Fab exam results and predictions but not even an interview from Cambridge Uni.

[nandio]

12GCSEs only 2As and the rest top grades.4A* and A predicted at A level - no interview from Cambridge. Not BME but white working class.

Why would Cambridge not interview a student of this calibre?

It's a bit odd isn't it Errol. Authoritative-sounding advice when people have no clue what they are talking about! Especially when a number of us directly involved in admissions have said earlier in the thread that the personal statement has essentially no bearing on who is and isn't called for interview.

I'm glad the foreign language requirement has now gone. I always thought it was a bit of a strange requirement for things like science or maths.

I know you have to pick through the information a bit, but I am glad this thread was started, as it has pointed me in the right direction for looking for information.

I am now clued up on the tests and the admission process and what the tests will involve if dd applies.

There's usually a thread each year for people with would-be oxbridge applicants, those usually get input from people who either work for the unis or have had kids go through the process in recent years. But tbh a lot of essential, accurate information can be obtained straight from the uni websites.

Another misconception upthread, best cleared up to avoid false hope:
'Do they still do the second 'pool' in the applications process? Forgotten what it's called- something like summer pool??? which makes it sound more pleasant than it is ...'

No - the summer pool isn't part of the applications process, it's an internal clearing system:
'In a few cases, offer holders who haven’t quite met the conditions of their original offer may still be offered a place following a small ‘summer pool’ that takes place once examination results are released.'

So, for instance, if someone had an offer of A stars in further maths and physics plus As in their other two subjects (this is a quite typical offer for an engineer who's doing 4 A levels) but they get Astars in physics and maths but only A in further maths and the other subject, then their original college might reject them but another college might well take them. Or if a maths offer holder gets the right A level grades but doesn't make the STEP level required by their offer.

The only way to have a second bite at Cambridge applications is to reapply from scratch in a later year.

Bean Bag Lady - they do!

I have to agree that the personal statement is totally irrelevant. It would be a spring board for interview questions but even these were usually only designed to relax the candidate a little before the real questioning (which would be technical and pre planned questions).

The only exception is for candidates that wrote they were interested in something on the personal statement but made it obvious at interview they hadn't even the vaguest idea what it was - we're not expecting you to have published papers on it but you could have at least read a new scientist article or wikipedia introduction about a topic you claim to be fascinated by.

Lots of students worry they're going to be quizzed in detail about epigenetics or black holes because they mentioned it on their personal statement. The reality is at most you'll just be asked very general questions and expected to have shown enough interest to at least have grasped the basics of what the subject is (e.g. a black hole is an astronomical object that is so dense the escape velocity is greater than the speed of light so can't emit light and can only be observed via it's gravitational affect or because it blocks light).

I think the pretests are pretty much the most important part of the process of selecting for interview. How a student thinks these went is pretty irrelevant in my experience. Those who think they went very well always ring alarm bells with me, but not always rightly. I'd be surprised if a Grammar school didn't do some preparation for the tests.

DD1 went to local comp, top grades in all exams and got into Oxford.
Both Oxford and Cambridge are very oversubscribed and with so many applicants gaining top grades these days it means a lot of disappointed students.

I'd be surprised if a Grammar school didn't do some preparation for the tests.

My DD was in the first year Cambridge did them, and literally the only prep was to do the one sample paper available. I guess now there's that and the last two years real papers. Maybe some schools try to come up with their own similar style of question in addition?But the actual knowledge base was just standard curriculum stuff, so diverting time from that might not be too helpful.

The Cambridge web site says exactly what it wishes to see in a personal statement. It lists useful inclusions so how can it be totally irrelevant? Is their web site lying? It also mentions extra curricular. It wants to see extra curricular linked to the academic subject. It gives detailed advice.

The best advice to any prospective candidate is to read the web site of the university. Some, such as Bristol, tell candidates what weighting is given to each part of the application process and exam results.

It’s not just public school children that seem to get in: children of academics with less than stellar results do too!

It’s not just public school children that seem to get in: children of academics with less than stellar results do too!

What are you implying, and what on earth is it based on!?

I think that a lot of parents don't get very good advice about Oxbridge. Firstly, they don't realise the academic standard at GCSE or A Level of the majority who apply and certainly those who are successful - because their child might be a top performer in their school which isn't hugely academic or doesn't have a big history of sending to Oxbridge, they think that a clutch of 7s and 8s will be okay, without realising how many candidates are out there with all 8s and 9s.

Then others think it is purely down to the grades - and if their child has all 8s and 9s and predictions of A/A* they assume that must make them a shoo-in. They don't realise that it's possible to get these grades through a reasonable level of intelligence and decent teaching, but these grades in themselves don't show significant aptitude or interest ina subject, and that more is needed for that. They don't realise how important the Oxbridge subject based tests will be for really testing at a deeper level what someone's understanding and aptitude are, or that students often can't accurately predict how they did on such tests. And lots of parents and schools don't really understand how real and genuine interest can be manifested and encouraged - so some students are disadvantaged because they simply haven't been encouraged in this area.

I think of 2 children I knew going for Oxbridge in History. Both had fantastic grades at GCSE and predictions for A Level and indeed gained all A* at A Level. One was really a plodder - not that interested, but listened to advice about what to in exams and delivered. The other had a genuine passion. They read History on the loo, on the train, instead of watching TV and they chose to go and listen to people sharing their views. When the first had this 2nd student described to them, they just could not believe it 'are there people who really do that' they asked, as they asked their teacher to tell them a book they could put on their personal statement, because they knew something would be expected. I think we know which one got the place.

