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

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I have just graduated from Oxbridge (mid level-competitive BA programme) with a 67 median 2:1 and I have applied to many masters programmes, including the Ivy League, getting into many without hustle - probably the most challenging part was getting the references / writing tailored personal statements.

    Funding, of course, is another story. I have received some partial scholarships, but only 1 scholarship which would cover my fees in their entirety (100%). The majority, however, offered no significant funding.

    My question is this: How competitive do you think are programmes such as those really expensive MSc in Management at WBS, LSE, Imperial, or those relatively cheap MPhils at Cambridge in something like Economics or Engineering? What about all of those LLM and Social Sciences?

    I get the impression that it's so much easier to get into those programmes - so many students have 1st class from so many different courses and universities, or a high 2:1. Like, could anyone go, if they wanted to?

    Is not doing masters in the UK the trend resulting mainly out of financial reasons? What other obstacles could there be to doing masters?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    With a 2.1 from Oxbridge, you should be able to get into WBS, LSE and Imperial for sure. However, the more competitive programmes at LSE require candidates to usually have a first. From what I gather, Cambridge's MPhil economics is quite competitive. Quite tough to get in.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Just because the requirement is set as a 2:1 or 1 doesn't mean everyone with that can get in. People do get rejected even with a high first from top universities (including Oxbridge rejecting Oxbridge graduates). And so, no, you can't say it's easier to get in at all.

    I can't speak for the general situation, but in my MSc course at Oxford, around 80% already held a postgraduate qualification, at least 20% already held a master's degree somewhere, including from Cambridge, UCL, Edinburgh, and top regional universities, around 4% held a doctorate. There were people who were already university lecturers, there were people who were working/teaching at Oxford, and there were people who did undergrad at Oxford. On top of that, acceptance rate was around 5% lower than for undergraduate entry.

    So can you say it's not competitive? Can you say anyone with a high 2:1 can get in? It's just like saying if you have AAA you will get into Oxford. No, that's simply not how it works.

    The US, including the Ivy League, is another story. It's much more common for people to skip the master's in the US and much more common for people to do a second bachelor's degree (usually a professional one) instead of a master's. Master's degrees in the US also take more time to complete and at a much, much higher costs with even less financial support from the government and elsewhere. That's why Harvard asks for a 3.0 GPA.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tutonic)
    With a 2.1 from Oxbridge, you should be able to get into WBS, LSE and Imperial for sure. However, the more competitive programmes at LSE require candidates to usually have a first. From what I gather, Cambridge's MPhil economics is quite competitive. Quite tough to get in.
    The university doesn't matter as long as it's accredited. What you studied and what you did in the degree matter.

    Many academics, including professors, at Oxbridge went to unknown universities before getting a master's and/or a doctorate from Oxbridge.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)

    I can't speak for the general situation, but in my MSc course at Oxford, around 80% already held a postgraduate qualification, at least 20% already held a master's degree somewhere, including from Cambridge, UCL, Edinburgh, and top regional universities, around 4% held a doctorate. There were people who were already university lecturers, there were people who were working/teaching at Oxford, and there were people who did undergrad at Oxford. On top of that, acceptance rate was around 5% lower than for undergraduate entry.

    So can you say it's not competitive? Can you say anyone with a high 2:1 can get in? It's just like saying if you have AAA you will get into Oxford. No, that's simply not how it works.
    I don't know - that's why I am asking. I know substantial amount of people who got into Econ/Finance/Management/Business postgraduate programmes at top institutions with relative ease.

    Indeed, I have noticed that in the UK people prefer to do another masters and in the US they'd do another bachelor (in 2 years I think because they have the prereqs or whatever this is called).

    What course are you doing that's so competitive? Sounds intense.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Little Toy Gun)
    The university doesn't matter as long as it's accredited. What you studied and what you did in the degree matter.

    Many academics, including professors, at Oxbridge went to unknown universities before getting a master's and/or a doctorate from Oxbridge.
    So you're saying a 2.1 from Oxbridge carry as much weight as a 2.1 from some podunk town? Come on. Let's be realistic here. Brand name will carry you a little bit. That's what I'm saying. It's ridiculous to completely disregard the impact of brand names.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HANNAHBENLOLO)
    I don't know - that's why I am asking. I know substantial amount of people who got into Econ/Finance/Management/Business postgraduate programmes at top institutions with relative ease.

