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

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Potiron)
    From Warwick, some people have offers. I, and I think most people, haven't heard anything other than "we make most of our decisions after the Ucas deadline."

    But yes, I want to hear one way or the other
    Ahh Thanks for that! Gosh, I just want to know! I suppose the deadline is only next week though, after all.
    Where else have you applied?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Safety K)
    There have been quite a few LSE offers.

    In terms of Warwick they don't generally start offering students until March time. There have been a couple on here but I think to overseas students so they can sort out arrangements etc.

    Where else have you applied if you don't mind me asking?
    Thank you!
    I applied to Exeter main campus, Exeter Cornwall campus and Sheffield and have unconditionals for those three but ideally would like to have Warwick and/or LSE
    Where else have you applied?


    Also, has anyone else done all science A Levels? I was slightly concerned about my subject choices but so far it doesn't appear to have been a big issue.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by micky022)
    What exactly did you say to Manchester and why?
    Is this the kid who flipped a **** because the uni messed up on the offer and he told them off? Or am I thinking of someone else?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by micky022)
    What exactly did you say to Manchester and why?
    Ah, well, I originally wasn’t going to consider accepting anywhere else (if I managed to get an offer) irrespective of the grades achieved due to a talk I had with some of their admissions staff. I was deeply impressed by their supposed attempts to improve the North-West economy, remedy the underrepresentation of poorer people in academia or the upper echelons of professions, and their inclusion policies in general.

    However, I later learned that things such as the ‘Manchester Access Scheme’ were part of their attempt to cater to governmentally obligated responsibilities despite them portraying it as a rather altruistic endeavour rather than self-interested. I appreciate that such expectations are rather ‘romanticised’ and that I was a tad naive (to say the least). On top of that, I began to read research in a journal related to university attitudes to various A Levels and whether they placed any on a ‘black-list.’

    Many universities, including Manchester, provided logical, empirical evidence to confirm why they excluded some subjects from conditions. However, things began to change in relation to other subjects including (much to my dislike) Law. In the Law specific research, all but one of the top ten for Law had responded by stating that they advocated it since it demonstrated prior knowledge of the legal system, long-standing desire to study subject, that they considered it sufficiently rigorous to merit acceptance, that statistics confirmed that it could be very beneficial or reduce drop-out rates, etc. The most vociferous supporters seemed to be the likes of KCL or Oxbridge.

    Of those that rejected it as a valid subject in its own right, one didn’t reply and the other (Manchester) gave a cursory, weak argument about it ‘possibly causing first years to rely on A Level notes’ which, as previously stated, is linked to student mentality rather than a subject choice. Other subjects had similar justifications for rejection or being viewed as ‘less preferred.’ I requested whatever data they’d utilised in order to reach their conclusions or a coherent explanation yet received none. Consequently, I retracted my statements of loyalty and voiced my dislike for their arbitrary policy based upon the fact that other universities of far higher ranking weren’t being as academically snobbish as they were. It was hard to reconcile claims of inclusion and diversification with such a rigid, unfounded mindset.

    I only included them in UCAS because I hoped that could be changed. I also know that the world hardly centres on me and such an institution couldn’t care less what my opinion is but I’m not a person that believes in silence or simply ‘changing your mind’ without notifying people that you have... even if they don’t remember or care about your previous statements!

    (Original post by adam0311)
    Is this the kid who flipped a **** because the uni messed up on the offer and he told them off? Or am I thinking of someone else?
    Oh goodness no, I would never resort to something that selfish or vitriolic. I don’t consider myself as instantly ‘worthy’ of an offer anywhere, that’s the epitome of arrogance.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Valindrius)
    x
    Did you do an A level in Law by any chance? :holmes:

    More seriously, who are you planning to firm out of Cambridge, Manchester and the other one Lancaster?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Valindrius)

    Oh goodness no, I would never resort to something that selfish or vitriolic. I don’t consider myself as instantly ‘worthy’ of an offer anywhere, that’s the epitome of arrogance.
    Once I read your post thoroughly instead of scanning it, I realized I was mistaken. There was this kid who came on here a few weeks ago, who basically threw a hissy fit with admissions because they made a series of mistakes. I think he had a twin which threw admissions off...but he didn't cut them any slack. If I can find the thread I'll post it.

    You've got some strong writing skills btw, you definitely should consider a career in academia.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Potiron)
    Did you do an A level in Law by any chance? :holmes:
    Haha, indeedies, but the complaint was sent many months ago thus Law is the one that stuck in my mind the most. I did include a list of other subjects that seemed unjustifiable to exclude at the time, then contrasted them with ‘traditional’ subjects containing less than 70% theoretical focus (as they claim is their standard).

