataj
it was a mid 2:2, 55 I'm sure. I'm waiting on the marks for the essays I did over Dec/Jan, I suppose I could add them?

Thanks for advice on references, I think I've got ones that are quite good..


If you can include any more recent marks with your application, and they are strong, then I imagine it will help your case a bit.
Does LSE require any kind of personal statement/research statement for the Economic History MSc? Alongside the references, you would probably want to ensure that any statement you have to do is very strong too.
Good luck!
Original post by Mamataj
First of all, thank you for your extremely helpful reply! and congrats on your offer!

Did you apply for the Econ History with Research or without?

Now, do you mean 2:2 as an overall degree or just in second year?
I've been working on my PS, I do have a research area that I want to go into and hopefully take further beyond the masters. I think I will tailor it a little more to suit their department as it is at the moment..

Also, do you think LSE have any bias on anyone who's applied before? I ask because I will most likely make an application to the same course next year.


I applied for the non-research stream.

2:2 in certain years. Should have specified.

I won't be able to comment on whether there is any bias as it's something you would need to approach the department with.
No harm trying. You could always take a gap year and apply with a 2:1.

I got a 55% 2:2 in my second year, and (after improving it to a low to mid-2:1 in third and fourth year) ended up doing a second masters at Oxford (sounds odd, but there were reasons) that required a 1st to get in. When I went to the open day they told me I had no chance with a 66% 2:1, but I applied anyway, got in and got 80% in the MSc.

It's always worth trying, but you need some reason for them to choose you. It could be high marks in some exams, competitions entered, research potential, or just a real deep interest and knowledge at interview. In my case I argued that my dissertation marks were much higher than my exam marks, so I would do better in a project based MSc. I also gave a good presentation at interview.

Plus, references are important.
Hi,
I know this is an odd question and I apologise to the OP.
If you want to get a scholarship at Oxbridge for masters, I am assuming they will require a high first and extracurriculars/internships?
Is this true?
Original post by Skill Twix
Hi,
I know this is an odd question and I apologise to the OP.
If you want to get a scholarship at Oxbridge for masters, I am assuming they will require a high first and extracurriculars/internships?
Is this true?


a) Do your own research;
b) Ask in the relevant thread. This has nothing to do with the OP's question.
Original post by Aceadria
a) Do your own research;
b) Ask in the relevant thread. This has nothing to do with the OP's question.

Spoiler

Reply 15
Avatar for MB1976
MB1976
OP
11
Original post by Octohedral
No harm trying. You could always take a gap year and apply with a 2:1.

I got a 55% 2:2 in my second year, and (after improving it to a low to mid-2:1 in third and fourth year) ended up doing a second masters at Oxford (sounds odd, but there were reasons) that required a 1st to get in. When I went to the open day they told me I had no chance with a 66% 2:1, but I applied anyway, got in and got 80% in the MSc.

It's always worth trying, but you need some reason for them to choose you. It could be high marks in some exams, competitions entered, research potential, or just a real deep interest and knowledge at interview. In my case I argued that my dissertation marks were much higher than my exam marks, so I would do better in a project based MSc. I also gave a good presentation at interview.

Plus, references are important.


Thanks! Congrats on your two masters. It's reassuring hearing from someone who's been in the same boat.
Original post by Mamataj
Thanks! Congrats on your two masters. It's reassuring hearing from someone who's been in the same boat.


No problem :smile: Good luck - never give up, and maybe you can even get a 1st this year!
I'm on a similar situation with you. Well kind of. I'm taking mechanical engineering at a Russell group university and planning on taking msc risk. Got similar scores to you. But I can definitely raise it to a 2:1 at the end of the year. Not sure whether I should apply now with 2:2 or wait until the summer...?
Even people with firsts get rejected from Russell Group unis for postgrad so I'd recommend not bothering and concentrate your applications on the less competitive unis instead.
Original post by stevey396
Even people with firsts get rejected from Russell Group unis for postgrad so I'd recommend not bothering and concentrate your applications on the less competitive unis instead.


Actually I don't who you are but thanks for your comment. You're not a university representative I assume but I'll take your comment as consideration any ways. I've got some mates who fked managed to get in with 2:1s at LSE from engineering backgrounds as well. So I might as well try.

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you