LSE's Language, Culture and Society BSc

[shockthemonkey]

New course this year, and seems to be extremely popular.

Does anyone have any insights regarding the course? I had one student apply -- I thought he was perfect for it, but he was turned down "due to his PS".

PS showed interest in and knowledge of sociology, linguistics, english literature, psychology, politics and history. I thought it ticked many of the boxes.

Other courses the student was going for were Liberal Arts at places like Warwick, Durham. He has done well with his other offers.

If you know anything about this course - application stats for instance (apparently it filled up very quickly!), but also, what are they looking for in the PS? I called LSE and talked to them at length, to see if maybe my student should have mentioned which language he wanted to take as part of his degree (he omitted this information because none of his other choices offered Russian ab initio).

Just not sure what kind of student I should be pointing towards this degree - this is a very strong student with great predictions and a good reference. His interests were aligned with the course content.

I already have a new student asking whether it would suit him for 2020 -- again it looks to me to be a match, but I was wrong last time.

Have I missed something???

Thanks so much...

My initial thought is that all those on MN who say universities don’t read the PS are wrong! However, maybe they had a great choice and the boxes were ticked better by others. Do they take a high proportion of overseas students? No courses fill up quicker than the last date for applications, apparently. So you cannot know how quickly it filled up or what the ratio of applications to places is. Maybe not mentioning language skills was key? It is first in the title of the course.

Were his grades high enough? Both gcse and A levels?

LSE is apparently notorious for having a hissy fit if one's PS isn't geared towards its specific version of whatever one is applying for, so the 'not mentioning Russian' may have been it.

Has your studenr tried asking for feedback for himself?

Thanks! He will ask for feedback in March, but they may give the platitudes I got on the phone.

It's not that I don't think LSE read the PS -- I am quite sure they did in fact. Some unis (by their own admission) don't read the PSs but LSE is not one of them.

Yes I wonder whether the languages part got him... yet, he is French, studying a bilingual version of the French Bac, and was talking about English reading he'd done. So I thought the language part would be evident, but maybe not sufficiently evident?

I hear you about the fussiness of LSE, and I asked them about this, pointing out that if he'd mentioned Russian it would have looked funny for his four other choices. They wouldn't say whether the omission of talk about Russian hurt him or not.

His grades were very good, above LSE's standard offer. He had particularly strong predictions in key subjects such as history-geography, literature, philosophy, languages, social sciences. The nearest equivalent he has to GCSEs is the French Brevet, in which he obtained Mention Très Bien, the highest honours given.

In case anyone is interested, if he gets anything useful in his feedback I'll come back and update! It's very hard with the new courses as you feel a little like you're applying in the dark.

Part of my job is to read PS for MScs for a Russell Group uni. On competitive courses these absolutely will be read. There will likely be a scoring system.

We look for employability and good fit with the course. Have they thought through why this course and how it will help them get a job? Do they have the self analysis and communication skills to sell themselves to an employer?

We give detailed guidance on what we are looking for in a PS but a shocking amount of applicants don’t seem to have read it based on their answers.

Just to defend what I said earlier: it was absolutely not that LSE didn’t read the PS. They obviously did. If you read many HE threads on this forum, academic after academic and parent after parent assert that the PSs are not read. They say all the universities care about is grades. Algorithms choose successful applicants apparently. Therefore it can be all too easy for people to believe this. I’m not, in any way, suggesting the OP did. Not at all. However I think it serves as a reminder that competitive universities will look at all available information. Therefore making sure the PS nails the brief is important. I would suggest, in this case, other students made more appeal to LSE.

Further thoughts: The LSE say GCSE or A level language is desirable but not essential. Therefore I wonder if his language attributes didn’t come across as strongly as they should have done, given his other applications. Maybe other applicants had an A level in the language?

My DD was in a similar position. Her favoured course did not have the same content as the other 4. Mainly because it was unique. She was advised to include elements that would appeal to admissions for her favoured course. It was felt the other universities would be ok with this. To have omitted the elements geared towards the fashion course at LCF would have been folly. I think the same issue has raised its head here.

