Why does Oxbridge do this? Do you know any Students like this?

[janeeire244]

Why are there so many students at Oxbridge who study competitive degrees like law with relatively low A-level grades such as anything below 3A*s but also including AAA or even AAB? Most of these people applied with inflated predicted grades but are let in when they get lower grades than they were predicted either because they still met the really low entry requirements (shockingly Oxford Law is at AAA) or if they miss it and get AAB, they are reprieved?

I don’t even think it’s fair to say that they shone at some other stage of the application process because I know of some students who got relatively low admissions test scores or mediocre GCSEs and got in as well.

This is all the while they reject people with much high admissions test scores or much better grades.

That being said I’ve never heard of anyone who did poorly on the interviews get an offer (poorly by Oxbridge standards not just them thinking they did badly).

Do you know anyone at Oxbridge studying a degree (especially a competitive one like law) with an average admissions test score or below average; or less than 3A*s at A-level?

Jeez, the OP is probably a kid, a teen, hardly a bitter old Mumsnetter.

I think a lot of people forget that, whilst the two overlap, there is actually a difference between being clever and being academic. Also, there are different ways of expressing academic ability, of which written exams are just one tiny subset. Following a rigid, set syllabus and passing a test at the end of it does not mean someone is automatically academic, or enjoys academic study, only that they are motivated enough to jump through a few hoops, for motivations unknown.

It is also the case that intelligence is not one thing, it’s a collection of attributes, and nobody is outstanding in all areas. Certainly for arts and humanities subjects at Oxford and Cambridge, if you didn’t enjoy verbal communication and debate, the tutorial/supervision system would just be a weekly torture, not an exciting opportunity to engage directly with someone more expert in the subject. Plenty of highly intelligent, academic people actually don’t enjoy that style of learning and communication.

If you don’t get into your first choice of university, there are plenty of other people in the same boat. Other universities do exist… as do apprenticeships and degree apprenticeships. At the end of the day, your personality and resilience will get you further, or hold you back more, than where you went to university.

Bloody hell, op 😳
Go do something useful.

If this post has been made so many times do you think it is in anyway helpful deriding the teenage OP in this way.

I sympathize with your situation, but you can't blame Oxbridge for your not getting a diagnosis prior to A level, and extra time. At least, now it is on record for future exams and applications: you can't change the past.

Liz Truss didn't come from particularly humble roots. Perhaps not super-posh but certainly comfortably middle-class. And I wouldn't say that she did well. OK, she became PM for about five minutes but totally messed things up for herself and the country (OK, I'm doubtless derailing the thread a bit).

That doesn’t really sound any better or more mature in its reasoning. If I avoided everything that someone who is related to someone I know didn’t enjoy, I wouldn’t do anything at all. And the article referred to is poor journalism, not a serious piece of reporting, imvho. The fact is, too many people look at Oxford and Cambridge with strong preconceptions which they are seeking to confirm - they are not making an honest, open minded consideration of the syllabus, style of teaching, or collegiate nature of the experience.

@AllyMacbealmyarse over the course of several threads, it has been mentioned to the OP that there are other establishments that will provide the means to achieve a career in a profession she wants.

Unfortunately, these are not what she wants.

But there are students at every university who feel they made a mistake. It's quite common, you've only got to read the number of posts from concerned parents on any university forum to see how many students aren't happy with their course/accommodation/tutor/flatmates/lack of nightlife/ insert various reasons here, and are thinking of leaving, or changing uni. The experience of one student isn't going to mean that it's going to be the same for everyone on that course.

Mine's absolutely loving Oxford, and he's a free school meals kid. I'm a single mum. We're definitely not the stereotypical Oxford type. Seeing him go through the Oxford admissions process really opened my eyes to how much effort Oxford have put into widening participation, and making sure everyone who applies gets a fair consideration. I was really pleasantly surprised, and we can honestly say he's never encountered any snobbishness or felt out of place.

His oxford friends come from all backgrounds, some like him, one or two who are quite wealthy. It doesn't seem to be an issue amongst them, which is brilliant. I'm sure there are pockets of snobbery, but you could get that at any university where there are rich, privately educated people. I really don't think in this day and age that either Oxford or Cambridge are 'oblivious' to the disadvantages that state school kids might face.