    (Original post by Potiron)
    More seriously, who are you planning to firm out of Cambridge, Manchester and the other one Lancaster?
    Originally, it would have been Manchester. Now, Cambridge. I just didn't expect to get beyond the initial application, I think luck helped me a great deal! Hehe.

    You've got some strong writing skills btw, you definitely should consider a career in academia.
    Oh that's really lovely of you to say, I disagree a great deal but I appreciate such a wonderful compliment. It's especially excellent when given by somebody of such astounding academic achievement, belated congratulations on getting into Durham so quickly!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Valindrius)
    Ah, well, I originally wasn’t going to consider accepting anywhere else (if I managed to get an offer) irrespective of the grades achieved due to a talk I had with some of their admissions staff. I was deeply impressed by their supposed attempts to improve the North-West economy, remedy the underrepresentation of poorer people in academia or the upper echelons of professions, and their inclusion policies in general.

    However, I later learned that things such as the ‘Manchester Access Scheme’ were part of their attempt to cater to governmentally obligated responsibilities despite them portraying it as a rather altruistic endeavour rather than self-interested. I appreciate that such expectations are rather ‘romanticised’ and that I was a tad naive (to say the least). On top of that, I began to read research in a journal related to university attitudes to various A Levels and whether they placed any on a ‘black-list.’

    Many universities, including Manchester, provided logical, empirical evidence to confirm why they excluded some subjects from conditions. However, things began to change in relation to other subjects including (much to my dislike) Law. In the Law specific research, all but one of the top ten for Law had responded by stating that they advocated it since it demonstrated prior knowledge of the legal system, long-standing desire to study subject, that they considered it sufficiently rigorous to merit acceptance, that statistics confirmed that it could be very beneficial or reduce drop-out rates, etc. The most vociferous supporters seemed to be the likes of KCL or Oxbridge.

    Of those that rejected it as a valid subject in its own right, one didn’t reply and the other (Manchester) gave a cursory, weak argument about it ‘possibly causing first years to rely on A Level notes’ which, as previously stated, is linked to student mentality rather than a subject choice. Other subjects had similar justifications for rejection or being viewed as ‘less preferred.’ I requested whatever data they’d utilised in order to reach their conclusions or a coherent explanation yet received none. Consequently, I retracted my statements of loyalty and voiced my dislike for their arbitrary policy based upon the fact that other universities of far higher ranking weren’t being as academically snobbish as they were. It was hard to reconcile claims of inclusion and diversification with such a rigid, unfounded mindset.

    I only included them in UCAS because I hoped that could be changed. I also know that the world hardly centres on me and such an institution couldn’t care less what my opinion is but I’m not a person that believes in silence or simply ‘changing your mind’ without notifying people that you have... even if they don’t remember or care about your previous statements!


    Oh goodness no, I would never resort to something that selfish or vitriolic. I don’t consider myself as instantly ‘worthy’ of an offer anywhere, that’s the epitome of arrogance.
    So, in short, excluding the access scheme "conspiracy" you're annoyed that Manchester prefer it if you don't take A-Level Law.

    Yet, they still saw fit to give you an offer (I'm assuming you took A-Level Law) and you're STILL annoyed?
    Basically, they said "We prefer if you don't have X." You have X. They then thought "Screw it, he has X, but he's still good." And you're not happy?

    I understand not doing something on principle, but this isn't even about that, it seems illogical. Similarly, asking for data on something that they say is only "possible" seems arrogant. You should be able to deduce that the tutors there have either had experience with people slacking off in modules they've studied or they just plain don't want to take the risk, I'm sure you don't do things you've done before after bad experiences, and haven't collated data on the issue to back up your thesis on whatever you don't do. End of the day, their university, their rules.

    Just go to Cambridge and be happy.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mann18)
    So, in short, excluding the access scheme "conspiracy" you're annoyed that Manchester prefer it if you don't take A-Level Law.
    I think that's a rather scathing and unfair reduction, I'm not implying that it's a conspiracy. I was just quite shocked that such an unsubstantiated, backwards mindset existed there given supposed goals of diversification and inclusion. The attitudes displayed by their Law admissions staff (via comments included in the research) belong at an upper-class stereotype of Oxbridge, not somewhere in an impoverished area that can do a great deal of social good or harm via its policies.

