Oxford -- PPE or Economics with Management

[shockthemonkey]

This is the question one of my charges is struggling with.

We all know how hard PPE at Oxford is -- but its acceptance rate at 15% appears better than for Economics and Management at the same uni, with just 7% of applicants accepted.

Whilst he's looking closely at course content, and discovering more about the other four choices he'd be going for in either scenario (PPE or Econ with Mgt), does anyone have any thoughts about the programme choice?

I have no reservations about his academic level nor his commitment to doing what it takes to give him the very best chances. I just know, though, that he'll ask me whether one is "easier" to get in for than the other.

Before looking at the acceptance rates, I would always have said PPE is harder. Even looking at the 15% vs 7% I still think this may be the case -- Econ and Mgt may be attracting more "borderline" candidates than PPE because I cannot imagine schools in the UK encouraging anyone other than their very brightest to go for PPE.

Does anyone have any experiences to share? Thanks!

Number of interviews: the official guidance for PPE and EM (and probably most other subjects, including history), which I believe virtually all colleges follow, is that all candidates should have at least two interviews and each interview should have at least two people present (though one may just be a notetaker). Different colleges may implement that slightly differently. At my college PPE candidates get one interview with a politics tutor and a philosophy tutor, and also one with a (different) politics tutor and an economics tutor. Each tutor gives a separate mark, but the central data system only allows us to record three marks, so we do some averaging.

Place decisions are made jointly on the basis of all information available and do not follow any rigid formula. Allocation to interviews at second colleges is done centrally these days and does follow a formula. The TSA is very important.

I think three totally independent interviews at one college would be rare.

Of my French bac UCAS candidates this year, all applied to HE in France (APB, which is the UCAS equivalent, plus independent options like Ipesup or Dauphine) and several applied to Switzerland and/or Spain and/or Canada and/or the US as well. They have a pretty wide view of HE and are often only really interested in a couple of courses/universities in the UK but since it doesn't cost anymore to fill up the UCAS form with 5 options, they do so - relying sometimes on hearsay and friends' recommendations because they haven't the time or need to "fully research" so many courses in so many countries.

I wonder whether Warwick isn't a victim of its own marketing and gets lots of French (and other EU?) applicants who aren't really interested?

Thanks so much regular. Very useful info.

If I can be so nosy, and if you are allowed to say... what mark are you looking for in the TSA?

TSA - there is an advised (not strict) cut-off for getting invited to interview. It varies each year as it is calculated to give us the right number of interviewees per place. For the second college interviews there is a formula that is a weighted average of different measures, not just the TSA. The formula is based on statistical analysis of admitted students degree results.

Interesting, irregular. It is indeed a numbers game rather than a grade boundary game (though perfectly understandable that parents and candidates frame it in grade boundary terms since this is all the info they have).

Bonsoir, or they may be victims of their own prejudice.

We come across plenty of people in London who work in the Financial sector. And a couple, including a tenant who had recently graduated from UCL and was working for a good hedge fund, were kind enough to take time out to talk DS through the choices. A regular theme, including from an experienced city recruiter, was that the City like Warwick graduates. And (proof in the pudding?) several seemed delighted that their DC had offers.

Anecdote yes, but talking to people, plus reviwing course content and looking at who taught there, was the way DS made his decision.

My impression is that Warwick are working hard to build an international reputation, which may be why they are relatively generous to EU applicants. For a University that is not yet 50 years old they have done spectacularly well.

So the French may not be interested, but maybe they should be.

(And oddly my impression, from people's responses to my son going there, is that LSE enjoys a higher reputation overseas than it does in the UK. Certainly from Asians, but also Spanish and others.)

LSE's reputation in France is excellent. Perhaps because of the magic word "School" (as in Grande Ecole) rather than University (université is generally despised in France unless for Law/Medicine/Dentistry)? And of course LSE was the original globalised university that has alumni and networks all over the world, carrying the flame.

A bit of advice I had when I was applying for University (albeit twenty years ago) was always choose the course over the institution. So, don't do History so you can get into Oxford, do the course you are really interested in at another very good university.

