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.

In that way, something has already come out of the application.

DD met with a friend who has just started at Edinburgh and was back for the weekend. Apparently, a conversation along the lines of, "So which college rejected you?" is quite common. The friend loves Edinburg and has a studio in a brand new student residence with a self-catering. DD likes the sound of that much more than living in a freezing cold centuries old building and having college food.

Cambridge Uni - Does anyone know if there is a date by which you will have heard if you are successful in getting an interview? 2 of DDs friends have been offered interviews and she has been told that any interview offers go out by a certain date.

I feel that I am struggling slightly with what I want for my daughter. Though it is, of course, about what she wants. The offers coming in from a couple of universities on her list - and now an interview date- make it all seem oddly real.

Marianne, do you mean you'll be disappointed if she doesn't get into Cambridge? I know I will be - but I'm also sure that by February I'll be happily looking forward to Bristol or Leeds. And I'm certainly not letting on to dd that I care much!

Think the Oxford applications went up this year and Cambridge slightly down, as people opt for the safety of an Oxford offer over the gamble of a Cambridge one! Heard about another old friend's dd last night, who has just started at Durham after failing to get her STEP grade for her Cambridge maths offer, despite a plethora of A*s in her A levels.

(I am already fretting about ds in y9. He's very good at maths. Suppose he wants to do it as a degree? Try for Cambridge and miss out at the final hurdle? Go to Oxford, despite its inferiority? I'm irritating myself with my ridiculousness.)

I think that the two most highly ranked universities on my daughter's list both have some drawbacks/potential pitfalls - as well as both offering really excellent opportunities. The two are Cambridge and Kings, London. They'd be very different environments in which to live. One's the smallest town on my daughter's list, the other's the biggest city.

It would perhaps be easier - on one level - if I thought, I know this one is the one that I really, really want for her. (Fortunately there's a level on which it's really not my problem, but while everything is being worked out I do feel a bit unsettled.

Atiaofthejulii my DS also missed his Cambridge offer for maths because of STEP. It's really tough to get the grades, and it was so hard to find out in August that he wasn't going after having the offer since January.
I wouldn't recommend trying for Cambridge maths after this experience....

My DS also missed his Cambridge maths offer because of STEP. His college made 52 offers in Maths and only 13 got through. All of those 52 will have got A* in their A levels but missed the STEP.

That strikes me as a bit mean, setting most of them up to fail. It really puzzles me why they would do that.

Obviously I know nothing about Oxford or Cambridge, but i'm also wondering why the terms are so short compared to other universities. Wouldn't it lessen the pressure a bit to have longer terms? Is it an historical anomaly or has it been designed that way for a good reason?

Cambridge Maths admissions certainly seems harsh.

Secretsquirrels - do you know to what extent the STEP pass mark is controlled by Cambridge admissions? ie if they want 200 maths freshers, they just put the pass mark at the level of the 200th student?

There are 3 STEP Maths papers and it is not just Cambridge which requires them: Warwick, Bath, Imperial, ... all include STEP in their offers. (Although alternative offers can be made excluding STEP for those who take MAT or AEA.)

Each paper is graded S, 1, 2, 3 or Fail, with S being the highest. Those holding Cambridge Maths offers will typically be required to get specific grades in 2 papers. The offers however vary between students and colleges.

Given the above, it is evident that the grade boundaries on the three papers are not being custom fitted for Cambridge admissions: this would be ridiculously complicated, and completely inappropriate, given that the tests are being used by other universities too. There is some crude adjustment of grade boundaries, to ensure that the standards for getting S, 1, 2 and 3 are comparable year on year. But overall maths academics are pretty skilled at setting maths papers which produce the marks distribution that they desire so rather little adjustment is usually needed.

