School of Oriental and African Studies

London

If I miss the grade are SOAS lenient with Masters applications?

Hi all,
Im starting my final year of university in September and plan to apply to SOAS to do MA International Management (Japan) for entry 2014. Assuming I get accepted, if it turns out I miss the 2:1 do SOAS still consider the application or just rule out 2:2s all together? I understand there are a lot of variables involved, but assuming the course isn't over subscribed.
This happened to anyone else? I expect to get the 2:1, but you know, peace of mind and all that :colondollar:

Reply 1

Picaa

The only 'variables' really involved are supply and demand. Academic standards are a little white lie nobody wants to expose. So yes, you will get in.

School of Oriental and African Studies

London

Reply 2

x78rd

Original post by Picaa

The only 'variables' really involved are supply and demand. Academic standards are a little white lie nobody wants to expose. So yes, you will get in.

Thanks, I like to think that they just want my money at the end of the day so if i just miss the mark it should be ok. That, and its different with postgrad admissions I guess.

Reply 3

Ellim

Original post by Picaa

So yes, you will get in.

I'm sorry - I cannot get over the downright irresponsibility of making such a definitive statement about someone else's admission chances.

Academic standards actually are in place for a reason even if you personally believe that those reasons are completely arbitrary. Admission to a postgraduate course depends on things other than grades. For example, an applicant with a 1st but a badly conceptualised personal statement and noncommittal (or negative - don't believe it doesn't happen) academic references won't just ride though on their 1st. Similarly, an applicant with a strong personal statement and great references might be admitted despite not quite making the advertised mark cutoff.

The other consideration is that the advertised mark cut off is not a 'clearly in' threshold where you will be admitted if you make above the required grade - it is a minimum grade that they are likely to accept.

x78rd: cultivate some good relationships with some of your senior lecturers to make sure you get very good references. They can make or break your application.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 4

returnmigrant

I agree that 'academic standards' are not a mere pose. They matter. Especially to RG level Unis.

Unis do not make much money from Masters courses. Fee levels are usually far lower than first degrees. They are not therefore just a commercial exercise. The actual point is to encourage of post-grad community - and prepare promising students for research. This is why the 2.1/First is such an accepted benchmark.

Remember, getting a place on a Masters is one thing - if you are applying for funding to do this Masters, then you will DEFINITELY need a 2.1/First to be even considered.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 5

x78rd

Original post by Ellim

x78rd: cultivate some good relationships with some of your senior lecturers to make sure you get very good references. They can make or break your application.

Original post by returnmigrant

Remember, getting a place on a Masters is one thing - if you are applying for funding to do this Masters, then you will DEFINITELY need a 2.1/First to be even considered.

Thanks for the responses, Hopefully my application will be pretty good, I have a lot which is seen as advantageous for this program which should help. Hopefully I will get the 2:1, so if i get an offer I should be fine.

Im going to be self funded so im not looking for scholarships etc, I'd like one, but Id need a good 1st.

Reply 6

Picaa

I would like to agree with Ellim and returnmigrant and I do agree in principle that universities should insist on not watering down their entry requirements but in reality we're talking about masters entry requirements, which at most universities begin with asking for a 2:1 regardless of subject. Because of the flexibility in subject (a bachelors sort of related to the masters degree someone wants to take), it's already just a rule of thumb. They will look at other factors. However unless it's a very competitive programme, and most of them (especially at SOAS) aren't, they will relax the 2:1 requirement. SOAS runs on money not idealism.

Reply 7

Ellim

Original post by Picaa

I would like to...

Universities really just don't make as much as you might imagine off Master's fees. The cash-cow of the university is the international research student - minimum resources, maximum profit.

But, above and beyond that, the simple fact that students are not customers which means that there aren't incentives for universities to admit sub-standard students.

As I said in my original post, with good references and a good personal statement the 2.1 requirement might be relaxed. It similarly might not be, depending on the subscription to the individual course. Likewise the student with a high 1st and crappy references and statement might not be admitted. You have to have a package - not just grades, and not just a good statement and references.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 8

returnmigrant

Original post by Ellim

Spot on.

Reply 9

Picaa

Actually students ARE customers. It's 21st century Britain and SOAS is not Plato's Academy. You have to pay for credible, accredited degree programmes at SOAS, and people do it as a means to an end, not as an end in itself. You can take a vote on whether students are customers in the SU if you like. Nobody will play the blind bit of attention. You still have to pay your course fees and SOAS is still in a legal contractual relationship with you. If SOAS decided to stop teaching you in the middle of your course, you would take them to court and argue that you are their CUSTOMER. This much should be obvious in 2012. No amount of Marxist rhetoric is going to change that.