Which may explain the relative success rates amongst French students for Warwick and LSE.

LSE really does not have to take any action to encourage a more international campus. Its problem is attracting candidates from the UK, particuarly from outside the M25 and from the state sector.

This is different from my day. Yes plenty of international students, but also plenty of northern blokes who had calculated they could see their favourite football team more often in London than anywhere but home. Oxbridge reject private school kids went to Durham or Bristol. LSE was full of bright state school kids. If you look at the private/state stats now, none of the big name London Universities do well. Almost certainly because they do not get enough qualified applications than a preference for privately educated pupils. It would be very normal for a British student to select Warwick over LSE.

Well, Warwick is very good for Economics, and so is LSE. It wouldn't be odd to select Warwick.

Bonsoir's right about LSE's reputation - I think it's a positive thing, as it reflects the fact they're very used to teaching people who've been educated in a wide range of styles. I would imagine if you're coming from overseas, it'd be reassuring to know that you'd be one of many students who might be finding things extra strange, rather than being a very small minority.

Anyway, I was chatting about this thread, and I don't think LSE do anything at all at random. It does sound as if the Maths side of their Economics course is a bit different from Warwick's (and maybe Oxford's?), so perhaps that is part of the issue - just that the course content means the admissions people aren't looking for the same things as admissions people elsewhere?

Jeanne - the query I have about LSE arises from the fact that I know a great deal of really excellent French bac candidates who have applied there, and also some less starry candidates. I know LSE attaches a great deal of importance to the PS (and, again, experience shows that LSE do reject on the basis of less than stellar PSs whereas eg UCL doesn't). However, I am perplexed at LSE quite often making offers to "borderline" candidates who then miss their offer while not offering to really rather desirable candidates (who would easily have made LSE's standard French bac offer). No other university I can identify does this.

YY, I follow that. All I am saying is, I think LSE has a different idea of what they want from what you identify as being extra good. And once they've identified a candidate they want, maybe it matters less about getting the grade? There are other subjects in which I know other universities do this, so I don't think it's just an LSE thing, though I can understand it must be frustrating if you can't pin down what it is that makes those candidates appealing over and above their exam results.

I'm fairly sure it isn't random, is all.

Jeanne,
I agree. LSE are introducing, or have introduced, two new degrees. A four year PPE course, and a new Finance degree. The former will suit bright applicants who posssibly don't have the very hiigh levels of maths currently demanded. The second might appeal to those whose interest in Economics is largely as a stepping stone to a career in International banking, Presumably the process may appear less random is candidates essentially match themselves to the degree that suits them best.

halvedfees did your DS win the competition after he was rejected or before?

If your DS is considering applying again, how about taking A-level maths in November? Given that he has a 5 in HL maths, it is highly likely that he would get at least an A at A-level.

I have no idea how this would be looked at by the admissions team, but it seems a pity that an IB-43 student that dropped the points in HL maths should be considered less favourably than an student obtaining A,A,A at A-level.

RandomFriend DS won the competition well before even making his application - it featured in his PS.

He may apply again, (if he decides not to go to Warwick), but has been advised against taking A-level maths since the mixing of IB with A-levels is apparently frowned upon; I'm not so sure about this, but anyway he would have to be very committed to making a good job of it. I suspect he'd prefer to get going at Warwick or re-apply for another course elsewhere for which a 5 in HL maths would not be an issue. I don't know if we can give him much more advice; he'll just have to make his mind up and commit to whatever he decides.

Until the admissions teams acknowledge that IB-43 = 676 UCAS points while AAA = 580, then IB students will continue to be penalised.

Needmoresleep Applicants to LSE for PPE must have maths A-level A*/IB HL 7....

halvedfees - it may interest you to know that the PPE entrance requirement for holders of the French bac at Durham is for 16/20 overall and 14/20 in Maths. Most of the better universities equate 15/20 in Maths with A at A-level and 16 or 17/20 with A*.

Thanks, Bonsoir - more grist to the mill!

Is he still waiting for Durham to get back to him post A-level results or is his near miss a definite no?

