Oxford uni (and just unis in general)

[law4569]

Hi all!

Just wanted some advice. My daughter is applying for spanish + beginners German and wants to do a law conversion after. She's decided she wants to apply to Oxford, Edinburgh, ucl, durham and bristol or warwick. I wanted to know people's experiences with these unis as durham and Edinburgh are very far from where we live + warwick we're unsure if it's good for her degree. For anyone whose children went to Oxford, did they do well at gcse? She got 999888777 but she's worried because of the context of her skl (she did okay) then she'll be disadvantaged. if anyone has any sort of experience on any of this id appreciate it :)

Even if not planned that way, her strategy is quite smart if she wants to be a lawyer. Law is a sector where it’s widely agreed that the standing of the Uni you went to is important for getting training contracts ( vs some sectors which now recruit Uni blind). It is far easier to get into a top Uni for MFL than law if you look at the acceptance to application ratio.

DS1 went to Oxford. I genuinely can't remember his GCSE scores. They were good, but pretty sure they weren't all 9s. They'd look for 9s in the subjects being studied.

2 things matter most for Oxford: genuine interest with the subject they want to study - way beyond school syllabus, and, as PP has said, the ability to show outstanding critical and lateral thinking on the spot. Also, when challenged, not to cling to their original idea but consider the new one, and adjust their opinion if the suggestion is better, or to politely argue the case for holding their original opinion.

She should make use of open days at Oxford. The colleges give lists of who tutors each subject. DS looked them up and focused on colleges where the tutor's key interest intersected with his own, so he'd have something in common.
He met the tutor he most wanted to be taught by at an open day and timidly approached him with a question. Five minutes later, DS was correcting the tutor on the results of some esoteric paper they had both read and I backed off for tea and cake in the reception. When DS went for his interview, months later, the tutor remembered him because they'd already had a serious discussion about the subject.

I'm not suggesting she collars the tutors to impress them at open days, but if she gets the chance to chat with one whose interests really connect with her own, it might help her feel less intimidated at interview. DS came away from open day realising that he didn't like the grand colleges. he preferred the cosier small ones, but what mattered most was who taught there.

My law firm ( UK top 20) recruits University— blind, as do many of our peers. In other words, candidates do not specify their university on the form and we are forbidden to ask when we interview them. Times have changed.

You’re still right about the Bar though, but it’s Oxford and Cambridge, not just Oxford.

Can I ask, what criteria do they then use to cut down the applications to a reasonable number? I'm assuming they can't read them all at a first sift. Also, are they "A level blind" too? I always wonder if they use these to predict Uni by stealth (i.e. top A level grades likely went to higher Uni). No skin in the game, but just interested as my DC are mid teens and I do wonder if you're now better going to a lesser Uni where they're more likely to get a first and have more time to pursue internships and work experience.

She’s got nothing to lose from
applying has she? Even if she doesn’t get in, she’s got another 4 choices. I agree she should go to open days.

@CypressMoon I honestly don’t think that’s terribly relevant for MFLs. My dd didn’t do any of thst research for MFL, it’s a literature heavy course at Oxford and you have the core learning plus lots of options. Tutors often teach in several colleges so I don’t see the tutors as that important and they might even leave!

@law4569 My DD has actually done the route your dd wants . MFL degree and law conversion and is now a barrister. It’s a long slog but doable. Yes, there’s a strong Oxbridge contingent at the Bar but university blind is fairly normal there too. It’s well known some chambers are very very Oxbridge top heavy but they are usually the commercial law ones. There’s absolutely loads who are not and choosing the right area of law is absolutely key! Family law sets are not Oxbridge heavy for example, Also getting a decent scholarship from your Inn of Court to pay for the conversion course and bar training course is really important. My DD got a very good scholarship snd it means you are on course to actually get pupillage. Thats obviously a long way down the line from her degree but aspiring barristers need their ducks in a row.

We have a friend whose DS did MFL degree and got into a magic circle law firm. There’s quite a few who find the working life ultra tough though and it’s not for everyone.

Regarding universities, you absolutely do not have to go to Oxbridge because plenty of barristers have been to Durham, Bristol, UCL, Kings, and Warwick at the London bar, and the regional bar will recruit from local universities like Birmingham and Manchester.