The LSE course has a full year abroad. What he’s read in English isn’t that important when compared to the need to demonstrate an interest in learning Russian and how his qualifications and interests support that aim. It’s a big part of the course. It’s also important to understand how the language chosen integrates with other units in a degree that is a pick and mix from other departments. I don’t think the other universities would have been too bothered by such a paragraph and if he really wanted LSE, then his PS should have reflected that in the same way DDs was geared to LCF. You might risk not getting on the other courses but you don’t want to jeopardise the favoured one!

Thanks, Bubbles. I did understand you.

When they say it's the PS, it must be the PS. Yet they never seem to say "it was the reference", although surely a lukewarm reference will put them off just as much as a sub-standard PS.

[As an aside, many people working in vet school admissions, some working in medical school admissions, and some working at the central admissions offices in Oxbridge, say they don't read PSs. This is because a) they know some students get so much help it becomes unfair and b) because they have so much other data to go on, such as interviews and SJTs and standardised assessments where you cannot cheat.]

Getting back to LSE and the PS, I do believe they read it, and I do believe they always do read PSs. What I'd love to know is what it was about the PS that put them off.

Anyway, if they are any more precise in March, I'll definitely let you know!

Thanks everyone for commenting.

Cross-posted with Bubbles, definitely more food for thought there.

I did raise with LSE the possibility of asking for separate PSs for courses that were "unique" in this way.

They will never be doing that, they assured me.

Shame, as it has worked well for UCL and Durham and the likes.

If the PS is scored, and the LSE one is almost certain to be, I would print off their guidance, and make sure that each and every required or desired attribute is both addressed and evidenced.

Then look at what other Universities are looking for, and ADD anything not already covered. I can't see why you would need to do separate statements. Yes Oxbridge, who interview, may do it differently, but they normally allow for a supplementary statement and will not be relying as heavily on the PS. For a number of courses the LSE is very selective, and is not a particularly reliable Oxbridge fall-back. If you want a place you need to be clear on in the PS.

Oddly though Oxford suggest that the PS is not useful as applicants get help, the LSE still seems to be able to recruit a good diversity relying almost solely on academic achievements and PS. Almost all of DS' British friends were state educated, either first or second generation, and both clever and motivated. The LSE, which as well as not interviewing, does not enter clearing, so presumably have a much lower recruitment/selection cost per student. My guess is an economist has been playing with the figures and worked out that the marginal utility of a more refined selection method does not match the additional cost. So not perfect but if you want a place you play by their rules.

Thank you Sleep. Some very interesting points.

As far as I know, LSE's PS guidance is not course-specific. They are looking for highly academic content, 80% academics if I remember correctly. Then we go to the course summary page for the main subject areas and drill down if needed for more nitty-gritty. Then we ask students to address nitty-gritty in their PSs.

Thanks everyone!

But I did not ask him to talk about Russia because I thought it would have been such a "hair in the soup" for his other choices. Plus, he had so much to say about the other elements (linguistics, philosophy, Eng lit, history, sociology, psychology).

And now I'm learning from comments on here that Warwick, Durham etc may not mind a hair in the soup as much as LSE seems to mind an incomplete checklist. This does make sense and pretty much bears out my own (slowly accruing) experience.

That "thanks" was meant to be at the bottom of the post

A bit dated now, but when we went to a Warwick open day - for economics which is hopelessly over subscribed and where they only look at PS - the posh dad in the tweed jacked, the one who seem to go to all open days and ask the question about prejudice against private schools, asked it they minded "Oxbridge rejects". They said they would be daft to turn down good applicants simply because they had applied elsewhere. Would one way of doing it be to ensure you cover all the courses he is really interested in and in some way acknowledge that each have their strengths, thus showing he has read about and considered each course.

Interestingly DS was rejected by Warwick and UCL but got LSE. The only real difference was he went regularly to, and was registered for, LSE public lectures. He got his place and the two rejections, virtually the day before the deadline, so I wonder whether the clear interest in LSE made that might have made that tiny bit of difference. Observation was that languages helped with Warwick. If the guidance is not clear, my guess you have to take a slightly American approach and think what will I do for the University, not what will the University do for me. And what is the University likely to want. And oddly I suspect (conjecture only) the LSE is interested in students who will engage in and contribute to the intellectual and broader life of the School, not just the super-bright who will spend three years on the library on their way to a job at Goldman Sachs.

