LSE vs Warwick Advice... HELP

[hector_glz]

Hello everybody...

I just got my results on monday, got a 42 with 7 on math HL...

I had 39 with 6 on Math HL as predicted grades so I didn't get into LSE (they wanted 39 with 7 on Math) and accepted an offer in Warwick University.

But now, I don't know what to do, I'd really love to go to LSE and I've got the score that they ask. I already mailed them and they've got no vacancies so my choices are either to go to Warwick this year or wait for the next year and apply to Oxford and LSE...

What do u guys think is the best to do? Is there such a huge difference from Warwick to LSE that is worth waiting for a year??

And also...is it sure that I'll get an offer if I wait for the next year and apply for Economics at LSE and Oxford... what are the typical offers for Economics there... is my 42 with 7 on math enough??

Thanks dudeees!

[Abu]

Economics is one of the most oversubscribed courses in every highly ranked university in the UK. Chances are that you would get rejected again by LSE, as well as Oxford, and then left high and dry without an offer from Warwick either.

So really, even though the chance to go to Oxford and LSE may seem great, Warwick is a great university nonetheless.

[hector_glz]

Economics is one of the most oversubscribed courses in every highly ranked university in the UK. Chances are that you would get rejected again by LSE, as well as Oxford, and then left high and dry without an offer from Warwick either.

So really, even though the chance to go to Oxford and LSE may seem great, Warwick is a great university nonetheless.

You think so? I think the 42 plus a first year of a Bachelor's Degree here on Mexico (much cheaper) would do it .. won't it?

I know Warwick is good, but isn't there like a huge marginal difference from Warwick to LSE/Oxford?

[Abu]

I have similar thoughts to yourself, in that I want to go to LSE (been something I've wanted to do since forever but IB ****ed me over), and I emailed them a couple of days ago and this was their answer:

Thank you for your recent email regarding transfers into the LSE.

Unfortunately the School does not permit students from overseas universities to transfer into the second year of any of our degree courses. Therefore, if you would like to be considered for a place on this programme, you will need to apply via UCAS, before 15 January 2010, for first year entry. Applications for entry in 2009 are now closed

We will only consider applications submitted to UCAS after 15 January if there are places still available on the relevant degree programme. However, for the vast majority of courses this is highly unlikely. Please refer to the 2010 Undergraduate Prospectus for further details:

http://www2.lse.ac.uk/undergraduateProspectus2010/Home.aspx

Our Admissions Tutors will be looking for good upper second class marks in your first year examinations i.e. 65 per cent and above. You must also ensure that you have covered the equivalent material at your current university as is taught in the first year at LSE. Please visit the online prospectus at the following link for further details: http://www.lse.ac.uk/resources/undergraduateProspectus2009/howToApply.htm

So I'll leave you to decide how you want to take this further, but if you decide to apply anywhere, it shall have to be after your first year at university and you will then have to wait another year to start your first year at a university in the UK.

[Vvi]

When you say you were rejected from LSE because you had a 6 predicted in Math rather than a 7, are you certain that is the only reason you were rejected? LSE may have thought you were not the kind of student they were looking for, whatever your grades, in which case applying again with higher grades next year will make no difference.

And even with higher grades, your chance of getting into Oxford is very slim. 42 with a 7 in Math HL should tecgnically be enough for Oxford, but grades aren't the only important thing. Every year, Oxbrduge rejects 5000 students with AAA predicteds in A-Levels. If you aren't the kind of student they're looking for personality-wise (and it's hard to know what they want), you could get rejected even as a perfect 45 student.

I'm in the same situation as you (I needed 34 for Leeds and got 42), and have decided to go to Leeds and not reapply next year to St Andrews or even try to change in August with the Adjustment scheme UCAS offers. Call it fate, but if St Andrews rejected me then it's their loss (I got a letter saying my predicteds weren't high enough), and I also think I'll fit in at Leeds better (more middle class people).

Remember, you can always go to LSE for Masters if you're really set on it. Warwick is a great university, and also cheaper to live in because it's not in London.

[deissi]

Go to Warwick now and when you're there, apply to Oxford and LSE. If you fail, you continue in Warwick, if you don't you start again in LSE/Oxford. 2nd year entry is near impossible.

[The Economist]

I believe that deissi is totally right.

You should go to Warwick and then apply to LSE or Oxford , this way your future is more certain!

[~Lc~]

I know soemone from TSR who was in your situation, only she got entry into cambs but got 39 points instead of 42 which they required so she couldn't go and ended up going to sheffield (her insurance choice).

She then repaplied to Oxford the year after for law, because they're requirement is 38, and got rejected.

They don't take people who reapply usually. LSE might be a different case but I'd forget about Oxford. Honestly, I don't think it's that more different to get a degree from Warwick or LSE, LSE is just more globally known. People go what? when I tell them I go to Loughborough, and they wouldn't if I said Oxford you know?

but the degree shouldn't be that different!

I say stick to Warwick, try for LSE/Oxford when you're in England if it doesn't work you're still not wasting time.