Cambridge Maths admissions feels harsh because for many of these students this is their first experience of rejection. But there are good arguments for using STEP for selection. Maths and Further Maths are too easy these days to distinguish between Maths candidates - the top 10 or 15 universities are getting A* candidates. STEP is pretty accurate at identifying the top mathematicians. STEP is taken later than MAT which has the disadvantage that the decision is made later but the huge advantage that the students are more mature and the papers cover all of A2. In my experience students from poorer schools do better on STEP than MAT, as students from better schools are often running ahead in the Autumn of year 13.

I think it is sad that British society is so obsessed with Oxbridge: a student holding Maths offers from Cambridge and another top university should be open to the fact that they could end up at either place and both will be great opportunities. And in reality this competition is just the beginning for most of these students: whether they wish to carry on in academia or not, they will be competing against many other highly-qualified candidates for top positions. They won't always get their first choice - that's life.

uilen I completely agree. DS was thrilled with his insurance place and is loving every minute there, I believe he is in the right place for him.
He was borderline on his STEP paper grades which meant he comfortably got the grade required for his insurance at Warwick. He is in good company there as it seems to be the insurance choice of many Cambridge Maths candidates.

The selection process for Maths at Cambridge uses A levels only as a starting point. The real selection is done by the STEP papers.

In my experience students from poorer schools do better on STEP than MAT, as students from better schools are often running ahead in the Autumn of year 13 This is very interesting and I have not heard this said before. DS certainly went to a poorer school and had no support from them in STEP whereas private and selective schools devote a lot of teaching time to STEP candidates. It occurred to me at the time that DS would have been spared a lot of stress if he had applied to Oxford and done the MAT, so perhaps I am wrong.

They won't always get their first choice - that's life.

True, but 52 offers for 13 places seems a bit extreme to me, especially when they get the A level grades. Wouldn't it be better if the STEP or other maths aptitude tests came earlier, as happens with the other tests?

I don't agree that people are obsessed with Oxford and Cambridge (in fact some aspects of these universities seem a bit odd to me...such as the short intense terms) and most normal parents are just happy if their child is happy. There is nothing wrong with being interested in how it all works though.

UK society seems to put Oxford and Cambridge on a pedestal, as if these universities are far superior to the rest. Yet neither teaching nor research are necessarily better at Oxbridge.

In UK research assessments, Oxbridge does not automatically come top in every subjects (although for most subjects they are usually in the top 5). Since they are guaranteed a stream of very good students the teaching is not reviewed and improved as often as it is at other universities who have to compete for their students. E.g. on another thread somebody said that something was mentioned in 3 lines of a 1st year course that was covered in 3 pages of a Warwick 2nd year course: this is often down to poor teaching rather than high expectations of students. I know Cambridge academics who deliberately teach their courses badly so students won't do their questions in the exams - this would absolutely not be tolerated elsewhere.

I gave the reasons for doing STEP in the sixth term above: testing A2 material gives a far better measure than testing AS in the fourth term. And whenever STEP is raised and people talk about the tuition given in some schools maths academics point out that tuition just doesn't help because the questions change every year. Why on earth would Cambridge want to set papers that could be tutored for? If this were the case, and students from low achieving schools consistently did worse, they would lower the STEP offers for these students but they don't because it isn't necessary.

The fact that Oxford and Cambridge are so oversubscribed means that they can select their students, whereas other universities recruit. It means that, for the students that get there, everyone is very bright, which helps to create a different learning atmosphere.

Of course everyone is going to interested in how the students are selected!

The private schools are geared up to understanding exactly how the system works, so at to maximise the chance getting some of their students in to some subjects at some colleges. The universities, by contrast, are trying to pick the brightest students, regardless of which schools they have been to before.

It would be easier if Oxford and Cambridge followed the same system as the other universities. Way less confusing as well. Although I have read some news reports that suggest that other universities may follow Ox / Cam by introducing aptitude tests. Sigh.

I understand your point about STEP being more useful if they have done the A2 stuff, but it must be possible to devise a test that comes before they choose their Firm and Insurance options. The trouble with loads of people missing a Firm choice is that it really messes up other things eg. finding accommodation at the Insurance choice.

