Oxbridge Entry 2015

[Roisin]

Do we have a thread already?
ds1 has decided to definitely apply to Oxford to do Biochemistry. He will probably apply to St John's.

Mrs Bartlett further up the thread I think you were worrying about Durham doing a similar thing with their offers to Exeter. I know this is only my first time, but I don't believe they will. I sat in on the English talk at Durham - my only one of the 5- and it could not have been clearer that if you are lucky enough to get an offer, it will be A AA, with the A in any subject. I even put my hand up to ask if it mattered if you got two As in humanities and a B in something unrelated, say a science. Answer was - it absolutely must be AAA. Nothing else will do and nothing more is required. I thought this was commendable at least for being pretty clear!

Molio, surely the highly technical term you used with respect to Exeter should really have been preceded by complete and utter ? :)

Thank you Figment, that has put my mind at ease. Still, I wish Durham didn't take so long to get their offers out!

Yes sorry boys3, quite right :)

Agree about Durham. Quite apart from the fact that Durham has this whole sneaky 'substitute statement' thing going on, it got its fingers massively badly burned when Cambridge introduced A offers, and attempted to pre-empt damage for itself the following year by asking for the A in the main subject being applied for. That turned out to be a spectacular fail, so it backed down and subsequently only asked for A in an unspecified subject. Or, as the 'official' line went: 'We've had to re-think our A policy across the whole university as last year it didn't work out so well'.

That's first hand daproxen, in case of doubt :)

But on past form, I don't think it will risk the Exeter strategy which I suspect will be mega short lived.

MrsGhoulofGhostbourne Again, 'what is it like to study subject X at institution Y?' is very different to a very specific question about admissions proceedure for a specific subject at Oxford. And I agree with you that for the former sort of question 'crowd-sourcing' experiences is an extremely good idea. Especially if subject X at institution Y is trying to recruit as many students as possible. Unlike Oxford and Cambridge who are trying to select the best students, and who (in the subjects that I'm familiar with at least) make available detailed information about how they do that.

And a general comment about hearing things from multiple sources. Just because lots of people believe that something is true, doesn't mean that it is actually true. I spend a lot of time talking to sixth formers and their parents. A lot of them are under the impression that personal statements and/or extra curricular activities play a crucial role in physics admissions. They don't. At least not at any of the dozen or so institutions where my research collaborators and I have first-hand experience of admissions. Academics typically don't just have information on what happens in their own subject at their own institution, but also what happens in their subject at a range of institutions, and in a range of subjects at their own institution.

dapoxen there are few people who have a monopoly of virtue, or knowledge. I think you may need to accept that others have experience and knowledge at least equal to your own even if they aren't peacocks about it. These threads are supposed to be collaborative, not competitive, or it all gets quite silly.

I'm afraid I still find the comments about 'non-expert parents' incredibly patronizing and a reflection on you, not the parents. Can we get back to the thread please/ move on?

Molio A particular parent will of course be an expert in various things. However unless they're an academic in physics (or a related subject), they're unlikely to be an expert in physics admissions. Which was the context of that comment.

Of course anyone can claim to be anything on the internet, but without some information about someone's background/expertise it's impossible to judge the veracity of their statements.

I've tried to be careful not to make concrete statements outside of my limited area of expertise. In fact if you look at my posting history I usually only de-lurk to post links to information which answers questions or corrects mis-information. And only when I'm confident that that information is correct.

My last couple of posts have been borne of two things
i) A desire to explain where I'm coming from. As I've repeatedly said there are many situations where sharing personal experiences is useful. But that's not always the best way to get reliable answers to specific questions. In particular in the current rapidly changing admissions climate.
ii) Frustration. From several months of watching other academics who've tried to provide helpful information or insight being sometimes ignored and occasionally belittled or insulted (I can provide links if you wish!)

If people really don't want to be pointed in the direction of specific relevant information, then in future I won't do it.

I think most of us are able to google/research/ read the official line off web sites.
What is so different about MN is that we can augment that information with personal experience. There may be a fear, for example, that applying for 2 subjects could imply that a student is not AS committed to pure physics and therefore less likely to get a place, no matter what the party line is. So hearing personal experiences or anecdotes can be very helpful.
Links to appropriate pages are helpful too :)

ALL of it is useful. Certainly I think so, anyway. (DS is 16, we have a lot of thinking to do over the next year.)

Yes I completely agree that some info meted out here can be woefully inaccurate and is better corrected but sometimes those who declare their hand as admissions tutors can be guilty of generalising from a particular department, discipline or uni, which can occasionally mislead. Very occasionally some get pompous too :) And of course a lot of the time their advice is exceptionally useful.

But I disagree that it's academics and only academics who have their finger on the pulse. A great many other groups are experts too - all sorts of people behind the scenes in uni admissions for instance, the post grad students who share in interviewing and making decisions, various think tanks and policy making bodies, seasoned HTs and heads of sixth at the best schools etc etc. Often some of these people will know exactly what's happening in a particular department and uni as well as having a broad overview of the changing scene nationally. I don't think it's reasonable to expect people to justify what they know and I personally wouldn't necessarily accept any info as valuable, simply by dint of a poster claiming to be any particular thing. It's what they say, not who they say they are.