DD applied to PS heavy medical schools. There she just covered each thing each school said they were looking for, and got interviews for all but the one where she was ruled out on academics/UKCAT. The point seemed to be to tick enough boxes, and not worry that some stuff was irrelevant to some schools. Interestingly there was plenty of observation that those who wrote Oxbridgey PS's did not get far with some of these schools. Very different courses, and seemingly credit given to different things.

I think med schools are slightly different in that there are around 40 of them (from memory). Therefore they are not all chasing identical students and can afford to vary their selection procedures and preferences to suit themselves. They do know they will get high calibre people whatever they do.

With unique courses, and this one at the LSE wants AAB so that’s widening participation anyway, I think you have to drill down regarding what they want.

My DD1, who did MFL, wrote about why she wanted to study the languages, literature and culture and how this course of study was supported by what she had read, participated in and what interested her. She didn’t write a lot about France or Italy. She looked at the general core modules and tried to build her PS around them. I think when a language is a fundamental part of a course, and other subjects will be studied, looking at how these interact is perhaps useful. Why Russian? How does Russian combine with the other subjects and his interests? By talking at length about other aspects of the course, he has omitted to say how studying Russian, and to some extent Russian culture, is significant.

I think, for the future, take the language element a lot more seriously at LSE, even if it’s not required elsewhere. Niche and unique courses will present this difficulty. I think also be aware that lack of study to A level in a language may not be helpful because they thought it desirable. Therefore, without an A level in Russian, there is a great need to explain why a student wishes to study this language now, on this course, and be immersed in it for a year.

I always find it odd that parents ask the Oxbridge reject question. When DCs turn up at university, who knows and who cares? I think LSE is a top class choice in its own right. Many courses there would put you in a better position for a great career than doing Norse Studies at Oxbridge. (Or similar. You get my drift).

Bubbles, to what extent though did the University rely on the PS and how many qualified applicants were there for each place?

When DS was applying there were 13 applicants for each place, so you needed to get your PS spot on. (He had A* predictions but then so would many of the others without contextualisation.) So read course requirements carefully and course content and tailor the PS accordingly. Its not about being good enough but scoring better than other applicants. (No so with many MFL courses at RG Universities who may offer to almost every qualified applicant.)

I was clear that I was talking about Med Schools that gave weight to the PS. (DD deliberately avoided those that wanted a high UKCAT). Again the applicant to place was 17 to 1 so if you wanted an interview you had to make sure the PS ticked the right boxes. Writing a nice essay about how enthusiastic you are about your subject is all well and good, but may not carry that much weight with the admin assistant who has a whole pile to score. DD ended up doing a PS by numbers - covering each requirement, but it worked. Whilst others, with perhaps better grades got early rejections.

Oh, and I have just finished reading the Icelandic sagas. I think Norse studies would be great!

I promised I'd get back with LSE's written feedback.

It turns out that he should have talked about Russian, you were right. Even though on the phone LSE said that "not mentioning Russian would not have necessarily hurt his chances", it was the only reason they gave in their written feedback (which also stated that all other points were covered by the PS to their satisfaction).

I hope that's useful information...

I thought that might be the case because the clue was in the title of the course.

When DD applied for her unique course, we were told over 800 had applied the previous year when it was brand new. 50 places were available. Therefore you don’t have any room for a poor PS because they won’t invite you to interview and see your portfolio. I have no idea who sifted the applicants but when it’s a course not offered elsewhere, and you really want it, I think the best advice is to look at the course content and see how you meet the requirements. If it’s a unique course, you have to fit the possibly niche requirements. It is a bit tick boxing! DD then added elements for the other courses which were all the same. It’s not easy though.

Good luck with future students.

Thanks Bubbles!

@shockthemonkey DS is 22 - so this may be out of date. Ds was offered 4 out of 5 UCAS places , but not LSE - LSE are very particular about how they want the PS to be written (Well in DS's day they were & in Ds's day it was all there on the website ) . To be frank - his PS did not fit what they wanted and he probably was not a good fit for them. He landed at Oxford & was very happy with that , but in hindsight his application to LSE was not well researched enough, which was a bit shoddy ( by him) as they give excellent advice re PS on their website - and also for his subject ( History) he probably didn't have enough maths . DS wrote a general PS which got him through 4 applications , but not LSE. Had that been his first and heartfelt choice he really should have taken more notice of what they wanted , because - they made it clear