Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Higher education

Talk to other parents whose children are preparing for university on our Higher Education forum.

Getting into Oxbridge

263 replies

PinkPeppers · 20/06/2017 13:57

Can someone explained to me what is needed to get into Oxford/Cambridge?
Dc1 is decided this is what he wants to aim for (good for him to aim high - I wont stop him from doing that). He is only in Y8 so plenty of time to change his mind too.

However, Im not british and I havent gone through the system so have little idea on how things are actually working.
In particular, im not sure about what is needed. Obviously very good A levels in your subjects (maths/science for dc1). But do you also need a very good GCSE and/or a high number of GCSE with a level 8/9 (A/A*)?
Does doing more GCSE than you have to making any difference?

I know that you need to be able to talk about your subject and be hapy to deal with questions where you didn't know the answer etc...
But what else can be playing in your favour? Ive read for example very conflicting advise of having the right sort of experience/voluntary work etc... (some saying its essential, some not).

Im well aware that he might never get there and might change his mind. But atm, this is the one thing that is helping him focus on his studies and the one thing that makes him want to do well (as well as he can do rather than coasting if that).
So any advice on what would help him and what would make a difference is welcome! and if he changes his mind, he will at least have learnt the power of focusing your mind on something you real;l'y care about

OP posts:
PInkPeppers · 24/06/2017 21:00

Still reading the thread Hingle and with great interest, even though I don't really have a lot to comment on!
However, this helps me enormously to understand who things are working.

I fully agree that Oxbridge isn't always best suited to what you want to do. I was more coming from the angle that, if this is what he wants to do, I want to be sure he won't be taking the wrong choice that will close doors for him.

OP posts:
Addley · 24/06/2017 21:06

My main concern with Cambridge, which I know definitely put off some people I know, so I guess is something to consider when thinking about whether to apply, is the focus on exams with no resits 😣 (but on the plus side, no group assessments?)

HolyGhost · 24/06/2017 21:07

www.telegraph.co.uk/sponsored/education/oxbridge/12200381/applications.html

This is an excellent guide to the application process.

Elendon, that is essentially an ad for an expensive consultancy with a vested interest in making applying to Oxbridge seem as arcane a process as possible.

Nobody gave a damn whether I was 'well-rounded' or not. I applied from overseas, having been at a failing school where almost no one went on to any form of third-level education, far less to Oxbridge, and all I demonstrated in my application and in person was a totally one-dimensional, possibly slightly pathetic enthusiasm for talking about my subject, purely because I had never had the chance to talk about it at all, ever. I used words at the interview that I had never said out loud before -- I remember being gently corrected on the pronunciation of what I believed to be pronounced 'eppytome', for instance. Grin

LRDtheFeministDragon · 24/06/2017 21:09

pink, I'd definitely come at it from that attitude if I had a university-age child. As things are DD is showing her immense aptitude with vomiting and chewing her own fists, so I'm aware I don't know anything about parenting older ones.

addley - yes, but then with English Lit, you do a dissertation and a portfolio of essays for Part I, and at least one dissertation for Part II. All things considered, as little as three fifths of your final degree result can rest of exams, and two fifths on dissertations.

Addley · 24/06/2017 21:14

Mmm, have read up a lot (a lot!) on the assessment structure; it was one of my main criteria. As little group assessment and assessment by presentations as possible, please Grin Although the reason I got a D in GCSE English Lit was that I went into the exam, sat down, froze up and wrote only half a sentence 😂 But yeah. (Sorry for the thread hijack.)

LRDtheFeministDragon · 24/06/2017 21:17

Oh, sorry! Blush

I didn't mean to patronise you, or tell you things you already knew. I just misunderstood your post.

Addley · 24/06/2017 21:19

I didn't think you were patronising me? Sorry, my tone must've been wrong. Just taking a dig at my own neuroticism and excessive research Grin

LRDtheFeministDragon · 24/06/2017 21:45

Grin No, it's my nervousness. I have been ticked off many times for apologising too much.

I do hope all the mathmos on this thread are rolling their eyes and thanking their lucky stars they're not doing English!

