Parent of oxbridge candidate-peersupportneeded

[funnyperson]

OK so my DD is applying to Oxford for entry in 2011 and has a 75% chance of getting rejected so I am told by the Oxford website so I reckon a new thread would be helpful for us parents who may end up with joy or grief but in any event need to keep sane enough to support our loved ones. Any tips on maximising chances of success at this stage?

funny and wellinformed... I don't think there's any general ranking, though coordinated faculties like Law might have one.

I meant that each college will have a ranking for each subject, which used always to be included in the letter to schools, which they BY THE WAY still get though often without the ranking, so that you should be able if that's the only remaining option to use the Data Protection Act to find it out, or indeed to find out what the college told the school.

It's true that some administrators will discourage frank and free exchanges on the grounds that you might be about to launch a lawsuit, but this seems imbecilic, really. Very occasionally, too, you get someone who just never answers enquiries.

But I would suggest contacting in this order and until you have found out all there is to find a. the person who interviewed your child b. the other person who interviewed them c. the Senior Tutor of that college d. the Admissions Officer of the relevant faculty e. the Central Admissions Office, complaining about lack of feedback from all of the above and definitely mentioning it if your child is at a state school. (OTOH, a private school will often try all this for you... and some state schools will, but then they often refuse to share what they have found out with you...) Don't give up, and as with all enquiries, be patient, polite and willing to keep trying. Message me for more if you like.

Sieglinde has good advice. As an interviewer, I would be happy to give feedback on those I interviewed. (Not that I am about to out myself on here though.)

What I meant about rankings is that they are rather arbitrary (even subject-specific ones), although I can only really speak for the subjects I interview in: if you're just below the cut-off one year, that won't necessarily mean that hard work will raise your level the next as you'll be measured against a different set of people. Also, candidates have an alarming (or predicatably human) habit of doing really well in one interview and badly in the next (or vice versa).

Hmmm. Well here is some nice feedback about the interview process- DD has just gone out for a coffee with someone else she met at the interviews (previously a complete stranger) who she got on with and who has also been given an offer for the same subject in the same college! Apparently, with the benefit of electronic communication, they and a few others kept in touch after the interviews.
This reinforces my opinion that the interview process, which included staying overnight, was really helpful in DD getting to know the college and people.

Its nice because I remember the only person I knew on my first day at university was............yes, you guessed it........my physics teacher. (LOL- it is true. We are still, after thirty years, friends)

So schools get feedback do they? Oh well, we were unable to access that feedback. Probably just as well, because closure came quickly and we moved on. We never thought of warfare. Waste of valuable energy.
Besides, in the end we grown ups knew that DS was brilliant- his maths olympiads and scholarship etc etc testified. The problem was- and this is the rub- I am not sure that DS realised he was brilliant, and the danger, to an extent, is that being rejected can undermine confidence. Which is where prompt feedback can help and why the attitude of us parents is important.

Thanks for further thoughts, especially from the insiders but DS definitely wants to start next autumn, assuming good results in August [fingers crossed], so isn't considering either reapplying or finding out what he fell down on.

wellinformedlurker, "lacklustre interviews in philosophy often result in the applicants not getting what is being asked (ie not realising that there is an issue, or that someone could disagree with their own views)" - I think that sums up exactly how DS's philosophy/politics interview went; he didn't know what they were getting at, or how he should respond, or even that he was supposed to argue!

"St Peter's was rather swamped with PPE applicants this year" - DS's was an open application, he was allocated St Peter's

UCL does sound wonderful but they don't offer Philosophy with Politics - in fact they have hardly any Politics courses at all. (He's really not so keen on Economics despite applying for PPE!) Thanks for the nudges that way though, I've just started trawling through the other London colleges & have already discovered that Birkbeck have Pol/Phil/Hist (though that's a 4-year course for some reason) & RH offer both Pol/Phil & Phil/Pol/International Relations, which he may consider. He would like London...cities don't come a lot bigger!

Ponders, and anyone else, wellinformed is absolutely right in her advice and also about rankings, though I'd say more moderately that there's usually a biiig difference between coming tenth and coming twentieth and I would advise anyone just below theline to get in touch with the admissions tutors, while anyone who misses said cutoff by more than ten should really go elsewhere.

And I always advise AGAINST OPEN APPLICATIONS..

Why advise against open applications, Sieglinde?
I thought Oxford was at pains to point out that an open application did not disadvantage someone, and nor did applying somewhere where by chance a large number of others had also applied, because the candidates in the pool were also looked at before choices were made.

mmm, what wolfbrother just said!

(DS didn't even get pooled though)

Ponders I have a feeling that Birkbeck only takes part time undergraduates- usually evenings/weekends and those who are working.
UCL is a good one to apply to, though competitive, and DS says there is a very strong drinking culture there.
What about Kings College? Also SOAS.
SOAS is next to Senate House in the heart of Bloomsbury and has very good economics, history and law depts and gives lowish offers so is a good insurance choice.
It is also looked on with favour by employers because of the international focus.
Another tack is to try a different course at LSE- I noticed that those applying for govt rather than economics seemed to face less competition.
Once in at LSE/SOAS/Kings it is possible to change course in the first fortnight or so if desired and capable. Lots do because the undergraduate course is modular.

10 round the table tomorrow.

Anyway where is donindisguise? Happy Christmas to all the lurkers. DD says it sounds like a masked ball. Lol

Sieglinde is right - there is a difference between 10 and 20 on the rankings (say), but little between 10-13.

I never take an interest (or even know) if someone has made an open application.

