Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by guest115)
    Talking about tangents you seemed much keener on disagreeing with everything I had to say, rather than actually providing readers proof to disprove my initial post.
    You argue with minor points and provide exceptions, but largely you haven't said anything to suggest the post provides incorrect advice to applicants.
    The problem with poor advice on TSR, and you will see I have been a member since 2010, is usually the extrapolation of something of limited applicability to general applicability.

    What you have said is mostly an amalgam of the most selective aspects of the admissions systems of Cambridge, UCL and LSE but taken together it is not reflective of the way in which any of the UK's law schools actually recruit,

    The damage this does, is that inexperienced applicants think these leading universities are far more competitive in terms of exam grades than they actually are.

    Another feature of TSR's membership is that they tend to over-value the quantifiable at the expense of the unquantifiable. There must be 5 times as much comment on the LNAT multiple choice test than the essay, yet it is the essay which is the one opportunity which a candidate really has to sell himself or herself given the dismissal by most universities of the worth of a good personal statement..
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    The problem with poor advice on TSR, and you will see I have been a member since 2010, is usually the extrapolation of something of limited applicability to general applicability.

    What you have said is mostly an amalgam of the most selective aspects of the admissions systems of Cambridge, UCL and LSE but taken together it is not reflective of the way in which any of the UK's law schools actually recruit,

    The damage this does, is that inexperienced applicants think these leading universities are far more competitive in terms of exam grades than they actually are.

    Another feature of TSR's membership is that they tend to over-value the quantifiable at the expense of the unquantifiable. There must be 5 times as much comment on the LNAT multiple choice test than the essay, yet it is the essay which is the one opportunity which a candidate really has to sell himself or herself given the dismissal by most universities of the worth of a good personal statement..
    I take your point, and agree completely on the significance of the lnat. My post was intended as a response to the tens of 'are my GCSE's good enough for oxford law' posts that I keep see in this forum. Hence the exam grades were my main focus, rather than the lnat. I focus mainly on the leading uni's, as people on tsr appear to be more focused on these universities. Of course oxbridge use interviews, cambridge uses its own admissions test etc. This isn't a description of uni's admissions process, but a guide to what universities you can expect to apply to based upon your academic credentials.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by guest115)
    I take your point, and agree completely on the significance of the lnat. My post was intended as a response to the tens of 'are my GCSE's good enough for oxford law' posts that I keep see in this forum. Hence the exam grades were my main focus, rather than the lnat. I focus mainly on the leading uni's, as people on tsr appear to be more focused on these universities. Of course oxbridge use interviews, cambridge uses its own admissions test etc. This isn't a description of uni's admissions process, but a guide to what universities you can expect to apply to based upon your academic credentials.
    The only non-medicine data I can give you about GCSEs at Oxford is now 5 years old and may be unrepresentative. Oxford medicine is very good at information, but it is unrepresentative because there is a formula taking into BMAT and GCSEs to decide who to interview. No other subject has a mechanistic process incorporating GCSEs

    http://www.stdominics.org.uk/media/u...s%20-%20NI.pdf

    The point is that these figures are far lower than those bandied about in these threads including your own. More to the point they are far lower than the figures bandied about in these threads 2010/11 when they were current.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    The only non-medicine data I can give you about GCSEs at Oxford is now 5 years old and may be unrepresentative. Oxford medicine is very good at information, but it is unrepresentative because there is a formula taking into BMAT and GCSEs to decide who to interview. No other subject has a mechanistic process incorporating GCSEs

    http://www.stdominics.org.uk/media/u...s%20-%20NI.pdf

    The point is that these figures are far lower than those bandied about in these threads including your own. More to the point they are far lower than the figures bandied about in these threads 2010/11 when they were current.
    That page says, 'The average applicant hasaround 6.2 A*s'

    And one can expect that as law is one of their most competitive degrees, the average for law is considerable higher than that. I think this is inline with the gsce profiles I mentioned in the first post.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by guest115)
    That page says, 'The average applicant hasaround 6.2 A*s'

    And one can expect that as law is one of their most competitive degrees, the average for law is considerable higher than that. I think this is inline with the gsce profiles I mentioned in the first post.
    No The average for law was lower than that. The average for law, as the link shows, was 4.82

    The figures also show that across all subjects (but bear in mind law had scores lower than the average ) 4.5% of applicants with 1 A* got in

    11.1% of applicants with 3 A* got in. 60.9% of people with 12 A* got in.

    Think about that; nearly 40% of people with 12 A* were turned away and 88.9% of people with 3 A* were turned away, but 11.1 % got in.

