Am I right to discourage dd1 from Cambridge application (NatSci)?

[roundandroundthehouses]

Dd1 is currently Lower 6th and, for a long time, has intended to apply for NatSci at Cambridge. However, I'm concerned that she'd be wasting an application, due to her grades at GCSE and feedback from the current year's applicants.

She is doing AS Physics, Chemistry, Maths and English Lit, whilst following the Further Maths course at home as her school doesn't offer it. Physics is by far her best subject, but her GCSE result doesn't reflect this.

The offers and interview invitations have now started coming in for pupils in the year above. Of the two pupils who applied for Cambridge NatSci, neither was offered an interview. One of them was given feedback that this was because his academic profile was not strong enough.

This chap had 4 As at AS level, so it must be his GCSEs that were the issue. He has 7 As and 6 As. Dd1 has 6 As and 4 As. Two of the As are in Physics and Chemistry. Although both were high As, and unexpectedly 'low' given her previous performances (normally in the top three in her year), those are the grades that she got.

To me, that makes her situation clear, but dd1 is determined to apply anyway. Both dh and I went to Cambridge so we know the form - however, neither of us went for NatSci, which is (one of) the most competitive for applicants.

I'm torn between not wanting to shatter her dreams and advising her, realistically, that she would probably be wasting one of her five applications. Can anyone suggest a middle ground?

Experience in bmo does not help that much with entry, except that such students are more used to deeper and open ended problems (given in interview and in STEP). Bmo experience is not in itself given "bonus points" in admissions.

I do think it is very important for the admission system to as far as possible not to be biased in favour of those who have chances to take part in maths challenges/olympiads, as many state schools simply don't have the time or resources to engage with these.

cool. Id hope that it might be recognised when state school pupils have trained themselves for it though.

especially when many state 6th forms lack experience and resources to also help children with STEP. It seems quite a similar issue to me.

I just looked it up. I guess colleges differ as the cambridge maths page does mention olympiads.

I didn't think any 'training' was needed for the maths challenges. DS has just told me that they get the option the lesson before a challenge to do a past paper, but it would be a stretch to call that 'training'.

Kitten if your DC has done well in those then s/he's probably a very good mathematician. Why does the Olympiad itself need recognition, surely it's the ability and skills that count?

DC have never had training for Olympiads either. We know of one academic school that seems to prep them, but cannot see the point, other than perhaps to keep parents happy. The value of Olympiads perhaps is to spot and encourage kids to see things in a certain way. I know a couple of people who have been surprised at their state educated DC reaching, say, Kangaroo stages, and who have then understood that their DC are perhaps genuinely good. This too then opens the door for various outreach schemes which children seem to enjoy (at least the sort of children who enjoy maths.) I assume schools find it useful as well to have external evidence of a child's potential, seperate from class performance.

Maths is strange. DS has been shocked at how much tutoring some of his University peers (his degree is about 75% applied maths) have had. Some students from Asia claim to have gone to tutors for up to four hours a day after school and also at weekends. A level is not that good at differentiating between those who have had a lot of support (DS always had excellent teachers - not true of all with potential - though clearly nothing like the prep some of his peers had) and those with ability. Kitten ought to perhaps welcome tests which aim to level the playing field and identify ability. And in particular ability to thrive at the next stage. University is quite a step up, both in approach and content.

Agree its worth a try as is only one of five choices, and Camb is not interested in GCSEs, but in AS UMS and interview.
DS decided against Camb, having had his heart set on NatSci, because although has always been in the top few of a highly academic school, all A* for GCSE, all A for AS he scored 94 UMS in Physics and the school advised him based on past pupils applications that it was too low to get an interview at Camb.

Not NatSci, but DD has an interview at Cambridge with just under 85% UMS for a pretty competitive course. She wasn't going to bother applying when she got her AS results, but is now pleased she gave it a go. She does have extentuating circumstances, but we didn't think that would be enough to make up for the UMS.

So long as they can accept it's a long shot/lottery, why not apply?

It was just a question Molio :)

A lot of people get A* for Maths and FM. Only about 100 sit the BMO2. If I were one of those 100 I'd like to think it meant something, that maths academics would appreciate it!

It sounded like a rhetorical one Kitten but that you didn't then like the answer :)

Do lots get A* for FM as well Atia?

It went against what I had heard previously, it also goes against the Cambridge admissions page for maths but I strongly suspect that different colleges and different admissions tutors have different things that they are looking for.

People are right, no practice is needed for the maths challenges, but for bmo 1 and beyond there are various theorems and areas of maths that would be really really hard to work out from first principles. But there is the mentoring scheme, which by the senior mentoring scheme needs no input from school, just a motivated student happy to work through the problems by themselves, reading up on things, with the tiniest of hints by email if they get stuck.

Last year 26.5% of students who took further maths got an a. About 14000 take it, so thats around 3500 a hence STEP.

You're obviously significantly better informed than me Kitten so I'll bow out. My DS is clearly only tolerably able in the context of 3500 kids a year getting A* in FM, but it's just that he does really seem to enjoy maths very much indeed and vaguely mentioned it once recently as a possibility for uni. He's only at gold/ kangaroo level too and has a very unclued up parent on this particular front, so probably best not to encourage him further!

Are the parents of maths applicants unusually tigerish? Or is it that maths progeny usually have a maths grad parent?

dont be daft! I only googled, cos you asked a question. The point is that a* doesnt differentiate enough for oxbridge hence step or aea. I have no idea how dd will do in her a levels, we arent there yet.
If your ds loves maths he should do maths and apply where the hell he likes. And kangaroo is bloody good. In dds sixth form at her school noone made it into the kangaroo.

and Im sorry if I annoyed you, I seem to have a pathalogical need to be a knowitall. I'm the same in everything I get interested in. I reckon I can be quite irritating.

Molio, you're overreacting. Clearly most people doing maths degrees, even at COWI, haven't done the BMO2, so there might yet be hope for your son

Don't really understand your "tigerish" question. I think with some kids who are very good at maths, that it's obvious pretty early on, so perhaps parents are used to having to be supportive. It doesn't seem to manifest itself in quite the same way as having a flair for physics or history? But I don't know, I haven't had any of the latter Anyway, I don't think Kitten was being pushy or obnoxious - she asked one small question.

cept Im clearly shit at spelling!

No I'm not Atia but I genuinely wouldn't know a theorem if it hit me in the face.

Kitten you haven't annoyed me at all, I just don't feel very equal to the science/(potentially) maths bods in the family. There seem to be loads of maths mums on here, far more than any other subject actually, and they all seem well versed in the intricacies.

What's COWI - is it Cam/Ox/War/ Imp?

it is weird that isnt it. i don't know why. Maybe it is a personality thing, dd gets pretty obsessed with maths, I get obsessed with things too, just dont have the talent that she has. I direct my obsessions elsewhere instead.

COWI is exactly that. There is a lot of snobbishness probably, whereever someone takes a maths degree they are going to be in huge demand after.

"tolerably able"? Yes, that's an overreaction

"tolerably able"? Yes, that's an overreaction

you got hiccups Atia?

Oops, somehow posted too early.

I first heard COWI here on MN, lol, it's a great source of information!

I dunno, I guess if your kid does something at school or elsewhere, and you're interested, you find out about it. That's the only reason I know about the maths challenges, etc. I read about people's dc doing essay competitions and so on - I don't know the first thing about them but it doesn't make me think they're horribly pushy parents or similar.

Early and twice! Sorry :) Shouldn't be doing two other things at the same time!