Reply 10

returnmigrant

I have just sat in a 3 hour meeting at the RG Uni where I work, discussing how to attract more PG research students to our Uni, and in particular how to attract the best and brightest - ie. how to do this without 'lowering the bar' on entrance requirements in any respect.

I think the aggressive little voice above needs to realise that although we live in a market economy, there are still Universities who value their high academic standards and will not compromise on that fundamental.

Reply 11

Ellim

If students are customers then how come they don't have consumer rights?

Education isn't a consumable. You pay fees in order to have access to various things; including library resources and access to academics. You don't pay for answers. What you want, in that case, is training and not education, and training has little to no place in universities.

I've also sat in on department meetings that have been similar to what returnmigrant describes above. Imagine what would happen to research standards if postgraduate courses would just let in any old riff raff who is willing to pay. Universities value a lot of things, and one of the things they value is their research standards. Love or hate REF, lowering admission standards is a pretty fast way of sliding down that scale.

Reply 12

Picaa

Original post by Ellim

If students are customers then how come they don't have consumer rights?

You are confused about the law. There are many acts of Parliament and other instruments that govern the 'rights' of consumers. For example if you buy something from a door-to-door salesman you have a statutory cooling-off period. However what defines a customer is basically someone contracting a service from another in exchange for consideration.

Education isn't a consumable.

This is your thesis but it's wrong. It's a service that IS consumed.

You pay fees in order to have access to various things; including library resources and access to academics.

Yes, that and tuition.

You don't pay for answers.

This is where your thesis falls down. You are suggesting that if education was a consumable, you would be paying for both the exam paper and the answer book. What you're saying doesn't make sense. A little training in logic might help. When you pay for a university course you have the right to all the things you mentioned before, plus tuition, plus whatever else was advertised or made part of the deal contractually (for example, anything in the prospectus). This is a contractual right.

What you want, in that case, is training and not education, and training has little to no place in universities.

This kind of ideological persuasion, influenced in large part by Marxist dialectic, is purely 'academic' in that the reality is people go to universities to get credible qualifications to support them in their careers, teaching or research. The ideology you espouse exists in the world of make-believe you so keenly defend, but not in the real world.

I've also sat in on department meetings that have been similar to what returnmigrant describes above.

If you're not a member of SOAS staff then did they do this for political reasons by trying to make you feel a part of the 'in' crowd? Or to get customer feedback? Or did you learn or share anything in departmental meetings? The basic difference between students and staff at departmental meetings is that one group is paying to be there and the other is paid to be there. I would be interested to know in what capacity you were there. Are academic staff leeching ideas from students for example then passing them off as their own?

Imagine what would happen to research standards if postgraduate courses would just let in any old riff raff who is willing to pay.

That's just the point. There are lots of riff-raff but not all of them are willing (or able) to pay for SOAS courses. I am a riff-raff with a 2:1 as well. I don't see how, if someone can afford to pay for SOAS courses at masters level, in addition to supporting themselves, they can be called 'riff raff' but that's beside the point.

Since you mention research standards, if league tables in relation to SOAS are consumerist superficial nonsense in all respects, why are they suddenly relevant when it comes to the Research Assessment Exercise? If league tables can accurately measure something as amorphous as 'research standards' why are they no good in any other respect? There's a lot of hypocrisy here and one of the impossible games SOAS always tries to play is to pick and choose which subsection of the league tables to follow.

Universities value a lot of things, and one of the things they value is their research standards. Love or hate REF, lowering admission standards is a pretty fast way of sliding down that scale.

Two points. First we are talking about masters admissions not research. Research is led by funding. Second, I don't like your use of the word 'values' because it fails to note that if the results of the RAE were bad, the university would slide down the league tables. So of course everyone has a vested interest in trying to tick those boxes.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 13

Picaa

Original post by returnmigrant

I think the aggressive little voice above

Oh, watch out everyone I'm aggressive AND little! SOAS high-brow intellectual debating style. Attack the person not the argument. It kind of undermines your academic pretensions. More than a little. :smile:

there are still Universities who value their high academic standards and will not compromise on that fundamental.

There are a few but this isn't one of them. And the reason is that market forces aren't as strong as for top-10 and Russell Group universities. Lack of demand, and costs still have to be met.