And I realise that it could have been that the great reader with the genuine interest wasn't up to it and might not have done well in interview or in an aptitude test, aren't everything. Perhaps what I'm trying to say, is that people seem to thinking decent set of GCSEs and A Level predictions is enough.....but it isn't, because quite simply there are far too many people with those.

The grades are good enough, but so are those of most applicants. The Cambridge admissions tutors will be looking for evidence of something extra by way of reading round the subject, understanding what the Cambridge course really is and having that extra spark of intellectualism and enthusiasm.

Some subjects (Classics, Arabic, Theology, Physics) are much easier to get into than others (English Lit., History).

The foreign language requirement was there because the universities used to have at least some commitment to producing people of wide education and capability. It would astound peoplemin civilised countries to hear that you can gain an elite degree in England without ANY knowledge of a foreign language. Most able secondary school students on the continent do four or five.

Now academics are measured on narrow but strict performance measures and their students could be giraffes for all they care as long as they meet the criteria.

A general engineering or natural sciences degree from Cambridge is massively wide ... nowadays in sciences and engineering there is just so much more content than there used to be.

BubblesBuddy - The Cambridge web site says exactly what it wishes to see in a personal statement. It lists useful inclusions so how can it be totally irrelevant? Is their web site lying? It also mentions extra curricular. It wants to see extra curricular linked to the academic subject. It gives detailed advice.

The Cambridge web site "What are we looking for?" literally opens with Admissions decisions at the University are based solely on academic criteria and, under the section "Personal Statement", they repeat:

At Cambridge, all admissions decisions are based solely on academic criteria (ability and potential). Therefore, in your personal statement, we’d like you to:

- explain your reasons for wanting to study the subject at university
- demonstrate enthusiasm for and commitment to your chosen course
- express any particular interests within the field
- outline how you’ve pursued your subject interest in your own time

This information is often used as a basis for discussion at interview.

Would you be so kind as to provide links to the statements about non-academic inclusions and relevant extracurricular activities?

I'd be surprised if a Grammar school didn't do some preparation for the tests.

No prep at DS's school just pointed in the direction of the website.

The Cambridge web site says exactly what it wishes to see in a personal statement. It lists useful inclusions so how can it be totally irrelevant?

They say that because they're inundated with questions about it. In reality any candidate who has got the grades required has the common sense to write a fairly decent personal statement and in any case they all read almost exactly the same much like the school reference). You can't make PS a large part of the application procedure because they don't tell you much about the candidate's ability. Some students have a lot of help writing them others none. They tell you very little. I did admissions.

At Oxford there was literally a mark given to students based on a number of criteria to determine whether they got interview. The weighting of the mark was overwhelming the pretest.

I'm not sure why people with 0 idea about admissions are offering so much advice here!

UnrelentingFruitScoffer

A British university degree qualifies a student in the subject that their degree is taken in. If you study maths you will be highly qualified in maths. If an employer needs any skills other than maths (for example a foreign language) the student can very easily demonstrate these skills at interview or via an additional qualification. A foreign language is not required for 99% of jobs in science because even internationally science happens in English. This is the language in which papers are published, conferences take place in etc. When I was still in science I lived in 3 different countries with 4 different languages. There is no way I would be fluent in all of these (I'm not good at languages - I am good at science). Anyway who isn't a native English speaker would need to become fluent in 1 additional language and that would be English.

Yes. DH and I have over 60 years between us working as scientists in different fields - zero requirement for foreign languages. If we're talking about ...'producing people of wide education and capability' perhaps it should be more astonishing that in the 21st century you can still gain an elite degree in England with no meaningful understanding of science, technology, logic or statistics?

Sorry, way OT, that might make for a debate on another thread!

"The Cambridge web site says exactly what it wishes to see in a personal statement. It lists useful inclusions so how can it be totally irrelevant?"

To add to what user says, although it's irrelevant to getting to interview, the personal statement is not entirely irrelevant to the interview itself. For instance, if you put in your personal statement that you love reading books about history, but when asked about this it transpires that you can't name a single one you've read and enjoyed, then the interviewers will make the relevant assumptions about the genuineness or otherwise of your interest in the subject! And also about the fact you want to get into Oxford or Cambridge to study one of the most competitive subjects there is, but haven't twigged that the interviewers are quite likely to want a little bit of detail about what your supposed passion for your subject means in practice! 'Err, I read the A-level set text' doesn't cut it.

This is not an isolated example, either! Talk to any group of interviewers and you'll get many similar stories...

The process of writing the PS may be of value to the applicant - thinking through why exactly they want to apply for these specific courses, and articulating those reasons. On the one hand 'because my parents want me to go to Oxbridge' won't cut it, on the other extreme, something more than (even if deeply meant) 'because I really really love physics' isn't too useful.

I assume there's a misunderstanding about what "physics olympiad team" means, since the list of past British competitors shows that there was no student who was on the British team in both 2018 and 2017.

whiteroseredrose absolutely no Oxbridge preparation for any of my grammar school DC either. None. The website is all they used (and indeed all they needed).

On the current way of counting, four A gets you 224 points and Cambridge NS had an average of 245 amongst successfully admitted candidates in the last reported year. The competition is extraordinarily tough and those numbers tell you what you need to aim for. The subject has always had a large cohort of kids with triple science and double maths at A level. Oxbridge makes use of many methods for assessing people in addition to A levels but it is just false to say that look at only three A levels. If you get an offer it will be based on three. That is the minimum standard for a candidate they have decided they want has to get at the end of U6. That decision is based on all kinds of factors and is based on an applicant pool of very high quality. People need to remember that 4A is below average for a successful NS candidate without other points from somewhere.