I’d also suggest some areas of law are worth looking at more than others and she needs to choose fairly quickly and start applying for mini pupillages at uni if she wants the bar. Websites like Legal Cheek and Student Barrister have good info.

More barristers now have first class degrees and pass the other courses with flying colours! Honing your cv matters and choosing the area of law that interests you guides you to shape your cv. My dd does family - matrimonial now but started off thinking she would do children work but she now loves what she does. She’s a people person so tax law was never for her!

Have a go for Oxford. It’s one choice! After that the unis I mentioned are strongly represented at the London bar.

You’re asking the wrong question, OP. Your DD needs to focus on whether the Oxford ML degree, and the Oxford style of teaching even suits her. If she’s only choosing ML at Oxford because she thinks it’s easier to get into than law but will help her eventual law career, that’s going to show, if the other candidates are genuinely passionate, well-informed and good at thinking on their feet.

There’s also lots of publicly available material on the ML interviews. How is she at unseen translation — could be prose, could be poetry? How fluent is her Spanish? Would she adjust if the interviewer spoke a South American Spanish? She will be potentially asked in detail about her personal statement. Is she good at thinking on her feet in response to challenging questions that have no right answer? Why study languages in an age of machine translation? Is grammar important for communication? Tell us about the most difficult text you’ve ever read in Spanish. Tell us about a time when language influenced how you experienced an culture. And remember she’ll be interviewed for the ab initio language too. They will show her a passage and ask her to identify the verbs, the plurals, recognise patterns, extrapolate how to say something. They’re testing her aptitude at language learning.

My DD got those same grades (one less 8, as she only did 9 GCSEs) from a northern comp and needs AAA to take up her place to do MLs at Oxford. I’ve been worrying that she’ll get a B in Maths, so it’s great to hear it’s not necessarily a definite NO even if she does.

I’m a solicitor and work for one of the large firms typically targeted by graduates for training contracts. I’m occasionally involved in the training contract assessment process.

Whilst I agree a student should go to a good University, going to a “prestigious” one becoming less important. In fact, the name of the University (and School) is now removed from our application forms before they reach us for shortlisting.

I went to a traditional red brick Russell Group University, in common with most colleagues at my level. However, the universities attended by my junior colleagues (where I know them) vary much more.

That’s my firm of course, I can’t speak for others.

I think the grades are a bit low for private school. If she was coming from a state school, it could be different. But given all the support of a private school she should be at the very top grades. I went to Oxford and got all A*s and As at GCSE and As at A level (before the grade system changed). Almost everyone had the same plus all the extra curricular stuff (I had competed at a high level in sport). I was coming from a big comprehensive sixth form college where out of about 1000 students I was the only one that even applied to Oxbridge. From a private school she has all the advantages and Oxford will see that and she should be achieving the very highest grades, unless she has exceptional circumstances (health etc).

Hi OP. What kind of school is she at and are her GCSE grades average / below average in that school?

Oxford contextualise GCSEs against the average in the relevant school.

Particularly if it's a selective independent, I think her GCSEs could rule her out. Sorry.

I can only tell you my experience.

DC1 - 10 x 9 at GCSE and all A star predictions - did not get in first time, but did get in second time (with all A star A-levels achieved, national subject prize and published work - if they are in a top school, Oxford want a LOT extra from them)!

DC2 - 9 x 9s and 1 x 8 at GCSE plus all A star A-level predictions. Got in (but for a less competitive subject). The GCSE '8' had nothing to do with what she applied for.

DC3 - 6 x 9, 2 x 8, 2 x 7 at GCSE, plus all A star A-level predictions. Did not get in, even though they have the most 'passion' for the subject applied for than either of the other two. Also the 7s had nothing to do with the subject being applied for.

All mine were at a school (independents) which are on the top 10 in the UK and these schools are contextualised heavily.

If your DD is in a similar school, by all means try. But she might be better applying post A-level with (hopefully) all A stars in hand. She will need 'something extra' too - eg. school subject prize, essay competitions, etc. This will mitigate against the GCSE results.

By the way, my DC who didn't get in to Oxford did get in to UCL, St Andrews, Durham and Bristol. Went to one of these and had an international year at Berkeley in US which created a certain career opportunity. So don't get hung up on Oxbridge. Nice buildings, but there are other unis with amazing things going on! Go and visit them all.

