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

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by *Star*Guitar*)
    D'you fancy getting your facts right before commenting?
    Its neither an advantange, nor disadvantage. Do the subjects that interest you, if it means you'll do better in them.
    Cambridge and LSE have explicitly said they would rather students did not take Law A level. In this case, it is certainly a disadvantage.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by simon12345)
    You do realise that's one college in one university, don't you? They are not the voice of every single university in the country.
    Source: http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/und...iteria/law.htm

    "however, as with all programmes at LSE, at least two traditional academic subjects are preferred. [...] A level Law is not seen as an advantage for this course."

    Although, confusingly, it also says things which are contradictory to the above quote.

    If you want more examples of universities/colleges which have similar things to say about this then by all means just ask.

    (Original post by simon12345)
    Plus, an applicant with AAA in Classics, English Literature and Law will have a chance of getting accepted, whereas an applicant with AAB in Classics, English Literature and History will not. This is the point I'm making. My friend got pooled by Trinity for Law; with English Literature & Language, Law and Business Studies at A2, and was then accepted into Sidney Sussex. Plenty of people in my Law class having been given offers at top universities for Law with suppodedly 'soft' A levels. Yes it's better to do the best possible subject recommendations for entry to Law if you can get AAA, but only if you can get AAA. Universities don't care about you subject combination as much as you may think.
    I wouldn't say a candidate with AAB would definitely not get in (it has been known to happen).

    Quoting you, "Yes, it's better to do the best possible subject recommendations if you can get AAA". That is all I'm trying to say here, I'm not saying no one has ever gotten in without the correct subjects, all I'm saying is that it's best to pick the best possible subject recommendations. In reality, If a candidate can't get AAA in said subjects, then the university they're applying to (be it Cambridge, LSE, wherever) probably isn't best suited to them anyway.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    apparently the reason why they prefer not to accept somebody with a level law is because when they go to do it at university, they seem to act like they know it all from a level but they do not know the basics, so their understanding is poor which makes it harder for the lecturer to teach
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Xerophelistica)
    Source: http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/und...iteria/law.htm

    "however, as with all programmes at LSE, at least two traditional academic subjects are preferred. [...] A level Law is not seen as an advantage for this course."

    Although, confusingly, it also says things which are contradictory to the above quote.

    If you want more examples of universities/colleges which have similar things to say about this then by all means just ask.



    I wouldn't say a candidate with AAB would definitely not get in (it has been known to happen).

    Quoting you, "Yes, it's better to do the best possible subject recommendations if you can get AAA". That is all I'm trying to say here, I'm not saying no one has ever gotten in without the correct subjects, all I'm saying is that it's best to pick the best possible subject recommendations. In reality, If a candidate can't get AAA in said subjects, then the university they're applying to (be it Cambridge, LSE, wherever) probably isn't best suited to them anyway.
    I doubt very much that anyone would get into Cambridge for Law with anything less than AAA.

    Where on the LSE website does it say that it's a disadvantage? (I thought they actually did, the only university to explicitly state that, but your quote simply says it's not an advantage, which is the same for every single university in the country, since A level Law is not required for entry to the degree).

    There are also plenty of examples of top universities saying A level Law places applicants at no advantage nor any disadvantage. In a survey by UCAS in 1995 95% of Law admissions tutors said that they have no preference as to whether the applicant had taken Law at A level or not. Even that will not be a current representation of opinions, since Law has toughened up considerably in recent years. In any case, your quotes seem to suggest only two academic subjects are required ... English Lit and Classics both fulfil that criteria.

    Your point about whether someone who cannot get AAA in supposedly 'hard' subjects is suitable for Cambridge is irrelevant, they'd still jump at the opportunity and, who knows; they could be far more suitable to the degree rather than those who did ‘hard’ A levels and actually do very well. Plus, people do get accepted into top universities for Law with supposedly ‘soft’ subjects and I’m sure are at no disadvantage when it comes to studying a completely different subject. Plus those ‘soft’ subjects aren’t necessarily any less hard than English Literature, History, Maths, etc ... it all depends on the strengths of the individual. Some people find Maths and English very easy and so can easily get As, but cannot get As in other subjects, such as Law.

