A-Level Results: Student ... Gets Seven A*s And REJECTED From Oxford University

[MariscallRoad]

here
Can somebody explain?

I understand the boy was was rejected by Oxford admissions tutors; after the rejection the he went on to get 7 A*s in A Levels. But is not clear to me - and i d like to know - whether the rejection was after an interview. ... and whether he attended a state school.

State school, at least until GCSE.

Friend of mine was rejected by Cambridge despite top predictions (top result in the country at 16 in one exam) because they didn't think she was really committed to the course. She was outraged, got stellar grades, applied again, got in to do the same course - and hated it.

If you want to get into Oxford, being a straight A student is not enough. They want individual, unusual thinkers as well.

He'd have received a standard rejection (rather than "a vague message") from Oxford (via UCAS) if he'd been rejected without interview, so I surmise that the College admissions tutors must have interviewed him and decided that he wasn't what they were looking for. I wouldn't worry about him - Stanford is a fabulous university.

Oh for goodness sake, it happens every single year. Some bright kid gets a gazillion A*s and doesn't get in to Oxford or Cambridge. He wasn't what they were looking for, end of. I don't think it will hold any of them back in life, do you, really?

I kind of like hearing stories like this. Exams are not the be-all and end-all. It is good that places like Oxford take students based on more than just their GCSE or A level performance.

If he really wanted to go to Oxford he could reapply and would probably get in, but he is happy enough with Stanford so fair enough.

If he conveyed in any way at interview that he would rather go to Stanford then I'm not that surprised that he didn't get an offer, Oxford have plenty of candidates to choose from who want to be nowhere else in the world.

It's not just about grades.

Sometimes they/all of us make mistakes by focusing too much on grades meaning smart/engaged/original. I doubt anyone at Oxford is going oh damn, we rejected a kid who got 7 A*s.

Stanford is indeed excellent, he'll be fine.

"On what planet do you turn someone down with seven As," he added.*

He wasn't turned down with 7As! He was turned down when he applied, way before he did the exams. God, some media people are so dim

What are they looking for though? How do they judge children? Always seems very much like old boys' club to me.

not old boys club at all
plenty of academic but very dull kids about!

News flash!!! The Oxbridge admissions procedure is fallible. Sometimes better students don't get in while some mediocre students do. It's not that big a deal. If they're true academics they'll end up there at postgrad level. If not, other Russell Groups will do just as well.

Like all interview based systems, it comes down to the judgement of an individual by another individual. It is inevitably subjective.

I hate the idea that if some really smart kid doesn't get on, it's because they're not clever enough or if someone has clearly been over promoted, it's because they've got that little undefinable "extra". It's because someone somewhere misjudged. Move on.

Missed he was going to Stanford. Lucky him. Excellence and sunshine. Good call

Oxbridge is overhyped in my opinion. Lots of excellence in other places.

But you don't just apply to Oxford or Cambridge you apply to a college. Every college has strengths of weaknesses and are looking for people who will contribute to college life. Some colleges a it's rowing, others music and so on. Bad choice of college can lead to a rejection. Not every college has places for every course, so you may have to apply to a college that is not a natural fit due to places. Often colleges only have one or two places for a course.

Oh, not another one of these.

'Can anyone explain'.

Yes, I can: it's not a great surprising mystery.

Oxford has one of the most-scrutinized and most time-consuming admissions processes in the country. I bet they make mistakes from time to time, but it's also quite possible to get excellent results and not be the sort of student they want.

To me, 7A* grades suggests an excellent student who will do extremely well in the US system, where you specialize later. It does not guarantee a student who is very deeply brilliant at their chosen subject, does it? Which is the requirement.

Latin and Greek are, no doubt, lovely A Levels to get (and mariscal, if he's at a State school doing that, it is likely a rather good one, and I bet you his Greek class is pretty small - not doing down his achievement, just it's relevant to you asking about State Schools). But they don't prove someone will be an excellent Chemist, and that's what Oxford was looking for.

Sorry to sound grouchy but I really hate these stories, they put people with perfectly decent grades off applying and suggest there's something shady going on, when there's never any evidence.

I think the previous posters pretty much have it covered.

There is more to a person than their grades. The tutors have their pick of the best students in the country. They get to pick the most interesting students, the ones they think will get most from the experience, contribute most, etc etc.

I don't think they take stuff like rowing and music that much into consideration, though - I don't think they have for decades. Not to the extent of picking someone less good over someone more good. I think it's something they take into account when looking at two equally good people and trying to find anything at all to help them decide.

He went to the Royal Belfast Academical Institution and according to this article plays no sport and doesn't sound as though he does much apart from academic study. That's fair enough, but you can see why someone who doesn't have a rounded cross-section of interests might not appeal to an admissions tutor trying to decide between a large number of very academically gifted applicants.

He sounds quite boring.

I don't think he sounds boring.

I think his grades are brilliant and he should be very proud.

I just also think he's playing it up for his 5 minutes, and the papers are playing it up as they always do, and it's contributing to the myth that getting into Oxbridge is governed by complex and arcane rules, so you shouldn't try unless you think you already know them.

Stupid number of A levels. No time for life or anything else. Good call, Oxford.

I think it's really unhelpful that papers run these stories, it puts off so many students who would be great from applying.

You CAN still get in with less than perfect grades, and doing extra Alevels is not and never has been a requirement. So if they are taking students who didn't get straight A/As that means there will always be straight A students they decide not to take for whatever reason. It doesn't mean they aren't clever students, just that they weren't what admissions were looking for.

The main requirement, from everyone I know who has been - is to be really dedicated to your subject, to love it and take your study further in your own time in your own way.

I got into Oxford with grades that, while decent, weren't nearly as good as his

I also did poorly in their own aptitude tests and didnt understand one of the main big words in the poem I was supposed to discussing with the tutors at the interview, I had to ask them what it meant! (And in hindsight it wasn't that big a word!). However the same tutor later told me that lots of interviewees bluffed their way through things they didn't understand and they preferred people to just be honest.

I was passionate about my subject to the point of obsession, and had some quirky extra curricular bits going on too. It's a personality fit as much as anything

Ps then the Oxford system wrung out of me every bit of passion and confidence I had for my subject, and I have abandoned it completely since graduating, ah but there you go!

LRD dont draw conclusions so fast:

I don?t think that admissions tutors underestimate potential. They have aptitude tests and their interviews are quite good - I know something about that.
Had the guy been interviewed? that was my querry. I agree with some posters who say that straight A levels are everything.

I do not believe the news would put off students from applying to Oxford, to the contrary, if anything, it does indicate that the large number of A levels might not be the only factor that is considered.