@Wiennetta You surely don’t think all dc at private schools are geniuses do you? Of course they are not and she might not be at St Paul’s or Wycombe Abbey! There are 6 at grades 8/9 which is a bit on the cusp but it’s for MFLs. I think there is an issue with a 7 at English and History but A levels will matter - what is being studied? Oxford like essay subjects with the MFLs.

Does she want to read languages or is this just the vehicle to get into Oxford? Because Oxford is not the best place to study if she truly want to learn a language…

Not sure. It’s quite scientific, our recruitment team used consultants to build a system with complete transparency but I don’t know the ins and outs. It’s not really a case of talking the talk and then working out the info via a back door route.

I think they do try to read the statements of interest at first sift. (NB our AI policy forbids using AI to make employment decisions). We prioritise people who demonstrate a clear understanding of our quite specific client base and that is tested very carefully at interview and assessment centre to make sure they haven’t just cut and pasted from our website.

There is a system to promote social mobility as well, which looks at school and postcode and adjusts the weightings.

We also recruit from all over the world (as long as they are willing to do an English solicitor qualification) and no interviewer really has the inclination to learn about which are the prestigious universities in Australia, Greece, Canada, India, Singapore etc.

If you could read, I clearly have noted how Durham + Edinburgh are too far for her to actually attend = it would be expensive and she would get homesick

No I don’t. I think you misread my post or I didn’t explain it.
I don’t think all kids going to private school are capable of getting the top grades.
But I think if you’re academically able enough for Oxford, and you go to private school, you should really be getting the top grades. If you have the academic ability PLUS all the advantages of private school and aren’t getting the top grades, that might suggest that you aren’t Oxbridge calibre. There might of course be other things going on - health etc.

The same grades would be viewed differently at a state school especially one in a deprived area etc.

My dd had similar grades (urban state school and when results were A* so equal to an 8) and loved studying at Oxford, although the academic rigour is very intense. 7s are As in old money, so it’s worth applying.

Travel expenses are a very different thing to homesickness. Book trains well in advance, and the distance between Oxford and Durham or Edinburgh will be financially negligible. I mean, she wouldn’t be coming home often at weekends during Oxford’s eight-week terms, anyway, regardless of your proximity to Oxford. Termtime is pretty full on.

I agree with all of this except - I don't think (I mean - I've been told by someone in the know) that extra-curricular achievements make much difference to you chances of a place at Oxbridge. Yes, high achievers who get into the top universities will tend to have musical, sporting and other strings to their bows - it goes with the territory - but these things don't get taken into account in the selection process.

What matters is sound and consistent academic excellence and evidence of academic potential - the ability to think on the spot, to bring your subject knowledge into play to solve problems or think about related issues. I've heard Oxbridge selectors say they are looking for people who can truly benefit from what these universities have to offer in terms of intellectual challenge and pressure.

If you're invited to interview at Cambridge you're likely to have a first interview (which tends to be fairly easy-going), then a written exam and then a second, more challenging interview in which the paper you've written is used as the basis for the discussion.

My son went to Cambridge to read history from a state comp about a decade ago. He had a genuine interest in his subject and could demonstrate this outside his school curriculum. He'd also read widely around the subject and could discuss the work of some modern historians and changing interpretations of the past. I say this because they will be looking for evidence of a genuine interest in your subject which goes beyond school.

Not sure where you live, Durham to Kings Cross is under 3 hours. Ds1's mate was 7 hours from her home in Cornwall whilst at Durham. It is considered an Oxbridge "reject" second choice so it is worth considering. You only move all their stuff up once usually. At the end of term you can have their belongings stored locally ready to move into their second year accommodation, you don't have to bring it all back home again.

Your DD may also have the time of her life and not want to come home all the time. Terms are only 10 weeks long and you can facetime so easily. Holidays are 4 weeks minimum, Oxford term is 8 weeks so they cram all that extra study in which is why people are asking if it is right for your DD.

I used to follow some YouTubers who were part of "StudyTube" which meant students shared their advice on how they aced out their GCSEs/A levels. One girl got all 8s and 9s, went to Oxford for MFL German and Spanish and had to take a year out for mental health. It is a very pressured environment. She did graduate with first class honours but did find it hard going and described it as "intense."

Your DD needs to concentrate on supercurriculars, so basically what is she looking at outside of her studies that show she is interested in her subject. What did she discover, enjoy, find and what did that lead onto?