When dd2 was encouraged by school to apply for Oxford this year one of my family actually said to me that 'it wasn't for the likes of our children', so I can see your point about pedestals. However, I really haven't met anyone who thinks that these two universities are the be all and end all. If anything, I hear a lot of reverse snobbery instead.

uilen it is quite true that for most subjects there is somewhere other than Oxford or Cambridge that is ranked top for that discipline.

Other universities aren't necessarily recruiting. Many subjects are massively oversubscribed at several of the top universities. Even for relatively under-subscribed subjects such as Maths, Imperial, Warwick etc are certainly selective. But they have to work much harder and earn/maintain their reputation than Oxbridge. Yes, the students at Oxbridge are "very bright" but the difference between them and the students at other top universities is often less than people think. However, Oxbridge has additional funding for one-on-one or one-on-two tutorials which places such as Imperial just don't have. That means that after 3 years the gap has widened, mostly because the Oxbridge students have been offered more effective tuition. The tutorials make up for the sometimes poor lecturing but vary considerably between colleges.

More and more universities are using aptitude tests such as STEP for Maths because the A level papers are too easy. Of course this will change if the proposed changes to A level Maths go ahead, but the latter are highly controversial as they are likely to significantly reduce the pass rate.

My DD's top application is for Imperial for physics. The entry grade offer will be higher than Oxford, and they are way better rowers, which obviously matters to her at this point! She is deadly serious too about her Oxford application.

It is unlikely but were she offered places at both, which she would put as her firm choice I don't actually know

The recruiting we have seen such as her £2000 per annum sweetener from Newcastle, and her friend's unconditional offer from Birmingham as long as she firms them has been an eye opener.

My DH used to be lecturer, and he is all for aptitude tests, says that A levels aren't enough of a selection process.

Littleham please don't be put off by family members saying that it isn't for the likes of our children. It is! If your DD2 has been encouraged to apply, then she must be right up there with the brightest in her subject. Good on her for having a go.

I have just found out that some of the colleges have "outreach" officers, whose job it is to ensure that the student intake is more "diverse". If your DD gets an interview, it wouldn't hurt to ring such a person and ask for tips on how to prepare. Anything that can make your DD feel more relaxed and comfortable would help. Has your DD already visited for a subject open day?

The trouble with loads of people missing a Firm choice is that it really messes up other things eg. finding accommodation at the Insurance choice.

Yes, this is definitely a worry.

And I'm not really obsessed, I said myself I was being ridiculous Anyway, looked at the 2008 RAE and decided he'd better go to Imperial, lol. Maybe I'll change my mind when the REF comes out next year ...

The Oxford MAT is pretty easy (i.e. I can do it) and STEP seems really hard (I don't think I could do six questions on paper 2, and would have no chance on 3) - given the relatively small numbers of students doing STEP, it does seem like there might be room for a test in the spring that would give you results sooner. Or even send back the STEP results before the A level results.

Re short, intense terms - I could be wrong here, but I suspect it all comes out in the wash. Other universities have longer terms in the autumn and spring (12-13 weeks?), but very short terms in the summer with almost no teaching, just a few revision sessions and then exams - a lot of students start their long vac before the end of May these days. Some have moved over to the US semester model with effectively only two longer terms. Oxford and Cambridge stick to having three terms of equal length and end of term is about the third week of June.

On "short, intensive terms", other universities with ten-week terms often have a "reading week" where there are no lessons.

And at Oxford, I have the impression that many of the students seem to arrive back during "Week zero" and don't leave until during "week 9". So the difference is perhaps only a week.

Interesting conversation with daughter yesterday evening. Timing of interview means she will need to stay overnight and miss afternoon of school on the day before. She's saying she now has some regrets re having applied and says the travel, needing to do some reading before etc is just one more thing to be fitted in.

Told her that regardless of how she feels about the application, it will be an experience/interesting/chance to nose round etc and that we will help deal with general pressure by cooking delicious meals.