Getting into Oxford.....

[CrushWithEyeliner]

My friends' son has not passed the entrance to Oxford.
He is super clever, v good at maths and has has a private ed all his life with great results all around. He is articulate but not overly cerebral or intellectual, he finds certain subjects v easy and knows it, he is also really interested in banking. investment management and that kind of career.

I was quite surprised when he didn't make it, and want to know a bit more as to why. I don't want to go into all the details with the parents as I can tell they are quite gutted.
Does anyone know what they are looking for at this exam/ interview and what kind of student gets into Oxford - it seems being clever isn't enough..does this sounds utterly naive?!

agree with find the river re not getting too hung up on it - its where you're goign not where you've been that is important. Would also echo teh people who said its passion for the subject - I got in to oversubscribed arts subject when otehrs with fancier cvs didn't cos I lived and breathed what I did and had an interest in it that was -very sad- very deep

Acinonyx - i think ds's aspirations are such that for the last two years he has lived and breathed Oxford. Courses have come and gone but the mainstay has been Oxford. He is a delight and as a parent the thought of him being possibly rejected at just 17 is what holds me back

dp just rang me from parents evening (!) where he is with the baby (double !) Two ds's teachers asked dp would he be applying to Oxbridge.

Writing this actually clarifies in my head that i wish he was not

Ah Bink - not quite THAT finished, I WISH. Still got one chapter left. Which of course I should be doing right now, this very minute, not drinking wine and sitting on mn.....

NotanOtter - I totally understand your anxiety. But this is clearly something he has to do. If he doesn't, he will be wondering all his life. I was invited to apply to Oxford but my parents and school were not supportive and I didn't feel confident. It wasn't a really huge deal but I did wonder about it later and I'd be lying if I said I didn't get a kick out of being here now. Irony is, it's by actually being here that I'm able to get a perspective on the whole Oxbridge thing.

yes i do get that irony thing

the only way to get perspective - from the inside

NotanOtter, your DS sounds just like my nephew!! He is exactly the same, very determined and absolutely passionate about his subject.

The school he (and my DC are/were at) usually has about 25 Oxbridge successes per year. Last year Oxford was the most popular university (in terms of numbers actually getting in and going there) at the school, so he knows what he is aiming for and knows the perils of trying. But he just wants to. My sister and I, having had other children at the school and all being pretty bright, can see the difference between him and his sibling, cousins. He is just a 'step' above them.

My DH went to Cambridge so luckily can put some perspective on it.

Hopefully he, and your DS, will be successful!!!

Acinonyx, you cannot choose 2 colleges now! (I am k=led to believe)

Colleagues of mine all say about how they applied for Oxford & Cambridge, but the rule now (as far as DD told me) is you can only choose 1 college from either Oxbridge Uni, and apply for 1 course as part of your 5 choices.

Really? I applied to two but it was a few years ago. I'm curious - I might ring and ask since people expect me to know these things

This is cut from the UCAS website:

You can apply to a maximum of:

4 courses in any one of medicine/dentistry/veterinary medicine/veterinary science
3 courses in Route B art and design
One course at either Oxford University or University of Cambridge (unless you already have a degree or will have gained a degree before September of this cycle in which case you can apply to both).

Nothing about college applications though?

But you can only make one application, so that limits your college application to one.

The whole application changed this year as it is now part of the UCAS online application, then you get sent a supplementary questionnaire. The students were all told to make a careful choice, but only ONE choice.

I just read on the website that it's one college only. When I applied it was 2 - and that had nothing to do with making one application. Applying for a course has nothing to do with apply for a college. You used to make one application but nominate 2 colleges as first and second choice (as part of the same single course application IYSWIM).

Sounds a better system! DD has her interview on Friday. Hope she has better luck than today's interview where the car went into a ditch en-route!

Good luck!

NotAnOtter, from what you describe, your ds will get into Oxford. Just a feeling

This idea about Oxbridge being sink or swim and lectures and tutorials/essays being out of sync, is that a good thing? I thought that sounded particularly disorganised but something the institution has been allowed to get away with because they are so oversubscribed and can pick and choose self-starter candidates. Or is it a hallmark of head-in-the-clouds towering intellect .

I would say, sort it out!

Blueshoes - I think the 'sink or swim' is just being handed down through the generations. But the disorganisation of teaching, it seems to me in my limited expereince, is due to academic staff prioritising research over teaching duties. In fact admin in general is, er, weak to say the least.

