UCAS: Cambridge or Oxford?

[user1473771286]

DD is interested in studying economics at Cambridge. The predicted grade is AAA, not all A (due to a low A grade in one of the AS science subjects). Is this good enough for Cambridge? or is Oxford easier? She got straight A in GCSE. Any advice? Many thanks.

Thanks Errol. You had me googling For England there for a bit.

[relieved emoticon]

DS was considering applying for economics at Cambridge last year. He went to the open day, and the advice he was given there was pretty much what he had been told by a family member who is a professor in a different subject at Cambridge, as well as school staff: Cambridge (much more than Oxford) looks very closely at actual marks in AS levels, and unless you have an average of at least 90% UMS in all relevant subjects, preferably over 95%, there is little chance you will get called for interview. If your DD's school does not have much history of sending students to Oxbridge, they may interview her with UMS closer to 90 than 95, from what I've heard.

I know that AS exams changed this year, but did you still get given breakdowns of your marks in each paper? If so, I presume Cambridge will still be more interested in those than in predicted grades.

Also, DS was strongly advised not to drop his 4th A-level subject, as he was doing maths, further maths, history and economics, and while Cambridge economics sees further maths as very desirable, they don't seem to like it if maths makes two out of three of your A-levels.

Looking at average UCAS points for people who get into Cambridge to do economics, they seem to be well over 600, which would suggest that most people are doing 4 A-levels (and getting A*s in them), plus EPQs, further maths qualifications, high grades in musical instruments etc which add up to further UCAS points.

DS ended up not applying to Cambridge, as he mucked up a couple of his AS papers so didn't have the required UMS average. He did much better in the A2s, so has the grades for Cambridge, but by then had lost interest in Cambridge so is off to Warwick.

I think the main thing is not to waste a choice on LSE if the OPs DC is not doing Further Maths. A nephew of a friend did this and did not realise FM was required. It could be the same at other universities, so only apply for ones where the A levels meet the requirements. He went to Bristol.

Further maths is not required at LSE. DS was surprised at how many of his peers did not have it. Indeed Further Maths is not offered against and only considered as a fourth A level.

Read the course requirements on the website.

For economics that is. It may be needed for maths with economics or actuarial science.

bojo - the camb website I found had a very explicit clarification that while FM would be useful, it was not required. My guess is that 'mathsy' economics courses are like good engineering ones - it's a very good idea to have done it (because it'll make your life easier when you get there not to have to self-teach) and it will certainly be on their approved list of A level subjects but they don't make it a requirement because it simply isn't available to all students at some schools/colleges. And they probably don't want to exclude people who didn't know for sure what they wanted to do age 16, who might have done a more balanced spread of subjects to keep their options open.

I'd infer from the OP that her DD is doing 3 A levels, more than one of which is a science so I'd deduce not doing FM. Which is just as well if some courses only count it as a fourth subject!

A family member is an economics tutor at one of the more competitive Cambridge colleges: applicants need to be very, very, very, very strong at maths and beyond that, capable of engaging the tutors at interview.

In principle FM is not required for Cambridge Economics for some colleges. In practice I don't think that many students get in without FM (certainly true at the most academic colleges).

BTW FM not being available in all schools is not in itself a reason to exclude asking for it, as online support for self-study for FM exists. Most Cambridge colleges do require FM for Maths.

Stranger you are right. The Cambridge/LSE/UCL/Warwick economics courses are all very mathematical, and not much fun for a student who does not enjoy maths. Which is why I could not understand why OP was struggling to choose between Oxford and Cambridge. But as Errol suggests, it is aptitude that counts. None of these courses are going to turn away good students simply because they have not had the opportunity to study FM. And indeed LSE, who do not interview, are clear that they want breath, suggesting History as a good A level alongside Maths and Economics. The new aptitude tests should make it easier for Cambridge to differentiate the gifted mathematicians in a way A levels do not.

Ok, LSE says FM is "generally preferable" and the applicant is asked to say whether FM is offered at the school or not and to explain why it has not been studied if it available. So it looks like they do prefer it if they bother to mention it! Of course they are trying not to exclude people who have not had a chance but I would have thought, in reality, there would not be too many of them.