    I understand not doing something on principle, but this isn't even about that, it seems illogical.
    I fail to see how 'it isn't about that,' I resent those in publically important positions that make decisions without consistent, measureable evidence to justify their decisions hence I sent them a message.

    I haven’t changed my mind since receiving the offer because I’m yet to receive a reply from them after many months, and their policy remains the same. I applied to account for the fact that they might be willing to discuss the matter thereby changing my mind via data or might change their policy, but instead they’ve remained aloof. If they don’t change their mind, then they have wasted energy and time on my application which amounts to a kind of efficiency based ‘punishment.’

    How is that inconsistent with the principle espoused? The fact that they accepted me is an irrelevancy, the procedure is still unjust whether I benefitted from it or not. I see that as consistent. The important point is that they shouldn't say 'we prefer it if you don't have X,' unless they are justified in that. There should be no need for me or others to compensate via higher UMS in others subjects that they deem ‘traditional’ unless they have data to warrant it.

    Similarly, asking for data on something that they say is only "possible" seems arrogant.
    No, eliminating several A Levels from consideration because you think something is ‘possible’ is arrogant and callous.

    It instantly disadvantages people in reality, and why? Because somebody considered it a hypothetical possibility? Requesting evidence for something that affects the material isn’t arrogant, it’s logical to question it. It is arrogant to lambast those that request justification or to imply/state that it isn’t necessary to explain (their silence implies it).

    You should be able to deduce that the tutors there have either had experience with people slacking off in modules they've studied or they just plain don't want to take the risk, I'm sure you don't do things you've done before after bad experiences, and haven't collated data on the issue to back up your thesis on whatever you don't do. End of the day, their university, their rules.
    There’s a difference between deduction and agreement, I deduced it but didn’t accept their view since it’s ostensibly ridiculous. Why would I stop because I knew why they'd formed their view? If anything, it makes it worse.

    Your analogy is also invalid as I am not in a publically funded office with power over the future of others when I make my decisions, am I? If I make a decision over a ‘bad experience’ then that directly affects me, not others. (As an aside, I do use empirical data wherever possible to form opinions. I’m a lover of the scientific method and, to a large degree, a Cartesian-esque sceptic)

    Conversely, their decisions are guaranteed to affect many others so there’s greater diligence needed. As a result, there’s a large difference between the decisions of autonomous individuals and institutions funded via the public. An institution funded by the public is duty bound to make decisions based upon reliable, verifiable evidence so that the paths chosen or the impact those ‘paths’ have on society are as justifiable as possible by facts.

    By relying on the impressions of tutors you allow confirmation bias, academic superstition, logical fallacies (Post hoc ergo propter hoc), and innumerable other detestable emotive human flaws to dictate policy. That is unacceptable in an admissions system. The university is publically funded to a large degree and tuition fee loans are derived from the government for UK students, thus a defence of ‘our university, our rules’ is laughable. Whilst they do work there, they are there by the grace of public funding therefore must justify themselves and can legitimately be held to account. Why do you think they’re covered by the Freedom of Information Act?

    As a result, I don’t think their view is consistent with the long tradition of excellent scientific pursuits at the University of Manchester. I don’t care what an admissions tutor thinks based upon anecdotes, I care what an admissions tutor thinks based upon cold data.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Valindrius)

    By relying on the impressions of tutors you allow confirmation bias, academic superstition, logical fallacies (Post hoc ergo propter hoc), and innumerable other detestable emotive human flaws to dictate policy. That is unacceptable in an admissions system. The university is publically funded to a large degree and tuition fee loans are derived from the government for UK students, thus a defence of ‘our university, our rules’ is laughable. Whilst they do work there, they are there by the grace of public funding therefore must justify themselves and can legitimately be held to account. Why do you think they’re covered by the Freedom of Information Act?
    While your questions about how university admissions are all somewhat valid, I think all this nonsense about 'scientific method' is pretty silly really. These are university admissions, there is no Mathematics involved here at all. The admissions is a very subjective process - the tutors are the ones who will teach the students, so they pick the ones they feel will enrich the experience best, based on the extremely limited information they have in front of them.

    So it falls back onto the tutors' own personal experiences, and if they have (in the past) experienced that applicants who took subject X at A Level don't usually make good students, they are allowed to incorporate that observation, as subjective as it is, into their admissions process. Hence, I suppose, why Mann18 said 'their university, their rules'; there is no way to conduct university admissions in a 'scientific' way, you should know this since you went to an Oxbridge interview - it is likely some students probably didn't get in simply because they didn't give tutors 'the right impression'. It might not be a particularly efficient system, but the academics get the students they want.