    For some reason Law as a reputation on these forums as being soft, when in reality it’s actually very hard. Like I say, many have said it’s their hardest A level and they’ve done so called ‘hard’ subjects like the ones mentioned above. To achieve the best possible chance of success in life (for Law, especially) you should be going to one of the ‘elite’, and so you need to choose the subjects which you are best at so that you can get the grades required for the elite. I don’t think that ‘in reality you should choose the best possible subject recommendations’ ... as this thread proves. This thread is a perfect example of the flaws behind that reasoning. Should all the people in my Law class who have been accepted into top universities with so called 'soft' subjects just give up now because they aren't suitable?
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by simon12345)
    I doubt very much that anyone would get into Cambridge for Law with anything less than AAA.

    Where on the LSE website does it say that it's a disadvantage? (I thought they actually did, the only university to explicitly state that, but your quote simply says it's not an advantage, which is the same for every single university in the country, since A level Law is not required for entry to the degree).
    My point is this:

    1. 95% of Law admissions tutors say Law A Level is not an advantage or disadvantage.

    2. Taking Law AS or A Level takes up one of 3, 4, 5 or more AS / A levels a person will do doing. In other words, Law takes up a portion of time equal to every other subject the student is learning.

    3. Therefore, time is being taken up for something which is not advantageous in any way.

    4. Therefore it would be wiser to use that time instead to study a subject which is advantageous.


    Okay, I understand that many universities say they only require two 'hard' subjects out of three, however surely three hard subjects must be considered better than 2, despite what the universities say.


    (Original post by simon12345)
    Your point about whether someone who cannot get AAA in supposedly 'hard' subjects is suitable for Cambridge is irrelevant, they'd still jump at the opportunity and, who knows; they could be far more suitable to the degree rather than those who did ‘hard’ A levels and actually do very well. Plus, people do get accepted into top universities for Law with supposedly ‘soft’ subjects and I’m sure are at no disadvantage when it comes to studying a completely different subject. Plus those ‘soft’ subjects aren’t necessarily any less hard than English Literature, History, Maths, etc ... it all depends on the strengths of the individual. Some people find Maths and English very easy and so can easily get As, but cannot get As in other subjects, such as Law.
    In the end it all boils down to the meritocratic way universities select candidates. Yes, I'm sure that despite doing a 'soft' subject or two a person can still be more competent than a person doing no 'soft' subjects, but it's very hard for universities to know that when places are 10:1 and they can only interview a finite number of people. These days, universities will look for ANYTHING to be able to whittle down the number of potential students, be it GCSE results, personal statement or, as I'm saying, Subject Choices). I simply think it's a gamble to choose to study subjects which you've been TOLD aren't going to give you any advantage.

    Of course you can still be offered a place when you have these subjects (as your anecdotal examples prove), but for every person that did get in with 'soft' subjects, there were people who didn't get in, and one of the things taken into account before they were rejected was Subject Choices.

    (Original post by simon12345)
    For some reason Law as a reputation on these forums as being soft, when in reality it’s actually very hard. Like I say, many have said it’s their hardest A level and they’ve done so called ‘hard’ subjects like the ones mentioned above. To achieve the best possible chance of success in life (for Law, especially) you should be going to one of the ‘elite’, and so you need to choose the subjects which you are best at so that you can get the grades required for the elite. I don’t think that ‘in reality you should choose the best possible subject recommendations’ ... as this thread proves. This thread is a perfect example of the flaws behind that reasoning. Should all the people in my Law class who have been accepted into top universities with so called 'soft' subjects just give up now because they aren't suitable?
    Again, you seem to think I'm saying it's impossible to get onto a Law degree with soft subjects. No, I'm not saying this at all - all I'm saying is that it's a bit harder to.

    As for what you say about Law being a hard subject, yes, I completely agree. If you asked me to sit an ICT exam, I would probably fail miserably, even though it's regarded as 'soft'. It's not just the difficulty of the subject that the admissions tutors take into account, but also the number of "transferable skills" which the subject brings. Even if you completely disagree with the universities, you should still try to play the game in a way that benefits you - namely by trying to jump through as many of their hoops as possible, including the ones they give for Subject Choices.

    I’m not able to make any more replies to you after this post because I have other things to do, but feel free to reply to this post if you want to, however don’t expect a reply to whatever you say for a while.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Xerophelistica)
    My point is this:

    1. 95% of Law admissions tutors say Law A Level is not an advantage or disadvantage.

    2. Taking Law AS or A Level takes up one of 3, 4, 5 or more AS / A levels a person will do doing. In other words, Law takes up a portion of time equal to every other subject the student is learning.

