Tell me about Oxbridge please.

[EccentricaGallumbits]

I don't get it and DD1 has just announced I will need to.

different colleges for different stuff? how would you choose? Different application process? Extra good grades needed? I went to a polytechnic new university. I know nothing.

'Also if you've been asked to read, or do soemthing before the interview do so!

DH used to do mock Oxbridge interviewing at a very academic school. Every year the students he interviewed would write in their statement that they had read a certain book or had a great interest in something. DH would then ask them a question about this great interest/book and be told they hadn't had time to read it yet (or display a knowledge of the interest that was less than that of a one paragraph encyclopaedia entry).

If you write something on your personal statement, please be able to discuss it!

I did A-level law. i lasted 3 weeks before I jacked it in

DD is (at the moment) in to geography and tectonic plates and environmental stuff (and hair straigtning and nail varnish). She can argue until the cows come home (and palys a flute)

I can tutor her in Douglas Adams but little else.

Tansk for all the advice. We'll see what happes oer the next few years.

I've not got much to add, but will just insert a little cheer for Cambridge. My husband went to Cambridge, and had the best time. The friends he made there are still our friends now (granted, it's only been six years since they graduated), and we both love the city. It is a myth that all Oxbridge students are oh so posh - I met just as many posh idiots in Swansea as I did in Cambridge. Can't say as I've ever seen much in the way of drugs, either

Best of luck to your daughter!

I'm told there aren't the drugs there used to be. Less free booze, too, apparently.

Gallum, nothing wrong with geography. What other A-levels is she thinking about?

don't know as it's yeeeeeeears away.

If there are drugs involved i will be checking up on hr daily instead of twice weekly.

Hmmm. In my subject, we certainly don't 'run a biro through' the names of candidates who take any of those A-levels, sieglinde (although I have never come across travel and tourism). It seems to me rather unfair to expect our applicants to discern between things that their school is offering them at apparently equal level (and which WE tell them are equal).

My only input is to choose which colleges to apply to carefully. They are so so different in nature. Some are for nerdy scholarly people, some are better for sporty outgoing types and Jesus (I think, long time ago) at Oxford was always full of Welsh people. Each has it's own style. Also check up on the tutors attached to each college, tutorials are your main learning mechanism and it helps if you have a tutor that suits you and your particular interests in the subject.

Good luck to your DD

Sieglinde I've known lots of people who did Classics at Oxford and Cambridge who had Classical Civ A level - can't speak for how it's regarded by other subjects but the view I came across was that it was a perfectly good essay subject with the added bonus of showing you were interested in the ancient world. I think lecturers in Classics are increasingly pragmatic about the fact that nice as it would be for students to have done Latin and Greek A levels, there aren't many schools that give you the chance to do that these days.

Well, maybe my blacklist was intended to encapsulate every prejudice... And also maybe some courses are more crazily oversubscribed than others, so 'judgements' ie the desperate elimination of somebody for some threadbare reason are more hairsbreadth. I've had an applicant with Travel and Tourism as an A-Level.

Sieglinde, I'm surprised that RS is on your list. I thought this was a highly regarded old school academic subject. It is certainly on the Trinity College Cambridge list of acceptable arts A levels.

I am alarmed as DS, with Oxbridge aspirations, is studying it. He hopes to read Philosophy, and RS is the closest his school offers to the subject.

yes and I'm sure some colleges are worse than others. And indeed, some individuals in some colleges....
I always feel sorry for the majority of perfectly reasonable non-prejudiced individuals involved in admissions who feel like they are having to fight against the 'myths' about Oxbridge entry and insist it's all perfectly fair and there is no snobbery involved. Because the thing about Oxbridge is that there are still certain people (albeit a tiny number these days) who get away with old-style behaviour and I'm not sure how fair it is to insist to applicants that everyone is fair and unprejudiced. When what you sometimes need to do is to say to a someone who is planning to apply 'Don't apply for College X for Subject Y because the tutor there is going to be prejudiced against you because [insert daft old-fashioned reason], go for College Z where they are really keen on widening participation' but then it all starts to sound like there are all these secret codes and inside knowledge you need.

Lots has been said already - but will just add that the "5 hrs of optional lectures plus rip-to-shred tutorials" is probably more descriptive of arts than sciences at Oxbridge.