I also find the sharing of recent purely parental experience helpful, as others have said. I myself have learned a lot.

'non-expert parents' incredibly patronizing
I agree!
Like many on here, I know academics in various subjects in various institutions including Oxbridge, but I don't consider them the sole source of info, since no-one can know everything.
And regarding personal statements, I think you find it is more likely to be teachers, and parents getting info from those teachers that lead to that misconception, not 'non-expert' parents inventing it for themselves - they tend to be led by school advice.
But in many situations I have been in (including those dark days of school admissions), I have posted on MN and been stunned by the speedy and immensely helpful responses from people who have been through something similar, and can offer an insight into what they did, or didn't, do, and the consequences.
Often the 'official source has an agenda.
There are sadly many academic institutions that are suddenly being forced blinking into the bright lights of a world where people can share information, and many of them really don't like the assault on their stranglehold control.

Can I ask those of you who have received early offers whether these come directly and out of the blue, or are preceeded by an early acknowledgement?

DD has received two acknowledgements that say they are considering her information. One of the universities even mentioned 31st March as the date by which it had to give her a decision. She has high predicted grades for the exams next May - quite a bit higher than the grades that are stated on the websites as required - but she doesn't have any GCSEs or AS levels.

Her very early offer from Royal Holloway came less than a week after the application & before the acknowledgement.

York's offer came afterwards, about three weeks after applying. Still waiting for the other offer / rejectons, but all acknowledged receipt within the first week by e mail.

That suggests an acknowledgement comes after the department has considered whether or not to give an early offer?

DS has only had one offer (York) which came two weeks after their acknowledgement but three weeks after the ucas form was processed. But some of his friends had offers flying back almost instantly. Those are overwhelmingly the very highest performers in his school year though, so not a surprise.

I expect they happened at the same time, but went through different administrative systems & the RH department person was extremely quick off the mark loading the offer!

I think I'm right in saying that the department loads the offer directly onto track - but please correct me if I'm talking rubbish.

RandomFriend dd has had 2 offers so far. York's offer came the day after her UCAS form was submitted and before she received an acknowledgement! Exeter's offer was a couple of weeks after the acknowledgement.

DS was applying last year and all his offers came in within days apart from Cambridge which came after Christmas and Durham which came mid December. Many other Durham applicants did not hear until April though.
Incidentally he added Durham and his other choices a week after the Oxbridge deadline.

Thank you everyone who shared details.

One of DD's friends at a school nearby that does IGCSEs has received five offers already (I don't know which course or which universities); and DNiece received two offers within 24 hours of submitting her application last week.

It would really be a boost to DD to get an early offer - expecially as everyone she knows is receiving them - but perhaps that is not to be.

I think I'm getting more nervous than dd about this flipping HAT test on Wednesday. She seems fine, but I don't like the idea of her sitting all by herself to do a two hour exam which she may well struggle to complete. She has only just arrived home & has to squeeze preparation in this weekend.

I think I'm right in saying that the department loads the offer directly onto track - but please correct me if I'm talking rubbish.

I can only speak for the university where I worked, Littleham, and not everyone will do things in the same way, but there the offer would have come from admissions staff, not the department.

There were a number of possible models for making decisions and it was up to staff on each degree programme to decide how to proceed. I don't know how many programmes adopted each of the following, but I do know that there was some pressure exerted to go for 1 in the hope of speeding the whole process up, especially for overseas students.

1. Department told admissions what they were looking for and admissions staff did all the rejecting and offering, with just a few non-standard applications going to the department.

1. As above, but admissions only rejected the obvious cases, all decisions to offer came from department.

1. Admissions staff referred all applications to department with a recommendation on whether applicant was eligible for an offer or not. Department staff then made a judgement on each application and passed them back to Admissions.

Regardless of who was assessing the applications, admissions staff had a lot to do in assessing whether an applicant was a Home/EU student or overseas, checking qualifications and English language competence (not always easy with those who have studied overseas), checking out specific issues to do with visas/disability/criminal records, and so on.

The reason all offers came from admissions staff, not academics or other admin staff, was because once the offer is made, it's legally binding. There had been cases in the distant past of academics offering unconditional places to people who didn't meet the minimum academic standards, or of making offers to people who didn't stand a chance of getting a visa. All very messy.

Nothing is simple is it AllMimsy?

So if the admissions staff load all the offers onto track, why do some offers beat acknowledgements (which also come from admissions)? Is it just two different in-trays?

As much as possible is automated, although obviously emails are written carefully so they don't look too impersonal. I would suspect that the admissions officer for the programme hits the button to send out an acknowledgement email to everybody who's appplied once s/he's got agreement on the text/timings from an academic who's been snowed under at the start of the academic year. Meanwhile, the early applications have already been processed. Does that make sense?

As much as possible is automated, although obviously emails are written carefully so they don't look too impersonal. I would suspect that the admissions officer for the programme hits the button to send out an acknowledgement email to everybody who's appplied once s/he's got agreement on the text/timings from an academic who's been snowed under at the start of the academic year. Meanwhile, the early applications have already been processed. Does that make sense?

Perfect sense thanks.

I would hate to be the person hitting the button to send stuff out. It is the kind of thing that can go wrong in an embarrassing way.