    Indeed, I have noticed that in the UK people prefer to do another masters and in the US they'd do another bachelor (in 2 years I think because they have the prereqs or whatever this is called).

    What course are you doing that's so competitive? Sounds intense.
    Those people could have good writing samples, good references, good statements, on top of a very good degree. I'm not sure how one is supposed to show that they got in not with relative ease - it's not a physical competition. You either get in or you don't - is filling in an application form with 20 pages a sign of difficulty?

    It wasn't anything special and most people outside the field, including academics, don't even know what it is, so I'm inclined to believe that it's the norm rather than an exception.

    Even for summer school courses for any university student anywhere who can pay, you see at Oxbridge people with doctorates and academics at other universities attending them, so it's really just that the name itself attracts people with much better qualifications than required and the minimum requirement really can't be used to tell how competitive a course really is.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Getting back on topic, if you're looking for an extremely competitive course, I recommend you look at LSE's Msc econometrics and mathematical economics. I'm applying for next intake (September 2017). I'm not entirely certain I'll get in, even though I'm currently almost certain to graduate with a First and be among the top 10% of my graduating cohort.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tutonic)
    So you're saying a 2.1 from Oxbridge carry as much weight as a 2.1 from some podunk town? Come on. Let's be realistic here. Brand name will carry you a little bit. That's what I'm saying. It's ridiculous to completely disregard the impact of brand names.
    Yes. Whether you had done a dissertation, what it's in, and the content of the degree are the things that matter. The names don't.

    Now if you're talking about universities hiring researchers, then yes. Oxbridge really favour Oxbridge graduates. But for graduate admission? No.

    And before you scream "but it doesn't make sense" - how much sense are you making to suggest that an Oxbridge admission tutor would be impressed by an applicant from UCL or whatever?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HANNAHBENLOLO)
    I have just graduated from Oxbridge (mid level-competitive BA programme) with a 67 median 2:1 and I have applied to many masters programmes, including the Ivy League, getting into many without hustle - probably the most challenging part was getting the references / writing tailored personal statements.

    Funding, of course, is another story. I have received some partial scholarships, but only 1 scholarship which would cover my fees in their entirety (100%). The majority, however, offered no significant funding.

    My question is this: How competitive do you think are programmes such as those really expensive MSc in Management at WBS, LSE, Imperial, or those relatively cheap MPhils at Cambridge in something like Economics or Engineering? What about all of those LLM and Social Sciences?

    I get the impression that it's so much easier to get into those programmes - so many students have 1st class from so many different courses and universities, or a high 2:1. Like, could anyone go, if they wanted to?

    Is not doing masters in the UK the trend resulting mainly out of financial reasons? What other obstacles could there be to doing masters?
    Unless you've done Economics, you wouldn't get looked at for an Economics master's. It's a postgraduate course for economists.

    Same with LLM and law.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HANNAHBENLOLO)
    I have just graduated from Oxbridge (mid level-competitive BA programme) with a 67 median 2:1 and I have applied to many masters programmes, including the Ivy League, getting into many without hustle - probably the most challenging part was getting the references / writing tailored personal statements.

    Funding, of course, is another story. I have received some partial scholarships, but only 1 scholarship which would cover my fees in their entirety (100%). The majority, however, offered no significant funding.

    My question is this: How competitive do you think are programmes such as those really expensive MSc in Management at WBS, LSE, Imperial, or those relatively cheap MPhils at Cambridge in something like Economics or Engineering? What about all of those LLM and Social Sciences?

    I get the impression that it's so much easier to get into those programmes - so many students have 1st class from so many different courses and universities, or a high 2:1. Like, could anyone go, if they wanted to?

    Is not doing masters in the UK the trend resulting mainly out of financial reasons? What other obstacles could there be to doing masters?
    Out of interest, how did you get on?

    Have you managed to get into the unis that you wanted to in the US/UK
 
 
 
  • 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
    Should Spain allow Catalonia to declare independence?
  • 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

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