Me and my science/engineering/medic colleagues did more like 12-20 hrs lectures (optional, as at every uni I suppose), 6-10 hrs lab work, 4-6hrs tutorials. Many of the tutorials were to work through a set of problems & discuss implications, rather than essay based.

Great post Hilda.

Certainly no biro-running here. There's no doubt that certain A levels are essential for some subjects (and in that case will be named as such), and that some A levels are more useful than others for certain degrees. Again, this kind of advice will be published by the institution. However, lots of people don't have the advice or the perspective to make such informed choices aged 16, and I have not heard of a candidate being dismissed like this. Lots of excellent candidates don't even decide what they want to do at university until much later, perfectly reasonably. These stories are really damaging because they are used to discourage candidates from applying, when they might actually have had a really good chance if the admissions tutors had got the chance to see them.

People - my thing about Ford Prefect was a JOKE (did you notice the wink at the end?) because the OP said she was trying to get her DD into reading Hitchhikers Guide. In my actual Cambridge interviews I got asked perfectly sensible questions and no trick questions.

I also don't have Gold D of E or Grade 8 violin or compete in the England Athletics team but I do think the fact that I did various other things at school other than my A-Levels helped me get into my (newish) college because they thought I'd contribute to college / university life. Every applicant has an excellent academic record as a minimum (or at least everyone going for an interview).

I didn't see anyone doing drugs. I hung out with a very straight crowd!! (bit of drinking and that was all).

Good luck to your DD, OP!

I went to Cambridge. Most of the other students in my college were state school educated. I never saw any drugs (except when my cousin came to visit me on a weekend away from Warwick!). I did Land Economy and had about 10 hours of lectures per week, plus two or three essays. Supervisions (Cambridge-speak for Tutorials) were sometimes terrifying, in the manner described above. Others were fun.

DH was also there, studying Engineering. He worked ALL the time - lectures and practicals starting at 9am every day, including Saturday, and going on well into the afternoon. The three hours per week thing really only applies to certain arts subjects and they carry a VERY heavy reading load (e.g. five Charles Dickens novels in a week!)

It was a fabulously intense three years. But it is definitely a bubble and it takes a while to adjust to the real world.

My DN is in the first year at Oxford from a state grammar school, as are about 15 others from his year at his (and my DCs) school.

The main criteria seemed to be a genuine interest in the subject (English in his case), There were no 'trick' questions at his interview. The tutors were extremely kind and helpful to him. He did not feel out of his depth. He just said what he thought in reply to their questions. They did not ask him at all about his extra curricular activities, they were only interested in why he wanted to study English.

He had to take a supplementary English test and was questioned on an unseen piece of literature before the interview. He was predicted 3 A* at A2 level (A levels were English, French and Politics) but was given an offer of 3 As.

He came away from the admissions process thinking it was extremely fair and reasonable, and was obviously v delighted to be offered a place :) He felt had he not been offered a place then there was not much else he could have done and that it wouldn't have been the place for him in that case. He was genuinely surprised at the 'niceness' of everyone he met during the admissions procedure. Everyone went out of their way to put him at his ease.

that's a nice post thelastresort. I hope all candidates feel that they get such a fair shot. I think a large part of what makes interviews so difficult an experience for some applicants is not that the interviewers are unkind or unfair, but that it's such a nerve-inducing situation - like exams, where so much seems to rest on a short exercise (actually, it's worth stressing to your dd OP that interview is NOT everything in admissions - written work, aptitute tests, GCSE results etc, all count too). And we really do try quite hard to minimise the hideousness of it!

I think that's right about class civ - better than no classical history at all, esp since so few schools offer Latin/Greek these days

I totally agree, heartsease, and didn't mean to be discouraging, far from it, but one problem is that the distribution of advice is itself very unequal across sectors.

I thnk anyone with good predicted grades should def have a go. ANYONE.

But it's also smart IF POSSIBLE to contact the subject tutor or Senior Tutor at the chosen coll at A-Level chosing time and just see if they confirm any, erm, A-Level blacklists, because honestly, some people really do have them.

And I think anyone whose dd or ds is already embarked on A-Levels should also make that call because it will help in choosing a college.

While you have their attention, ask what the admissions to applicants ratio is at that college in ds or dd's chosen subject. This can vary an awful lot. The variation matters much more in some subjects than in others.