Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dragonkiller)
    But for Economics, I don't think anyone would pick UCL over LSE.
    :ditto:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Hessian)
    I doubt that the cut off is that low. On the cambridge site they say ... average people score within the 60s .... good students in the 70s and some exceptional brilliant candidates above 80% .... so i guess the cut off is around the low 70s
    Well i got a PPE inteview last year with TSA slightly above 60%, while my friend was rejected straight away with <50% (it's TSA Oxford, i'm not sure how Cambridge system works though).
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dragonkiller)
    But for Economics, I don't think anyone would pick UCL over LSE.
    I don't think you can make this assumption. Even though I would probably have chosen LSE over UCL, a lot of the talk on TSR about the atmosphere at LSE (indifferent staff, etc) has resulted in the gap between the two to become extremely small in my mind. If one doesn't aim to enter investment banking or other career where the brand of the university is of huge importance, it is entirely possible for one to choose UCL over LSE. It all depends on the individual and his/her priorities and preferences.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dragonkiller)
    But for Economics, I don't think anyone would pick UCL over LSE.
    Well, last year, my friend did. He got offers from LSE and UCL but went for UCL in the end, saying "I want a little bit of fun and drinking." Or maybe he was just attracted to the stories my Physics teacher poured into his head last year about the pool parties in UCL and all the late clubbing thingy. lol.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    OK, I didn't make it clear.

    I meant the vast majority of people would pick LSE for Economics rather than UCL.

    There is always going to be a few people who pick UCL for whatever reason, but it is nowhere near a 50/50 split which it would need to be for gilash89's theory to make sense.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dragonkiller)
    OK, I didn't make it clear.

    I meant the vast majority of people would pick LSE for Economics rather than UCL.

    There is always going to be a few people who pick UCL for whatever reason, but it is nowhere near a 50/50 split which it would need to be for gilash89's theory to make sense.
    But the 50/50 split would actually result in gilash89's theory to be false:

    (Original post by gilash89)
    If UCL and the LSE gave out offers to the same people there might be a situation where a vast majority go to one university and the other is left short.
    He's still arguing that the vast majority would go to one (i.e. LSE), whereas the other would be left short.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dragonkiller)
    OK, I didn't make it clear.

    I meant the vast majority of people would pick LSE for Economics rather than UCL.

    There is always going to be a few people who pick UCL for whatever reason, but it is nowhere near a 50/50 split which it would need to be for gilash89's theory to make sense.
    No, because the collusion forces people to take the option which is consider 'lesser' in the eyes of many.
    i.e. for UCL to be able to forward plan how many offers they give per place, they arrange that LSE don't give offers to the same people, who would generally accept LSE and skew UCL's intake numbers. In exchange, UCL agree not to interfere with the top candidates that LSE want, in case they do decide to reject LSE's offer. This means that both universities get people they want and can be relatively sure of their intake each year.
    I don't necessarily agree this is occurring at all, but I thought that it may be an interesting point of view.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hungdlhp)
    Well i got a PPE inteview last year with TSA slightly above 60%, while my friend was rejected straight away with <50% (it's TSA Oxford, i'm not sure how Cambridge system works though).
    I was talking about E&M at Oxford, which is highly oversubscribed. So for PPE it'll be enough to have 60% ... but it won't be enough for an E&M interview
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I thought he meant that, because they are considered equal, there might be a situation where (out of chance) 70% go to UCL, and LSE is left short. Or the other way.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Hessian)
    I was talking about E&M at Oxford, which is highly oversubscribed. So for PPE it'll be enough to have 60% ... but it won't be enough for an E&M interview
    I disagree with you. If we assume that 60% is the average score, surely less than that will be enough for E&M too. This is simply due to the fact that they are interviewing roughly 70% of the applicants. Hence there would not be enough applicants for interviews, if more than the average(=assuming its close to median) is required for an interview.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Wait, does any one know the dates of which LSE normally give out offer/rejections?
    Sorry if it had been posted before, but this thread is too big for me to search through lol

