Oxbridge, hypothetical question

[Changebagsandgladrags]

Just looking at the results of my local comp.

The highest scoring GCSE candidate got 4A (inc Maths & Physics) and 7As. Would they automatically be excluded by Oxbrudge selection computers because of not having enough A?

Bear in mind, this girl's results are significantly better than the rest of the year, the two next best have 2A and 1A, after that there are a couple of all As and then about 5 with a mix of A/B etc.

The school is normally well under the national average.

[Yellowstone]

Or rather, it was just a shorthand. Though it was just too.

[hildathebuilder]

OK, my dh is an admissions tutor. He would look at adjusted gcse weight and take a view. He would not necessarily deselect someone for interview with those grades.

There is no selection computer (as his wife I would kill for one of those... it would avoid the huge rucus we have at this time of year when he is trying to decide what to do for the best with the possible students)

There are people he would like to deselect as he knows they have in reality no chance of getting a place. But that would never include people from an underperforming comp, he has less info from those types of schools than he does from say Eton, where if the reference says this is the best student I have ever taugjht for subject x it means something as the referee is staking their reputation on something. As a point of principle for him at least students are also more likely to get interviewed and arguably selected if the school is poor as they are looking for potential, interest, enthusiasm, inate intellegence etc not the ability to be taught for an interview (and yes he does know if someone has been trained/had lots of interview practice etc and then has to try and dsicount it).

Oh and there will be astophysicists admitting students, for sciences. The tutors have day jobs as well as there research. My own tutor (many many years ago) was (and still is) an astrophysicist.

[GrendelsMum]

Sorry, merely my dreadful pedantry getting loose. I once had a summer job which involved typing up all the lists of all courses in the NatSci Tripos, which left me with far too much knowledge of which courses could be done in which Part - but clearly not whether any Astrophysicists were also DoSs.

Love the fact that someone on MN was able to come on and correct this important point, though.

[ellisbell]

yellowstone I was initially going to ignore your post but there are a couple of points that may need correction. Anyone can claim anything on the internet and we all have to make our own judgement about whether those people are worth listening to or not. You decided someone was lying about being an admission tutor and others disagreed. You interpreted information on Cambridge websites in a particular way and other people have disagreed. When someone disagrees with you you resort to childish insults and bullying. To me that suggests you may be an immature teenager posing as an adult, if you genuinely are an adult you are not a person I chose to interact with further.

Various people claiming to have good knowledge of the Cambridge admission process have said that there is no automatic deselection, that the colleges devote a lot of resources to the process, that they try to make allowances for those achieving above the standard for their school and that they retain some flexibility over deciding who receives an offer and what grades they have to achieve. Personally I believe them but if you have planted doubts in anyone's mind the best thing they can do is talk to admission tutors at the colleges, not rely on what they read on the internet.

Unfortunately, grendelsmum there are fewer people now on mumsnet prepared to correct these errors.

[ScroobiousPip]

Don't know if it's changed recently but when I applied a huge amount of emphasis was placed on both the interview and being a 'well-rounded' person. I failed to get my grades (which was a low offer anyway) but was still offered a place. I think it was because I held my own at both interviews, not only in the subject I had applied to read (a small specialist subject) but also in my DoS's own subject which I hadn't studied at A level but which was of general interest to me. Also, the fact that I did a wide range of extra-curricular stuff, including activities that were of particular interest to the college I applied to.

That's not to say grades aren't important but I never had the sense that they were the be all and end all or, even, that they would get you a foot in the door if you didn't have personality too. And applying to the right college for your personality/extra-curricular interests etc is important too.

There's a lot of correcting going on on this thread though so I wait to be corrected...

[Yellowstone]

ellis, what kind of bee do you have in your bonnet?! I really don't think these Oxbridge threads should get so personal - it's quite extraordinary .

There is no suggestion whatever on the thread in question that I doubted the poster to be a bona fide Cambridge don. I did however challenge her statement that Cambridge routinely hands out offers at AAA these days and doesn't mind if offerees slip a grade to AAB and that only two A's at AS are required, since she didn't restrict her comments to students coming through the Special Access route. After some while I quoted the Trinity website, verbatim. That is not interpretation, that is straight quotation.

The very unusual reactions to posters challenges are all yours I'm afraid, and I don't believe anyone except for you disagreed with what I said either!

I'm also not aware that I have anywhere said anything about automatic deselection, in fact I haven't. All very .

[Yellowstone]

I should correct that perhaps :)

I have once referred to the quasi automatic deselection at Oxford in certain subjects, based on exam results and the admissions tests, but nowhere have I ever said anything of the sort about Cambridge, nor would I.