What a great thread - I have really enjoyed reading this. Have not got much of use to contribute beyond saying - damn, wish I had at least tried to get in as an undergrad, but I was like lazymumofteenagesons ds, in as much as I attended the 6th form of a very prestigious private school and when I saw that all my least favourite people there were dead certs for Oxbridge, I refused to apply, despite pleas from the school and from my parents. I chose instead to go to a perfectly respectable provincial university, but found it much like an extension of school and rather dull. I later had a postgrad place at Oxford, but never took it up. I remember my godfather saying to me 25 years ago that if I didn't at least try, I'd regret it. Pains me to admit that he was right.
If either of my dcs show signs of being Oxbridge material, I'll be encouraging them to have a go. Even trying and failing is character-building. Not encouraging them have a go is teaching them to be afraid of failure.

Coming late to this thread and probably repeating a lot

Tactics mean a lot - certain subjects like English and history. Some like classics (and iirc modern languages) are far less

Certain colleges like Magdalen and Trinity Cambridge are v oversubscribed. Others, like Robinson and St Hughs, less so because of modern architecture, location or a single-sex background.

A bumptious, over-confident public schoolboy who may be good at exam technique but not so good at lateral thinking is not what they are looking for (though if he wants to be a banker and is honest enough to say so, good luck to him).

I have virtually no memory of my Oxbridge interview except waffling on about how I loved Leonardo da Vinci. A lie, as it happens but I was put on the spot about italian artists and needed to think fast. And maybe that's the point, they are looking for people who when asked who their favourite Italian artist is can pluck a name out of the air and give three well-argued reasons why that was the case (even if not actually true). I had read v broadly outside the curriculum and I'm sure I talked about the extra reading I'd done and that helped too.

Thanks to the well wishers earlier in the thread. The entrance tests went appallingly, the interviews less so.

On the plus side it was nice to have a couple of child free days away from home

Good luck to all those with dc's going through the anxiety of the admissions procedures at present

Coming late to this thread, but in case it's useful for other readers. I think the difficult thing is that schools and parents obviously see things from their level. You have to think yourself a bit into the perspective of the academics involved. (I am one!) Typically Oxbridge academics at this time of year will be interviewing for say 6 places in their subject and after desummoning (that's the stage where we decide not to invite certain candidates for interview) looking at about 20 candidates for interview. Of those 20 perhaps 2 (in a good year) will be obviously very strong and there'll be no question about taking them. Maybe 8 of the 20 will be definitely-not. The real "competition" to be honest is usually between the remaining 10 for the 4 places available. Each of those 10 are likely to be strong candidates who will clearly do well (i.e. are capable of a good 2:1 and are likely to be able to cope with the course successfully). Each of them will also have something not-perfect about them (of course!) but something different in each case - perhaps one sent a not-brilliant essay, another did only fairly well in an admissions test. That's the tricky stage for admissions tutors, and that's the group where interview performance has the biggest chance of making a difference. (Remember of course that all 20 of these candidates - and most if not all of those desummoned too - are predicted or already have As at A-level, so that aspect is basically useless to us now.)

Any worried parents/candidates should not be disconcerted by what seems like a "tough" interview. Very generally speaking, tutors are likely to go quite gently on a candidate who seems weak or out of their depth or otherwise very unlikely to make it (eg poor results on admissions tests), so having an 'easy' or 'good' interview is not necessarily a good sign. On the other hand, tutors are quite likely to push a candidate who does have a chance hardest to see how far they can go and give them the best chance to prove themselves. (You don't really need to push the very best, they tend to do it themselves.)

Hope this helps someone. (I missed interviewing this year as I'm recovering from flu, but I've done it in the past, have talked to endless colleagues about the process, not to mention been through it all myself.)

Very interesting Arionater

sorry - been busy. Mainly valuing debate over ability. So you produce people who talk well but are not necessarily able to do anything except debate. A well reasoned argument doesn't actually solve any problems. Also dislike the arrogant tone of some of the comments.

Yep, that's valid - verbal facility vs. substance. Doesn't necessarily mean the verbally facile are superficial though (I think Dennis Potter good example of profound substance plus extraordinary articulate agility). Suspect you are thinking of Oxbridge-bred politicians? (Separate thread - or is it??)

Anyway, v good way of testing the verbally facile is to pit them against people who can see through & call them on the bullshit? Which is what happens, to everyone, eventually.

blueshoes !
ds is a very relaxed individual and loves the sound of his own voice !

he failed to get into National youth Theatre last year and surprised me b taking the rejection well. Seemed quite mature . Has re applied this year so I am hoping all these means he will not be too disgruntled if he fails to get in

How many applicants actually get to interview?

I think as long as an applicant looks to have academic results/predictions for A level/school reference that are in the right sort of zone, they get an interview.

Certainly at Cambridge I think they interview almost every applicant, which is a massive undertaking if you think about it (about 14500 interviews last year).

If they still have entrance exams at Oxford then I guess they may not interview people whose exams aren't great.