    This week is a rejection week?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yodude888)
    No, because the collusion forces people to take the option which is consider 'lesser' in the eyes of many.
    i.e. for UCL to be able to forward plan how many offers they give per place, they arrange that LSE don't give offers to the same people, who would generally accept LSE and skew UCL's intake numbers. In exchange, UCL agree not to interfere with the top candidates that LSE want, in case they do decide to reject LSE's offer. This means that both universities get people they want and can be relatively sure of their intake each year.
    I don't necessarily agree this is occurring at all, but I thought that it may be an interesting point of view.
    I don't really understand what you are saying, but if you are trying to imply that UCL reject the best applicants on the basis that they are likely to get and accept and offer from LSE, then that is just a totally absurd notion.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dragonkiller)
    But for Economics, I don't think anyone would pick UCL over LSE.
    I for one, would pick UCL
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dragonkiller)
    I thought he meant that, because they are considered equal, there might be a situation where (out of chance) 70% go to UCL, and LSE is left short. Or the other way.
    Yeah, I think that pretty much sums up what I was trying to say. I think a parallel would be oxbridge. They are pretty much equal and you are now only allowed to apply to one because you would get the same applicants applying to both places which would create a situation where a 70-30% split might occur. But this is purely conjecture as I have absolutely no idea as to how admissions tutor make their decisions.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mike_P)
    Oh, right. Still sounds like they are interested in you .

    Are your grades currently in portugese or in english?
    If you need to translate them, ask if your school can do it on a official paper and then stamp + sign it. Otherwise, just ask them to print your grades and do the same. You have all your grades ready right?
    I really hope so. I've already been rejected by Oxford

    My grades are in portuguese, so are the subjects I'm taking. Do you think it's ok just to send a stamped transcript (and not 100% official one, signed by 1,000 univ. authorities, on a different paper, which will take aaaages to get printed) ? No way my university is translating it... they are so lazy. I guess I'll just pay someone to do it...
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by flglxpstbxkdls)
    Same here my friend! Economic history department is such a small department... The worse part, however, is that I haven't got any offer from any universities I applied so far...
    Don't worry. Your prediction is good so just wait and see.

    Noticed now that you and I have applied for exactly the same courses at LSE, Oxford and Warwick. Good taste!

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by makke)
    I disagree with you. If we assume that 60% is the average score, surely less than that will be enough for E&M too. This is simply due to the fact that they are interviewing roughly 70% of the applicants. Hence there would not be enough applicants for interviews, if more than the average(=assuming its close to median) is required for an interview.
    no it's not the case for E&M. go check out this in the Oxford forum.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yodude888)
    No, because the collusion forces people to take the option which is consider 'lesser' in the eyes of many.
    i.e. for UCL to be able to forward plan how many offers they give per place, they arrange that LSE don't give offers to the same people, who would generally accept LSE and skew UCL's intake numbers. In exchange, UCL agree not to interfere with the top candidates that LSE want, in case they do decide to reject LSE's offer. This means that both universities get people they want and can be relatively sure of their intake each year.
    I don't necessarily agree this is occurring at all, but I thought that it may be an interesting point of view.
    (Original post by tomoli)
    I don't really understand what you are saying, but if you are trying to imply that UCL reject the best applicants on the basis that they are likely to get and accept and offer from LSE, then that is just a totally absurd notion.
    Ditto. Collusion forces? Could you please re-state your post in a simple english without any redundancy, if possible?
    No offense, but your statement is overly wordy and very misleading, making unclear.
    edit: or maybe it just that your logic/reasoning is flawed.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ggap)
    i just want to suggest in relation to the whole LSE/ UCL connection (i.e. ppl get rejected for UCL but accepted by LSE and vice versa) that maybe the LNAT plays a big part in that correlation. We don't know how much emphasis UCL put onto the LNAT, and considering that one of the uni's takes part in the LNAT and the other does not may explain the issue.
    omg omg. wait. does lse not see our lnat scores?!? i thought both ucl and lse saw them?!!
    wow i hope lse doesnt c our lnat cos i think i totally messed mine up. big time.
    sumone answer pleeease :confused:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bvcj)
    omg omg. wait. does lse not see our lnat scores?!? i thought both ucl and lse saw them?!!
    wow i hope lse doesnt c our lnat cos i think i totally messed mine up. big time.
    sumone answer pleeease :confused:
    I am pretty sure they don't.
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
Updated: March 24, 2009
Poll
The new Gillette ad. Is it:

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.