The Student Room Group

rejected from LSE law

Just logged into my UCAS track and found LSE under the "unsuccessful" box

Now I am really discouraged because LSE was my dream school and I am afraid that there is a major flaw in my application that might ruin my application for other schools as well. The official feedback from the admissions selector said that my application was unsuccessful as a consequence of my personal statement but my counselor said that he found it odd that my personal statement was good enough to get me an interview for Cambridge but not the LSE

My grades are 5A* 4A in IGCSE and predicted 43 in IB with 777 HL and now I am afraid that I may get rejected from Cambridge, Kings and Warwick too

Can anyone shed some light???? thanks!!!

Scroll to see replies

LSE are notorious for randomly rejecting people on the basis of the personal statement even if the grades are there. Even a lot of people who have very interesting applications get rejected and it's sometimes hard to know why exactly they've been rejected, although as law at LSE is very competitive I guess they have the power to do whatever they want.

I'm pretty sure your other choices are much less reliant on the personal statement alone as a sole factor in admissions- for Cambridge you might get in with a good interview and grades, and Kings and Warwick are less competitive in that regard so I'm sure you'll be fine.
Reply 2
Original post by JohnGreek
Getting an interview and getting an offer are not the same thing. Cambridge interviews about 80% of its applicant cohort, whereas the LSE LLB's offer rate is around 15%. Assuming the applicants are of a similar calibre (considering most LSE applicants are also Oxbridge hopefuls), one can imagine that there would be a much lower threshold for Cambridge interviews than for LSE offers.

I suspect that the GCSE + IB combo might have been the killer. Since your only "firm" grades are your GCSEs, which are unexceptional by LLB standards, LSE might have found it difficult to expect you to actually get a 43 in the IB. Alternatively, even if they did take your IB predictions seriously, the GCSEs may have nonetheless put you at a disadvantage to those with straight A*s at GCSE level. When LSE has so few data points about the applicant (GCSE+IB predictions+P.S.), failing to pass the bar on just one of them could result in a rejection.

Don't be disheartened - you should get an offer from Warwick with your grades, and King's shouldn't be out of reach either.


But isn't IGCSE harder than GCSE (from what I heard), people told me 5A* 4A in IGCSE wasn't bad at all???

After asking around and also looking into the LSE website, I think I was rejected because my PS was more like a "listing of achievements" unlike the PSs that LSE expect which focuses on people's passion of the subject and particular objectives that fits their courses...? You seem quite experienced and I am just wondering if this will constitute as a major flaw that will also ruin my application for other universities...
Original post by Jude586
But isn't IGCSE harder than GCSE (from what I heard), people told me 5A* 4A in IGCSE wasn't bad at all???

After asking around and also looking into the LSE website, I think I was rejected because my PS was more like a "listing of achievements" unlike the PSs that LSE expect which focuses on people's passion of the subject and particular objectives that fits their courses...? You seem quite experienced and I am just wondering if this will constitute as a major flaw that will also ruin my application for other universities...


A personal statement should never be a listing of achievements
Reply 4
Original post by A-LJLB
A personal statement should never be a listing of achievements


To be exact, I spent the first paragraph explaining why I wanted to study law in general and why in the UK, 2nd paragraph to explain my work experiences and what i find interesting and gained from it, 3rd paragraph to explain what I studied in school to prepare me for a law degree, and a last paragraph explaining my long term commitment for extra-curricular activities which increases my time management skills and other skills so on... now that I write it out I guess it really seems like a "list" and fails to sparkle among other applicants...
Original post by Jude586
To be exact, I spent the first paragraph explaining why I wanted to study law in general and why in the UK, 2nd paragraph to explain my work experiences and what i find interesting and gained from it, 3rd paragraph to explain what I studied in school to prepare me for a law degree, and a last paragraph explaining my long term commitment for extra-curricular activities which increases my time management skills and other skills so on... now that I write it out I guess it really seems like a "list" and fails to sparkle among other applicants...


Contact them and ask them for feedback
Original post by Jude586
but my counselor said that he found it odd that my personal statement was good enough to get me an interview for Cambridge but not the LSE


As some others here have already said, Cambridge (and Oxford) put way less emphasis on the personal statement than LSE. And also, Cambridge interview the majority of their applicants.

LSE are notorious for being incredibly picky about personal statements for Law (arguably more so than other institutions). LSE only assess candidates on the basis of grades and PS, as a result the only thing which distinguishes candidates is the PS.

On the other hand, Cambridge and Oxford assess applicants more holistically via written tests, interviews etc. Oxbridge are aware that students can pay an external agency to write a stellar personal statement.
(edited 7 years ago)
If it helps, LSE is notorious for relying on the PS more than most other universities because, as someone above pointed out, there are so few other data points for it to consider (no interviews, no LNAT).