Ponders being pooled for 2nd interview is different from being pooled in the early stages because you've done an open application. It is likely that there were a lot of PPE applicants generally across oxford this year and so it was impossible to get second interviews for most. (I don't know the numbers though.)

Birkbeck is good (and has just started full time degrees, I think). Kings is also good for philosophy. Funny's DS is right about the hard-drinking culture of UCL, I don't know how everyone affords it.

I never take any interest in an open application either, and that's not why I advised against it. My reasoning is dfferent, and in two parts: I think the system is dependent more on number of applicants than number of places, and also it tends to mean you have no chance to ask any questions about the college in advance. But by this I only mean the so-called first-choice Open Application. I have NO idea how 2nd interview/2nd choice works in PPE, but there is a grand canyon of difference between e.g. English, Modern Languages, and law. The latter two call hardly anyone for interview, so virtually everyone who gets called at all gets two interviews. English calls a much higher percentage of applicants, but the second interview system is much, much more - erm - well, frankly, and in some cases, based on sheer luck, especially if you are crazy enough to apply to a very very oversubscribed college, with a deer park.

Sorry, I now see some ambiguity in what I wrote; I mean that I never try to discover whether a candidate comes from the pool or chooses my college.

sieglinde - lovely deer park though. St Peter's has squirrels instead (and is closer to the shops). They do not, however, have a special meal every year when they eat the squirrels although the porter did once suggest it.

Hi Sieglinde and Wellinformedlurker,

Thanks for your comments, which are very interesting. Can you tell me why you advise against open applications?

My son made an open application because he was more focussed on the course than the college and knew very little about the colleges. He couldn't make the open day because of a memorial service and given that we're four hundred miles away it wasn't easy to arrange a quick visit. He read that he would not be disadvantaged by making an open application and indeed he has now received an offer for PPE, so he doesn't seem to have suffered any disadvantage except that if he had chosen a college he probably wouldn't have chosen the one he was allocated.

He also wasn't pooled despite making an open application.

Thanks

RRocks

This reminds me of research grant applications where it is good to have chatted to at least some of the panel members beforehand.

Oh thanks for the Birkbeck inf - the 4-year degree I mentioned earlier is a part-time one unfortunately.

However they do offer a 3-year full-time Philosophy BA which includes Political Philosophy, so I will suggest that to him, & I've noticed that the standard offer for RH's Philosophy, Politics and International Relations BA is only ABB, which might make a good insurance choice...

I know RH is outside the M25 but it's in a nice part of the country & not too far from central London so worth considering.

There is silence from a couple of the 'dead certs' from DS school. Both of the mafioso. Parents who do not even nod at the lowly such as us. Oh well. They are probably enquiring informally behind the scenes to try and get a revised decision and secure a place. I might have done the same had I known what to do if I were in that position. I think it takes a lot of honesty and courage to out and say immediately that one has not got a place and move on.

DS two good friends also have offers-one to read English at the deer park college mentioned above and another to read ancient history at Lincoln. So as long as they get their grades she is set to have a splendid time at Wadham without being lonely. The grades worry will begin after Christmas I suspect.

It has been such a struggle at times it really is a relief to have pulled through this far. And now I feel a bit like a cast off old rag. So this old rag is going to watch a nice DVD while the teens are out........

I think that the ability to think analytically and critically and produce a reasoned argument, and the ability to adapt your position when presented with a better argument, is what they would be looking for in a Philosophy interview. Much the same in Politics, with some knowledge of political thought thrown in; and same again in economics. My son has never done economics and his economics interview was conducted on a purely abstract level involving the ability to work through a logical problem, possibly a game theory type problem.

I entirely agree that schools should be teaching this sort of stuff, although that doesn't mean that everyone will be able to do it well any more than we can all do Maths or Art well. They now teach Philosophy at Higher in Scottish schools, which they didn't when I was there, but I think they have done in England for a long time. Is that not the case? Of course, it will come down to which teachers your particular school has and whether there is sufficient interest to run a class.

RRocks

The ability to think analytically and produce a reasoned argument does seem to be crucial- DS was also asked about game theory in her interview. I agree that students from different cultures or educational backgrounds will approach this differently. For example those who have studied the classics or the presentation of different historical viewpoints might find it easier. Once I was interested to know what sort of education Shakespeare would have had. He was taught at Stratford Grammar school at a time when the main subjects on the syllabus were Logic, Rhetoric and Grammar.The study of rhetoric included an analysis of the Greek and Roman legal arguments and famous speeches- the art of persuasion, using as case studies Cicero, Socrates and so on; not just the content but also the delivery. It seems to me that the modern art of analytical reasoning and expression of it is not so far removed.
Thus Classics, Drama and History A levels appear to be useful subjects for anyone preparing for an Oxford interview. Depending on how they are taught and absorbed of course. The skill of scientific reasoning and critical analysis of evidence is another story.

Might this be why independent school students tend to be so much more successful, esp in things like PPE?

(Wondering now what percentage of peteneras's nothing-but-Oxford-will-do guys got offers...)

As well of course one must not forget the 'Argumentative Indian'. Amartya Sen's book of that name traces the tradition of Indian public debate and discussion through the ages, including some very famous women in antiquity who used the question and answer format with husbands/fathers/gurus to clarify philosophical points.
It is possible to come across some very argumentative Indians.
I find philosophy quite hard actually. But I do love the argument about whether the table exists if one cannot see it. I especially love it as it is clear that whoever it was thought the table didn't exist (I forget who) was obviously autistic. Classic Theory of Mind experiment.