They also say FM is a "valuable indictor" as regards to suitability. So a fairly strong steer I think. Economics A level is also not required but 90% of successful applicants have it. Another strong steer.

A bit of an arcane debate. However plenty of uk kids can't offer FM either because the school does not offer it, or the school only allows students to take 3 A levels. And LSE are clear that they do not consider double maths and a third subject as broad enough.

It's a whole different kettle of fish for those from schools that offer FM and routinely allow students to take four Alevels. But this sort of student is already well represented. There are enough barriers, mainly cost, deterring bright but disadvantaged students from applying to top London courses. LSE will not want to add more.

Cambridge issues a warning on some college websites about FM and says the overwhelming majority of offerees (90%) have taken it at least to AS. Economics at A2 is also - if not mandatory - clearly a subject which the vast majority of offerees have studied. Does this have any impact on your DD OP?

Both my DSSs, neither of whom had studied any Economics at all before embarking on their degrees in Economics (Bristol and UCL) think that there is any advantage to having studied Economics at A-level prior to doing an Economics degree. They certainly felt that they were better off having studied other subjects (both did French Bac S).

Both of them think as much prior maths as possible is essential!

Bobo, economics A level has changed. The old one was depressingly boring. LSEs admissions website suggests they like the new syllabus a lot more.

Bobo neither went to Cambridge for undergrad though did they, and that's the point of the thread. I only made the comment about Economics because the person in question was staying with us on A level results day last month and the conversation naturally turned to university entrance etc, especially since a DC of mine was collecting results. We were teasing him that the DC in question was going to apply to his college for Economics (because he got full ums in all his maths modules) and the guy looked worried for a while then relaxed and said well he can't because he isn't doing Economics A2. Presumably it's therefore at the very least strongly preferred, as is FM. Not official I know, but I guess he knows what he's talking about. I agree that if it was an absolute requirement they'd have to say on their website, but I'd be worried about opting for Economics at Cambridge without it.

My DSSs say that they didn't miss out at all though by not doing Economics. They feel their broader education is a valuable asset and Economics A-level material is covered in the first few lectures of a degree course.

I just don't think it's essential. Not in the way Maths is.

Bobo I know whose advice I'd take if I was considering applying for Cambridge and that's the advice of a current tutor not the advice of a Bristol graduate and a UCL undergraduate who come from a very different educational background to the vast majority of applicants. I'm just not sure they're in a position to comment, given the difference between the French Wotsit and A Levels.

Stranger, I have heard of a couple of strong mathematicians getting into Cambridge economics without economics. But equally knew of another, a few years back, who failed to persuade interviewers that he was suffiently interested in the subject. (And didn't get into LSE either.) He ended up successfully reapplying to Oxford for maths.

Why would you not listen to the experience of a recent graduate? Recent graduates are pretty well placed to compare the prior backgrounds of other students and ascertain what makes useful preparation for a degree course. And it isn't A-level Economics for an Economics degree - it's lots and lots of Maths, be that through A-levels, IB, EB, French bac, Abitur etc.

Yes I'm sure that some do get in Needmoresleep. Perhaps I'm making too much of an informal comment, it just surprised me a little though I didn't follow it up. As a general rule Cambridge does seem pretty intense, in the sense of serious, and rather less forgiving than Oxford.

Bobo I'd certainly listen to a recent Cambridge graduate on Cambridge admissions and I'd listen to a recent Bristol graduate like your DSS on Bristol admissions but why a Bristol graduate would know more about Cambridge admissions than a current Cambridge tutor who actually does the sifting and interviews etc at one of the more academic colleges I'm not really sure.

And believe me Bobo I'm not commenting at all on whether Economics A Level is a good thing to have prior to an Economics degree, because I know absolutely nothing whatsoever about the subject. The pages of curious mathematical notes left on the table left me cold - not sure I'd stop a plane on account of them, but made completely no sense, whichever way up I looked at them!

I wasn't commenting on Cambridge admissions. The thread was discussing prerequisites at a variety of universities. An awful lot of Economics UGs do not have A-levels anyway - it's hardly unusual for applicants not to have any previous experience of Economics.