Cambridge Admissions 2012

[Yellowstone]

www.guardian.co.uk/education/2012/jan/10/how-cambridge-admissions-really-work?INTCMP=SRCH

Yes I read this in the paper yesterday - was just feeling very diasppointed after DS was pooled and then rejected - got letter yesterday. Experience of being pooled but not getting a sniff of interest was rather painful really. So near and yet so far...

interesting. so true about doctors not curing everybody.

Sorry for you both sandripples, didn't intend to make pain worse. I just thought there was quite a few things of interest in the article. It makes it clear how cliff edge decisions can be, most notably in the pool.

were!

It seems rather horrible selecting who to pool (I would hate that job) and to me it looks too arbitrary how they decide who comes out of the pool. With all those boxes of files in the pool it seems it might be easy to lose/overlook some - what if someone else has a file out while you are looking through a box?

But they have to choose somehow and I guess the system must mostly work OK or they wouldn't use it.

It would be much nicer for the candidates for this stage of the process to be speeded up - Oxford do this bit better with up-to-date information on all candidates available to all tutors on-line throughout the interview period via a centralised computer system that is updated immediately following each interview session (at least for some subjects) with pooling being done at the time of interview, before the candidate is sent home. But they don't interview so many, so their earlier stage of rejecting candidates before interview must be more ruthless.

Sympathy to your ds sandripples. I hope he ends up somewhere where he is really happy.

Name change for anonymity

This was a really interesting article. Especially since I was interviewed by James Keeler about a decade ago. That interview didn't go great, but my other interview did. I was from a decent comp, in a working class area. I had perfect exam scores and the right mix of subjects. So they put me in the pool. (After reading the article, perhaps another problem was that he wasn't interested in my gap year which involved teaching abroad?) Anyway, I got picked out of the pool by another college, went through two more interviews which went fine, and thankfully got a place.

I ended up graduating with a first, came 8th in my year, and got the top mark on one of the papers. Yet, I only got in by the skin of my teeth. It just goes to show that it really is a bit of a lottery in the end. I definitely wish there had been some interview coaching available.

Thanks for that link Yellowstone. Very interesting.
DS1 would like to try for Cambridge. He doesn't go to a "good" school within the definition of the article. Perhaps it will be to his advantage that both his secondary school and sixth form college are under performing.

SecretSquirrels my DS is currently at Cambridge and went to an average primary and comp. From his experience, I do think the admissions tutors are trying hard to broaden the intake when DS had his interview, for instance, he was asked if it was OK if someone sat in to see what went on, and it was explained this person was a teacher from a school somewhere in Lincolnshire, I think, who was being given an idea of how the selection process went. DS studies History and one of his tutors is encouraging the students to hand over examples of their essays which he wants to put up on a website so that potential applicants can get an idea of what's required and the sort of standards of work, so they are at least trying to make it all a bit less mysterious.

You may already know this, but one of the key things for your son is to pick a college where he feels he fits. DS went to a Cambridge open day and was horrified by one or two of the students he came across who were manning an information stall at the college which is often seen as the natural choice for History students (one, I kid you not, was wearing a straw boater - perhaps as a joke, but still...). DS chose his college partly because of his reaction to it went he looked around, and also by trawling through student reviews on TSR and unofficial prospectus comments.

Thanks ancient I hope your DS is enjoying the college he chose. You're not the first to say something like this. In fact I met someone who had recently graduated and she said there are certain colleges which are known to never admit comprehensive students and an application made to them in ignorance of this unwritten rule would be a wasted one.

He has been on G&T "aspirational" days to Oxford and Cambridge and was bowled over by some of the students he met.
I haven't actively encouraged him because I think he would be at a disadvantage socially. He doesn't have the speaking skills that public schools instil from day1. He's only in Y11 at the moment but if he continues with this aim I will, as teaismylife mentioned, try to get him some interview coaching.

SecretSquirrelsthe person who said this was wrong. There isn't a college in Cambridge or Oxford which doesn't admit (and isn't keen to admit) students from comps. Of course he wouldn't be at a disadvantage socially, though paid for interview coaching might disadvantage him. I'd steer well clear.

Totally agree with Yellowstone all colleges are looking for good students from comps. The issue I was highlighting is that each college has its own 'feel' and your son needs to pick the one where he feels comfortable. Don't bother with interview coaching interviewers will see right through prepared answers. What you need to do is make sure your son is OK talking to adults and challenging their views, rather than feeling he must agree because it's a teacher speaking. Not a bad idea to get him to listen to R4 programmes like 'In our time' or 'Any Questions' so he gets the idea that there is not usually a 'right' answer, just different ways of looking at a problem (I'm assuming, btw, he's not planning to do Maths, where there is a right answer!). Also try and encourage newspaper reading, periodicals (New Statesman, Spectator), anything to give him a wider outlook. Interview is not about 'public speaking' but about how the student thinks and unpicks questions. And if he likes the students he's met, he'll be fine. My DS loves, loves, loves his college and all in it, as far as I can see, and certainly does not feel 'socially disadvantaged' even if he has been to a couple of 21st birthday dos over the summer which seemed to be on country estates (we live in inner city London....)

Please don't be influenced by discouraging comments, Secretsquirrel. The kind of scheme mentioned by ancientand modern above, encouraging state sector teachers to understand the process has been going on for years at Cambridge. Almost 20 years ago, I was a beneficiary who was invited to live as a Fellow and work on my own MA research in a Cambridge college and attend any lecture or seminar I liked, while being invited to lunch and formal hall or Fellows dinners by admissions tutors from nearly all the Colleges to learn about what they wanted and what we, as Sixth Form teachers, needed from them. (I suppose perhaps something could be read into the fact that a small number didn't invite me?!)

The tutors were keen that they should be approachable and were available on the end of a phone to discuss any possible candidate from our comprehensive. I was to spread the word in my areas/LEA.

As far as I understand, Cambridge put more money and research into this, earlier, but I doubt there is anything to choose these days. If you scrutinise the Sutton Trust figures, you can see which kinds of schools have successes at both Oxford and Cambridge as number of entries and success rates are recorded - by name for the most successful schools! (though not categorised by subject).

As has been said earlier, Oxford's pooling system is quicker and kinder. The Cambridge system is pretty agonising and could do with speeding up at least, but my understanding was that its original purpose was that the system should be as transparent as possible.

The point was also raised earlier that interviewing a high number of candidates might raise false hopes, and a stricter culling might be kinder in the long run. I was told informally the reason is that as many applicants as possible at least feel they have been properly considered and have had an opportunity to show what they can do, outside the exam system. I don't know if that is officially true.

And though sometimes young students can feel small and underconfident, it is largely to do with some of these stories they have heard and how they feel about themselves, though I think it is worth checking the entry stats for colleges and subjects, and success rate for state or maintained, male or female (available on the Cambridge Website, though not on Oxford's) in giving you a little help in choosing a College.

I've really had some incredibly helpful advice from MN on this and it is truly appreciated.
He wants to do Physics and from my research (on MN) I have encouraged him to extend his knowledge on the subject. In fact he can bore for England on it.
He has "In our time" on podcasts and is working his way very happily through a reading list including Richard Feynman and John Gribben that I made from yet another MN thread.
Bookmarking this for future reference.
Thanks all.

All the colleges actively try to recruit deserving state-sector applicants these days. But if your DS thinks a "posh" college might not be right for him culturally, why not apply for on of the newer colleges like Robinson, Fitzwilliam or Churchill? Generally speaking they have better facilities like central heating in the bedrooms and all three are closer than most to the Cavendish Laboratory.