    3. Therefore, time is being taken up for something which is not advantageous in any way.

    4. Therefore it would be wiser to use that time instead to study a subject which is advantageous.


    Okay, I understand that many universities say they only require two 'hard' subjects out of three, however surely three hard subjects must be considered better than 2, despite what the universities say.




    In the end it all boils down to the meritocratic way universities select candidates. Yes, I'm sure that despite doing a 'soft' subject or two a person can still be more competent than a person doing no 'soft' subjects, but it's very hard for universities to know that when places are 10:1 and they can only interview a finite number of people. These days, universities will look for ANYTHING to be able to whittle down the number of potential students, be it GCSE results, personal statement or, as I'm saying, Subject Choices). I simply think it's a gamble to choose to study subjects which you've been TOLD aren't going to give you any advantage.

    Of course you can still be offered a place when you have these subjects (as your anecdotal examples prove), but for every person that did get in with 'soft' subjects, there were people who didn't get in, and one of the things taken into account before they were rejected was Subject Choices.



    Again, you seem to think I'm saying it's impossible to get onto a Law degree with soft subjects. No, I'm not saying this at all - all I'm saying is that it's a bit harder to.

    As for what you say about Law being a hard subject, yes, I completely agree. If you asked me to sit an ICT exam, I would probably fail miserably, even though it's regarded as 'soft'. It's not just the difficulty of the subject that the admissions tutors take into account, but also the number of "transferable skills" which the subject brings. Even if you completely disagree with the universities, you should still try to play the game in a way that benefits you - namely by trying to jump through as many of their hoops as possible, including the ones they give for Subject Choices.

    I’m not able to make any more replies to you after this post because I have other things to do, but feel free to reply to this post if you want to, however don’t expect a reply to whatever you say for a while.
    The point about A level Law is is doesn't place you at any disvantage, but very few subjecs do for Law. You've merely go to display academic abilities in your A level choices (and English, Classics and Law demonstres that). I think the point which universities trying to make is that A level Law is not required for entry to a Law degree, but that's the same for many other subjects as well. Only a few subjects (e.g. Maths, English, etc) require you to have done the A level beforehand.

    What annoys me on these forums is that people just sees that someone wants to apply for Law and their automated responce is 'do English Lit, History and a foreign language) or something similar, without any idea what their stregths are. People should (IMO) merely do whatever they enjoy the most/are best at/what they can get the best grades in. In this case the OP would most certainly have a better chance of getting into a top law school had she done three A levels which she could have got AAA in.

    I won't reply to the rest of your post because, like you, I have other tings to do (namely Student Finance, that should be fun!).
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hendy16)
    I have just finished doin AS's in English Lit, Classics, Law and Dance. I took classics and eng lit because they're respected subjects by unis, however im regrettin this decision because if i'd chosen easier subjects (im aware dance and law aren't difficult) i could of gotten higher grades and even if i'd gotten AAA in those i'd have a better chance of gettin into a better uni, rather than having ABB/AAB in my chosen subjects , is this true?
    come on, but some back into it, i know many people who have got BCC, CCC and BBB and they pulled it up to AAB, AAA and AAA respectively, and I know this other guy in another school who got ACUd and pulled it up to AAAb, so you have plenty of time to do well. The best story I heard was this boy who got CEU and pulled it to an AAB.

    If you want inspiration, check this out, impossibe is nothing!
 
 
 
  • 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 like to hibernate through the winter months?
    Help with your A-levels

    All the essentials

    The adventure begins mug

    Student life: what to expect

    What it's really like going to uni

    Rosette

    Essay expert

    Learn to write like a pro with our ultimate essay guide.

    Uni match

    Uni match

    Our tool will help you find the perfect course for you

    Study planner

    Create a study plan

    Get your head around what you need to do and when with the study planner tool.

    Study planner

    Resources by subject

    Everything from mind maps to class notes.

    Hands typing

    Degrees without fees

    Discover more about degree-level apprenticeships.

    A student doing homework

    Study tips from A* students

    Students who got top grades in their A-levels share their secrets

    Study help links and info

    Can you help? Study help unanswered threadsRules and posting guidelines

    Sponsored content:

    HEAR

    HEAR

    Find out how a Higher Education Achievement Report can help you prove your achievements.

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • 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.