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?

Do you think everyone with an AAA is more intelligent than someone with an AAB?

Therein lies your problem.

Why? Who would that help?

You do need to decide whether you are a disgruntled A level student with spectacular grades but no common sense; an A level resit candidate with moderate grades; the mother of one of the above; or a mother of a bullying young thug.

.

You just sound entitled. It’s unfortunate that you had a late diagnosis so were not eligible for extra time at the point you took the exams. You cannot expect Oxford to account for that in terms of guessing that you might have got higher grades if you’d had more time. The thing that is going to hold you back in life is your attitude, not the fact you didn’t go to Oxford.

Also Oxbridge isn't the be all and end all these days, there are plenty of decent universities around and many are actually better than Oxbridge for certain subjects.

OP - your apparent inability to understand that Oxford may have other criteria than just 3 A star grades at A level may be part of the reason for your failure to get in.
And using Liz Truss's opinions as evidence for anything is bonkers.

Are the more intelligent people in the room with us right now..?

Oxbridge takes on the people they want to take on. They did not want you. You can try again when you resit. It’s entirely possible to have the best grades but absolutely bomb the interview. Doing well on paper is not the only thing they want their students to accomplish.

Do you somehow feel entitled to a place there? If so, why? Do you often feel you are better than others?

Liz Truss!

Surely nobody is looking to Liz Truss as a person with sensible ideas. She was like a wreaking ball.

OP
Oxbridge do NOT consistently let people in who do not achieve their 'inflated' predicted grades.
You're being silly and a bit sour grapes-y

Yes, I wouldn’t be using the PM that crashed the economy and lasted 49 days in office as basis for any argument…

So you want oxbridge to take you despite your lower grades because you had reasons but at the same time moaning that they have accepted others with lower grades! Those students probably had similar reasons!!

You also say high grades = intelligence, except in you case because again reasons.

You didn’t reapply this year and last post I read were dithering about applying for the foundation course as you felt you were too superior for it.

No legislation will help you here, you had an offer and didn’t meet it, the uni didn’t know about your circumstances so you were rejected. Then it doesn’t matter what your LNAT is - you didn’t apply this year! No one is recruited to university.

You need to move forward, either go to another (also very good university) in September or actually put an application in once you have you new grades and apply for 2026 entry.

As a parent of a 30 year old and a 28 year old it is quite easy to see, looking back at their friends, that school grades at 17/18 are not a terribly strong predictor of performance at degree level. Lots of degrees require talents and skills that are not tested at A-level and are only really revealed properly at university.

I think you sound bitter and resentful

also A* AA. are not relatively low grades

most of these people had inflated predicted grades? Where’s your evidence? Do you know all these people and their circumstances?

admission is not based on grades alone

You need to get over it.
It's like one person getting a job because of how they interviewed rather than another.
Noone ever said life was fair.

At the end of the day they’re private institutions and can accept whoever they want based on (within reason) the criteria they want.

I think the whole system of predicted grades and references is unfair. Students can not get offers because of it, then have to take a gap year and reapply once their results are through. It relies too much on individual teachers and their preferances. I think that a lot of unis end up taking students who didn't meet the required grades.

Hahahahahahahahaha

this comment just shows your level of maturity (and understanding of the real world)

I was already chosen as I already had an offer from Cambridge last year but missed it.

Ah. I saw your post about getting 38/42 on the LNAT. What you have failed to say here which you did on the other thread, that this was after studying law for 3 years at another uni.
Everyone on that thread pretty much told you that was totally expected that someone who has studied law for three years would expect to score far higher than anyone applying for uni-otherwise those three years studying were pretty pointless.
It's a bit like setting an A level candidate a GCSE paper and being surprised they do better.

No, that was a different thread. I got 38/42 on the LNAT this year as I’m on a gap year post A-levels. The person I discussed from YouTube actually got 40/42 after studying 3 years at Leeds. I haven’t done a law degree.

.

I’m a teacher at a school that has a fair number of kids applying for Oxbridge, and also went to Cambridge myself. In my experience, I have never come across someone who didn’t get the required grades still being let in. The required grades vary from college to college and subject to subject. Like anything, it’s a bit of a lottery, and sometimes I have been surprised at students who have offers (although generally they don’t then get their grades and therefore their place) or at fantastic kids who don’t get in. Obviously I have the advantage of knowing the kids really well, the Oxbridge interviewers have two pieces of work/interviews/entrance exam to go on. I always say to my students, don’t let getting/not getting a place define you and your worth.

Oh dear OP. It’s more than just grades. 30 years ago I did my Oxford exams on my first year of U6. Bloody hard work. I had an interview. I got a 2E offer. I even had Bs at GCSE 😱. They obviously liked me.
Also Oxford isn’t everything, I knew people who got there, hated it, didn’t like the course and left (some people are so fixated about Oxbridge, they don’t actually think about the course content). There are other great unis out there. My DS got rejected this year, hasn’t mentioned it since. From the sounds of it you need to move on, accept they do what they want because they might actually know that they are doing…

Cambridge rarely lets students who miss grades in but Oxford often does. This is because Cambridge gives out more offers than it have places whereas Oxford gives out fewer offers. Also, Cambridge has the August Reconsideration Pool for disadvantaged students who were initially rejected but ended up meeting the entry requirements who get a second chance at applying and so are in competition with those who missed their grades and seek a reprieve. By comparison, Oxford has no “August Pool”.

So, you have an advantage now over all the people who still don’t have a diagnosis. And you still haven’t got three A stars, you are just “on course” to achieve them, just as you were “on course” to achieve them the year before when you didn’t actually achieve them. Do you know what your teachers’ references said about you and what Oxford thought of any extra written work you provided? Were they exceptionally good?

On these posts, you come across as oddly obsessive and black and white in your thinking. Are you sure that’s the type of intelligence they are looking for in your chosen degree subject?