    Whether or not the university is in a deprived area, or if the university is publicly funded, you can't get away from the pure subjectivity of human nature in general. So complaining about them not giving you good reasons for not accepting a certain subject is not going to help you much - they probably don't have enough reasons to satisfy you anyway.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TimmonaPortella)

    Congrats man. Knew you'd get it.
    Congratulations to you too! I'm glad you knew cos I surely didn't :P I'm just hoping I can meet my offer now!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lis10)
    Well done to everyone with offers.

    I have:
    University of Leicester - AAA
    University of Liverpool - AAA or 360 points

    Still waiting on Sheffield, York and Warwick

    UCAS sent: 2nd Dec. 2010

    Anyone going to the Liverpool or Leicester open days?

    i'm going to the leicester open day, 9th march i think it is?
    what are you thinking of firming?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Sorry if this has already been asked but has anyone who had an interview with York heard anything? I can't remember when they said we should expect a reply.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Hmm reading this thread is making me feel a little scared as I've received no offers.
    I got 6A* and 5 As at GCSE, AAAAA at AS level: English lit/lang, History, Economics, French and Spanish, i'm predicted A*A*A*A, and i've applied to LSE, UCL, Kings, Queen Marys, and Nottingham. My application got sent off on the 17th, and I haven't heard anything.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by her.)
    Hmm reading this thread is making me feel a little scared as I've received no offers.
    I got 6A* and 5 As at GCSE, AAAAA at AS level: English lit/lang, History, Economics, French and Spanish, i'm predicted A*A*A*A, and i've applied to LSE, UCL, Kings, Queen Marys, and Nottingham. My application got sent off on the 17th, and I haven't heard anything.
    17th of December? They'll have only just started again at considering applications after the Christmas break, that will have got in just before they split for the holidays, so they'll have had less time to consider it than you think. Those grades are pretty good, and no news is good news
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by her.)
    Hmm reading this thread is making me feel a little scared as I've received no offers.
    I got 6A* and 5 As at GCSE, AAAAA at AS level: English lit/lang, History, Economics, French and Spanish, i'm predicted A*A*A*A, and i've applied to LSE, UCL, Kings, Queen Marys, and Nottingham. My application got sent off on the 17th, and I haven't heard anything.
    same here....i've applied for Warwick law and sociology and law, SOAS, Notts and Exeter (CC)
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I'm a mature applicant (Ha, it sounds like I'm bragging or something. I only mean that I'm 22, not superior in maturity or anything), and I only submitted my UCAS application for Law on Friday. I have the LNAT tomorrow and I've been checking out the practice papers and essay questions, seems like everyone who's done it so far has found it horrible. Is it that bad? I'm scared about the essay, having not written one for a while (not since A levels really, so 4 years... aaahhh, what am I doing?)

    And I know my application wasn't technically "late", but will a later application (near the deadline) be an issue? Not that I can do anything about it now, I suppose.

    Anyway, just introducing myself to this thread, I suppose. Good luck to everyone!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jennie_lin)
    I'm a mature applicant (Ha, it sounds like I'm bragging or something. I only mean that I'm 22, not superior in maturity or anything), and I only submitted my UCAS application for Law on Friday. I have the LNAT tomorrow and I've been checking out the practice papers and essay questions, seems like everyone who's done it so far has found it horrible. Is it that bad? I'm scared about the essay, having not written one for a while (not since A levels really, so 4 years... aaahhh, what am I doing?)

    And I know my application wasn't technically "late", but will a later application (near the deadline) be an issue? Not that I can do anything about it now, I suppose.

    Anyway, just introducing myself to this thread, I suppose. Good luck to everyone!
    i sat my LNAT a while back, i was so sleepy i wore two different pairs of shoes :/ you'll do great don't worry it's mostly based on part one out of 40, i recommend reading copies of the daily newspapers, by that i don't mean the comic's like daily express or mirror :P also take your time on the questions, the essays not to hard just make sure you pick a subject you at the very least familiar with, and just Argue all the best hope everything works out for you
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Course: Law
    University: Cambridge, Jesus College
    Offer: conditional - unsure of the conditions
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DM17)
    Sorry if this has already been asked but has anyone who had an interview with York heard anything? I can't remember when they said we should expect a reply.
    My interviewer stated 5-8 weeks from the interview date so I'm expecting a reply in a fortnight at the very earliest and five weeks at the latest.

    How did you find the interview?

    Best of luck!
 
 
 
  • 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
    Would you rather give up salt or pepper?
  • 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.