He has to wait until after the A-level results...The official advice is not to expect a place as demand for places is particularly high this year.

I agree with Bonsoir about many French students and parents being slightly obsessed by LSE to the exclusion of all else. My French DH's French godson applied although it was somewhat of a long shot for him and his other 4 choices were strangely random. In the end he will be going to Oxford Brookes in the Autumn without even visiting. His mother can only talk about LSE and apparently won't be visiting him at Oxford Brookes. LSE has a strange hold on the French imagination.

Halved re your post below - please take this as an apology for my reply.I asked Ds yesterday and with the slight change of "much less of a clue" for haven't a clue" he agrees with you. Sorry .
Anyway good luck with his decisions and waiting for Durham.

"By predictable I mean that the school can look at the candidate's application and give a good guess at their chances of getting in - they know better what the History, Classics etc depts are looking for in a candidate.

For PPE/E&M they haven't a clue "

Halved, the LSE PPE course will be more accessible to bright students who are not able to offer 4 A levels including FM. Important at a time when funding cuts mean fewer state schools may allow their pupils to take a fourth subject. At the moment the only option for these student is to self study an AS FM. DS has been surprised at how many of his peers have done this, as it cannot be an easy option. Presumably the LSE are concerned that other equally able candidates don't do this and so don't apply.

A bright student, who is capable of getting a good grade in FM, whether they take it or not, should not find a requirement for an A in single maths a significant hurdle. Its back to the earlier discussion. Some courses require a strong aptitude for maths. Others either offer less empirical courses or offer a wider range of options. Entry requirements are one thing. It is really important for your DS to read the course content carefully to ensure it appeals. Honestly if he thinks A in maths is a big ask, he is better off avoiding those courses which ask for it, regardless of how IB HL is translated.

It's perhaps also worth noting (your other thread) that courses with a strong international reputation tend to attract international/EU students, and your observation about there bing a lot of international students is perhaps evidence of what has been said upthread about the Warwick courses. Very anecdotally, but these courses then seem to attract a good proportion of home based ethnic minority students, who are at ease mixing with both home and overseas students. I guess it depends on where you start out from, but for most DC who are brought up in a City or have attended a sixth form offering boarding, it is normal to have a pretty mixed friendship group. DS's immediate friendship group includes British born ethnics, overseas students who have attended British sixth forms, Third Country Nationals, and overseas students as well as more traditionally British students. The sort of mix he would expect should he then go on to work in an international environment. I am sure there will be some who feel more comfortable staying within a known group, whether it is language based or defined by an activity such as playing rugby. But generally a diverse peer group should be a good thing. Most Universities are big enough to allow a student to find kindred spirits.

LSE has not created its PPE course because it is concerned about "accessibility" of its current offer of UG courses to prospective students. It has created its PPE course in response to very strong market demand by excellent candidates.

I am sure there are a number of reasons why the course has been created. However I am pretty sure accessibility is one. A couple of years ago I attended a talk by the Director of LSE to Alumni about the future of the School. He expressed concern about the low numbers of British state school applicants, particuarly those outside London and suggested they would be introducing this new course which might help the problem. Part of the issue was a reluctance to reduce maths requirements for the main ecomonics course.

Bonsoir, I realise you see things from a French perspective. However the issue, both in terms of the OP and with LSE is that top British Universities are trying to recruit the best students regardless of educational background, yet the British school system is not delivering consistent results, ie students at private schools and grammars often perform better than similar students at low performing comps. Hence Oxford offering comparatively low entry grades, albeit for candidates they have selected via interview and other tests. LSE had got themselves in a position where many (the majority?) of British students could not even apply for their flagship course because their schools were not allowing them to take 4 A levels/FM. A number of engineering courses are now four years, in part because students need that extra year to catch up on maths. This PPE course is also four years.

Do top French Universities make similar efforts to level the playing field to support talented students from poor performing schools? Or do they simply run a first past the post system and accept that there is over-representation from some, often more affluent, sections of the population. The British approach is pretty well accepted here. It may seem unfair or random from the outside, but as Jeanne suggested above, it probably is not.