I agree. I'm not anti independent schools - I used to work in one. But you can't have it both ways! Independent schools will tell parents that they provide a superior educational experience to state schools - and this is often the case for a number of reasons. So therefore, any state school student who attains the same grades must, logically, be more academically able than those who've had the advantage of an elite education.

That's why it's often the case that, once at university, state school students out-perform their public school peers because the playing field is now level.

(On another matter...the old system of closed scholarships (I think it's been stopped???) at Oxbridge colleges was iniquitous. There used to be a number of places kept for students from specific schools with a link to the college, which could only be filled by students from those schools. So, for eg, if King's, Cambridge had say 5 closed scholarships from St Custard's, then 5 people would go there from that school irrespective of whether they were as good as the other people competing for places. I don't think it happens this way any more, but happy to be corrected.)

Agree with PPs about going to visit places. School suggested DD1 do early entry for Oxford. We visited and she didn’t like it! Ended up at Edinburgh which she loves and going into 4th year after doing her 3rd year abroad. Language here too.

Extra-curriculars don’t make the slightest difference, apart from as a (slight) indication that the candidate is capable of getting excellent A levels while also doing multiple other things to a demonstrably high level, which might indicate a person who could cope with the workload and enjoy it while also doing other things without burning out.

‘Supra-curriculars’ on the other hand (though it’s a horrible term) indicate a wide-ranging interest in the subject outside of compulsory exam curriculum. But again, everything in context. I went to Oxford (aeons ago) to read English from a notoriously poor school in a very deprived area with non-stellar grades and with huge holes in my subject knowledge. The interviewers asked me a question about Shakespeare in performance and I had to tell them I’d never been to a play of any kind, let alone Shakespeare. I grew up in a household where the idea going to the theatre would have been regarded as much the same as going to Mars. That clearly didn’t count against me, and nor did my lack of any ‘supra-curriculars’ other than having read, obsessively, through the entire city library and a couple of the local branches, and being utterly thrilled to have someone to talk about books with in the interview.

But I imagine interviewers would see a middle-class candidate from a London private school who’d never gone to the theatre or to a literary event/festival differently.

Hi, OP -

I did a stint as an admissions tutor in a selecting university; my School has a very high offer. I think you, and hopefully DD, might feel better if you reframed this.

The GCSEs may be a tad low for Oxford, depending on the academic reputation of the school. If Oxford is the true dream, so what? They do not interview hopeless cases. Go for it.

Cambridge weights GCSE results less and there are many similarities. As I understand it, this includes the desirability of the degree for law conversion. It certainly includes the atmosphere, and the academic quality and modality. Has DD given any thought to Cambridge instead?

Above you say Edinburgh and Durham are too far away. Is that definitive or might DD change her mind? There is absolutely no point wasting a UCAS slot on a university you will not attend.

Is DD willing to go into Clearing or do a gap year? I ask because I don’t see what I consider to be a solid Insurance choice listed. About 80% of predicted grades are wrong, with the large majority being too high. Everyone not willing to make one of these choices needs an Insurance option they are happy with, allowing for drops in two grades.

PP are correct that Oxbridge care deeply about supercurriculars and not about extracurriculars, with the exception of hardship cases: applicants who need to work their way through high school, do caring, etc, and accomplishments at the highest level.

The most important thing is for DD to find a university where she will thrive. As PP said Oxbridge only works for some, as the tutorial system is extremely demanding. A 2.1 from UCL, York, Nottingham, etc together with strong referee letters and an excellent CV will be immensely more useful to DD than a 2.2 (or worse) from Oxbridge, no strong letters, a life of stress and a sparse CV reflecting this.

It is undeniable that where you come from can help, sometimes a lot, but I have a broad enough circle to know that ultimately what you do matters more. Please focus DD to choose the university that will bring on her best.

You really need to let your daughter lead the discussions and decisions. Your job is just to guide.

As she’s interested in applying for MFL I would definitely encourage her to apply - assuming she’s aware of the set up at Oxford and feels that she can cope with it. As others have said, a huge percentage of applicants get interviews for MFL so that’s her chance to shine.

ds goes to a non selective state school. He got 12 A⭐️ at GCSE, 4 A at AS level and is predicted 4 A⭐️ at A level. His MAT was just above average. He applied to Oxford for maths and didn’t get an interview. He’s now got a great course lined up elsewhere and is very much looking forward to it.