I have seen in my own exerience that Oxbridge def gives you advantage for top Law training contracts whereas Durhamites etc rejected.

Great post from @AllyMacbealmyarse

Much truth there, OP.

that’s a sentiment that drips with the kind of raw, unvarnished meritocracy that some find comforting simple, clean, and, dare I say, naive.

You see, intelligence, like power, is rarely as straightforward as a number on a test paper. It is not a neatly stacked deck where the highest card always wins. No, intelligence is a far more complex currency, one that Oxbridge and the world at large trade in shrewdly.

You want to talk about grades?

Let’s talk about them. They are a fine metric, yes, but they are also an instrument easily sharpened by the right tutors, the right school, the right family name.

A perfect score doesn’t just measure raw intellect it measures preparation, privilege, and often the simple good fortune of being trained in the right kind of game.

And yet, even if we were to strip all that away and talk about pure, unadulterated cognitive horsepower, let me ask you this:

What is a university’s purpose?

Is it to collect the highest-scoring automatons and line them up like trophies on a shelf?

Or is it to cultivate leaders, thinkers, and influencers who can shape the world?

Because if you think a university is just a temple to IQ points, then you have misunderstood the very essence of power and influence.

Oxbridge isn’t in the business of handing out medals for memorization. It is in the business of curating a class of individuals who will rise, who will connect, who will move the levers of power.

Intelligence is useful, but it is not enough. The right personality, the right background, the right connections these things matter just as much, if not more.

So if you’re worried that someone with lesser grades is sitting in a space you believe should be yours, then perhaps the real question isn’t whether they belong.

The real question is why don’t you?

Oxbridge don't care about extra curriculars that aren't relevant to your subject.

Not this again OP. You really should let this go, it's beginning to sound...unhinged.

Oxford are completely transparent in how they weight contextual GCSE grades, submitted essays, admission tests eg the LNAT, ELAT or HAT and interview score and how this changes through the admissions process. It's all on their website.

And yes I do know someone who went to Oxford with fewer than 3 Astars - D1 got 2 Astars and 1 A (COVID year 2020) and she graduated with a 1st. HTH

whats the context on the op ?

Have a look back at OPs other posts in the thread. Something about not doing as well as expected in A level exams because she was late being diagnosed as ND so didn’t get the extra time she would have been entitled to, so she lost her offer at Cambridge. So now she’s trying for Oxford ( I think) but according to other posters, she still posts obsessively about her rejection. It sounds quite sad really.

Before I read this post I was wondering if you were ASD/ND (I am too) because of how doggedly you seem to be pursuing an answer which you aren’t going to get.
Have you considered your options if you do not get an offer this time round?

Oxford and Cambridge have already made their offers for this year, so the OP has already not got an offer.

She didn’t apply this year. At least according to previous threads. The OP could have applied to a foundation place but again chose not to.

It shows that you can pass your exams but still be a big stupid idiot?

You’re absolutely right!!

In summary, there are more “deserving” applicants than places at Oxbridge.

The end.

I would have got 3 As if not disadvantaged and am on course to do so. Others who have been perfectly advantaged in the sense that they didn’t lack extra time accommodations if they needed them or anything like that didn’t get 3 As so are not naturally intelligent. That’s the problem.

You were not as good as the people who met the offers they were given by Cambridge. As you needed extra time, you were not as good as the people who got three As without needing extra time. It was a lie that you were on course to get three As, as you are now claiming that was an impossibility for you without being given extra time, yet your predictions would have been made on the basis of you not getting extra time, because you were not actually awarded extra time. You were treated fairly - nobody else applying to Cambridge got let in for failing to meet the conditions of their offer. What Oxford does is irrelevant to someone who applied to Cambridge. Fgs, just accept you failed to get in because you, quite literally, didn’t make the grade.

You haven’t been disadvantaged. You failed to get required grades and are resitting. You are one of many children who fail to get into Oxford or Cambridge. There are many, many other options which are probably better suited to your style of learning. This does not mean your life is destroyed. Get some help to move on.

Maybe in some American universities. NOT at Oxbridge or, so far as I know, any UK university (unless perhaps you are applying for a degree closely related to sports). Universities are looking for students who have the ability, aptitude and motivation to do well in their subject, Not for extra-curricular activities, unless they are relevant to the student's chosen course.