You already know that your PS wasn't ideal, let it go, no use worrying about it now. You have great grades and a strong background, I'm sure Warwick and KCL will take that into account assuming you did decently on the LNAT as well.

As for Cambridge, as long as you make it to interview, that's all that matters. Once you make it to that stage, it's about killing that interview and everything else, to some extent, falls to the wayside. Onwards and upwards.

As someone who did do the LLB at the LSE, you wouldn't be missing out on much, the course is much like any other LLB course at any other good UK university. Your university experience is what you make of it, regardless of where you end up going.
Original post by JohnGreek
I agreed with your post up to this point, though I'd be wary of submitting that this is the main reason why Oxbridge look at other data other than the P.S. I think it's more about them being able to assess mental ability (through, say, the LNAT or the CLT), and being able to determine how well someone would fit in with their tutorial system through interviews, rather than them being worried about fraud.


I agree with you. I wasn't in any way stating that fraud is the primary reason why Oxbridge don't place as much emphasis on the PS as other institutions. What I actually meant is that Oxbridge don't view the PS as a sufficient indication of ability to thrive at X institution, whereas LSE put too much emphasis (perhaps wrongly) on personal statements. The PS isn't necessarily a reliable indication of ability and certainly cannot indicate whether a student would be suited to the Oxbridge system of teaching.
Original post by Jude586
To be exact, I spent the first paragraph explaining why I wanted to study law in general and why in the UK, 2nd paragraph to explain my work experiences and what i find interesting and gained from it, 3rd paragraph to explain what I studied in school to prepare me for a law degree, and a last paragraph explaining my long term commitment for extra-curricular activities which increases my time management skills and other skills so on... now that I write it out I guess it really seems like a "list" and fails to sparkle among other applicants...


I received an offer from LSE several years ago for Law. And my personal statement was not too dissimilar to your PS. My first paragraph explained my curiosity and enthusiasm for Law. My second paragraph (the largest section) detailed my own exploration of the academic study of Law. Here I discussed work experience, legal books I read and my opinions on them; and essay competitions & sponsorships that I'd won. Third paragraph was about the transferable academic skills from my A-levels. Last paragraph was about my part-time work and extra-curriculars. My PS was 80% academic, and 20% on extra-curriculars.

Also for Law, LSE look for fluency and concision in written English. If the language used in your PS is anything like how you've written these forum posts, then that is probably a major reason why you fell short.
(edited 7 years ago)
Congrats, you just saved yourself 3 years at the driest college in London, and I include the School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine in that. LSE, from all the people I have met over the years is about as much fun as a silent movie at a school for the blind.

Hopefully, you'll get an offer across the road at the mighty KCL and never look back.
Why would you want to go to LSE over Cambridge? You should read arrowheads post #10. Get your PS looked at again. It might be a bit pedestrian and could do with tweaking. I can see it would be easy to make your personal statement look a bit naive about what studying the subject actually involves. Pnly they can fully tell you, so see what they say. If it was that important to you, then reapply next year.
Original post by Trinculo
Congrats, you just saved yourself 3 years at the driest college in London


LSE are full of students who get hard-ons whenever they hear "Goldman Sachs".
Original post by JohnGreek
Out of curiosity, where did you end up after that?


Urgh, here we go again with the KCL-related insecurity


Don't want to reveal my institution as some people may work out my identity (not at London or Oxbridge)! Although, I turned down LSE in case you were wondering.
Original post by JohnGreek
Out of curiosity, where did you end up after that?


Urgh, here we go again with the KCL-related insecurity


Kings, then UCL.

It has nothing to do with insecurity tho. LSE is a fine institution, for the courses I do, possibly the best in the world. But you can't pretend it's fun - and if you're going to spend 3-4 years and a ton of money somewhere, you might as well enjoy it, because there is a lot more to university than a certificate at the end.
Original post by Trinculo
Kings, then UCL.

It has nothing to do with insecurity tho. LSE is a fine institution, for the courses I do, possibly the best in the world. But you can't pretend it's fun - and if you're going to spend 3-4 years and a ton of money somewhere, you might as well enjoy it, because there is a lot more to university than a certificate at the end.


As someone who didn't actually read at the LSE, I hardly think you're a reliable authority on whether LSE was "fun" or not. I'm sure KCL and UCL are great, but I wouldn't exchange my time at the LSE for either of those universities. Yes, there are competitive people at the LSE, but that's just one small subset of the population, which is easily avoidable.
LSE is harder to get into than Cambridge/Oxford, don't be discouraged. This is exactly why I recommend many good applicants to go with four dream options on their UCAS application and only one safe choice - in the worst case scenario there's alwyas clearing etc.

Quick Reply

Latest