    Now what you said was "Less than 4A*...Will struggle for oxbridge" Hand on heart, did you mean "only 1 in 9 people with 3 A*s" would get in" (again remember the percentage for law will be higher than this because GCSE grades for law are below average across the university) or did you mean "1 in 50" or "1 in 100"? Whatever, you meant, what do you think your readers would think it meant?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    No The average for law was lower than that. The average for law, as the link shows, was 4.82

    The figures also show that across all subjects (but bear in mind law had scores lower than the average ) 4.5% of applicants with 1 A* got in

    11.1% of applicants with 3 A* got in. 60.9% of people with 12 A* got in.

    Think about that; nearly 40% of people with 12 A* were turned away and 88.9% of people with 3 A* were turned away, but 11.1 % got in.

    Now what you said was "Less than 4A*...Will struggle for oxbridge" Hand on heart, did you mean "only 1 in 9 people with 3 A*s" would get in" (again remember the percentage for law will be higher than this because GCSE grades for law are below average across the university) or did you mean "1 in 50" or "1 in 100"? Whatever, you meant, what do you think your readers would think it meant?
    The source you gave is 6 years out of date, and a lot has changed in admissions since then. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/ed...t-8761839.html . This article from 2013 already shows the increase in average gcse results for oxford, at over 8A*.
    Name:  Screen Shot 2016-02-21 at 16.22.59.png
Views: 43
Size:  78.1 KB
    I've also attached this table, from http://moodle2.warwickschool.org/car...t%202011_0.pdf . showing 3% applying with less than 4 A*'s getting an offer. Thats closer to 1 in 50 than 1 in 9.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by guest115)
    The source you gave is 6 years out of date, and a lot has changed in admissions since then. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/ed...t-8761839.html . This article from 2013 already shows the increase in average gcse results for oxford, at over 8A*.
    Name:  Screen Shot 2016-02-21 at 16.22.59.png
Views: 43
Size:  78.1 KB
    I've also attached this table, from http://moodle2.warwickschool.org/car...t%202011_0.pdf . showing 3% applying with less than 4 A*'s getting an offer. Thats closer to 1 in 50 than 1 in 9.
    I thought we were making progress in the conduct of this discussion but I am afraid not.

    When I introduced the material I said it was now 5 years old (and it is five admissions cycles not 6) and may not be representative. You don't then get a free hit by saying my source is 6 years out of date, My argument is already discounted for the weaknesses I have already acknowledged. Doing what you have done just annoys people.

    I would have expected you to have acknowledged your misreading of the data in your previous post; but no, you have simply ignored that.

    If you had looked more closely at the figures from the Independent you would have seen that the proportion of people with 0, 1, and 5 A* GCSEs were higher and those with 2, 3, and 4 A* GCSEs were lower which doesn't suggest a very clear trend. The fair point you make is that the overall average has appeared to rise.

    Passing off a table of applicants for Selwyn College Cambridge for 2007 in developing an argument that average A* at Oxford have risen since my data in 2010 would have you up on a charge of academic misconduct if perpetrated at university rather than on a TSR forum.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    I thought we were making progress in the conduct of this discussion but I am afraid not.

    When I introduced the material I said it was now 5 years old (and it is five admissions cycles not 6) and may not be representative. You don't then get a free hit by saying my source is 6 years out of date, My argument is already discounted for the weaknesses I have already acknowledged. Doing what you have done just annoys people.

    I would have expected you to have acknowledged your misreading of the data in your previous post; but no, you have simply ignored that.

    If you had looked more closely at the figures from the Independent you would have seen that the proportion of people with 0, 1, and 5 A* GCSEs were higher and those with 2, 3, and 4 A* GCSEs were lower which doesn't suggest a very clear trend. The fair point you make is that the overall average has appeared to rise.

    Passing off a table of applicants for Selwyn College Cambridge for 2007 in developing an argument that average A* at Oxford have risen since my data in 2010 would have you up on a charge of academic misconduct if perpetrated at university rather than on a TSR forum.
    The only point I made from that article, is that the overall average has risen, which is relevant in disproving your previous comment that my first post's GCSE guides were incorrect. If you had done a little bit of research, you would have got to this point yourself, rather than posting misleading information from 6 years ago.

    Perhaps you should now acknowledge that people with less than 4A* at GCSE are at a significant disadvantage when applying.

    Okay, fair enough that table shouldn't have been used. Yet this is still a tangent to the main point - people with less than 4A* are at a major disadvantage, and very likely will not get into to oxbridge law.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • 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.