Addley · 24/06/2017 21:49

Brother's a mathmo, I'm used to the eyerolls Grin

Addley · 24/06/2017 21:54

Well, ex. He sold his soul.

tropicalfish · 24/06/2017 21:58

Going back to topic Halo
Although it has already been saidSmile
I think it is a lot harder to get in now than it used to be as more people are applying due to getting more encouragement and because offers are spread more thinly. Thats why its important not to big it up as it can be quite hit and miss. The disappointment on not getting in when they have for years felt it was quite within their grasp can be upsetting at a time they may need to be focusing on doing other interviews.
I think being a bit confident but not cocky is good when coming to do interviews which is perhaps why being an all rounder to a high level in other extra curriculars could be an advantage as this can give you extra confidence. However, in my opinion they are not looking at extra curricular interests apart from when they are directly related to the course the student is applying for.
Someone mentioned about having a good answer about college choice. Perhaps if they do ask this it is because they don't think the candidate is what they are looking for.
The interviews are very intense and in my dc's experience of applying to oxford twice and having 6 interviews in total over 4 days, involved no chit chat at all.
I would say you need to be incredibly knowledgeable about your subject area and far beyond the a level curriculum imo from the questions my dc was asked. It would be nearly impossible to have an answer to otherwise and although yes you can say that they expect you to think on your feet and work it out, the fact is, when so many other candidates are well prepared, you are not really going to have a competitive chance of getting in.

In fact, what would the tutorial system be like anyway with ultra competitive people. It might not suit everyone.

cowgirlsareforever · 24/06/2017 22:04

HolyGhost Do you know the Oscar Wilde quote about never mocking a person who mispronounces a word because it means they learned it from a book? I wonder if your interviewer thought about that when you mispronounced epitome?

OrlandaFuriosa · 24/06/2017 22:32

The good trend was the bleep spell check refusing to accept Leavis and putting in its own version. As you will realise, I am not, never was, a Leavisite. I have told spellcheck off ( pathetic fallacy and all) in no uncertain terms. I tried to correct by using the convention of the * but obv to no success.

The Other Place, in this context because I'm Oxford, is Cambridge, sorry to those from Cambridge. Could have been vice versa. If said in the House of Commons, however, it would refer to the Lords and similarly vice versa. Cheap in-joke of the sort that is so -deservedly -irritating to others.

HolyGhost · 24/06/2017 22:51

cowgirls, I only came across it years later, but whole-heartedly agree with Wilde. I will say they were extremely nice about it.

LadyinCement · 25/06/2017 10:43

I still find I mispronounce a lot of words that I have never heard out loud. Nowadays we have the internet, though, and just yesterday I looked up how to pronounce "porcine". Pour sein? Pork een? Pour seen?

For years I pronounced "misled" as in "Don't be misled by these statistics," as "my zeld". I still think my pronunciation sounds so much more full of ill intent Smile

HingleMcCringleberry · 25/06/2017 11:59

Pathetic fallacy... now there's a phrase I've not heard since undergrad days!

Lancelottie · 25/06/2017 15:06

I'd pronounce it piggy, I think, Lady.

OrlandaFuriosa · 25/06/2017 15:30

I've always pronounced it pork -I'n because of the c being hard in Latin, but now you've made me wonder...poor seen? Poor sine? I'm going to have to look it up and struggle with those pronunciation symbols that I find incomprehensible.

OrlandaFuriosa · 25/06/2017 15:34

Just looked it up. Been saying it wrongly all these years. Pawsine, sine as in angles, trigonometry.

O poo.

HolyGhost · 25/06/2017 15:36

I say 'POUR-sine', but, hey, no one will listen to me now I've admitted to saying 'eppytome'. Grin

Lancelottie · 25/06/2017 15:51

Is it a word you use a lot, Orlanda?

HolyGhost · 25/06/2017 18:22

I also pronounced 'misled' as 'mizzled' to rhyme with 'drizzled'.

Lancelottie · 25/06/2017 22:54

Mizzled is a great word though, as is awry, which I always mentally pronounce to rhyme with story.

traininthedistance · 25/06/2017 22:58

I think being a bit confident but not cocky is good when coming to do interviews which is perhaps why being an all rounder to a high level in other extra curriculars could be an advantage as this can give you extra confidence.

Lots of candidates aren't confident (either socially, or intellectually) at all; in fact certain kinds of "confidence" can be positively off-putting, if they get in the way of a candidate really engaging with a question. We're much more interested in thoughtfulness than confidence. As long as they can chat with a couple of unfamiliar adults about some interesting ideas without clamming up completely, they don't need to worry about social confidence or poise.

One of the reasons we are not interested in extracurriculars is that we are highly aware that many are basically a proxy for cultural capital or money. It's nice and all that someone has two instruments to grade 8, or Gold Duke of Edinburgh, or is a competitive rower or whatever; but largely those achievements just signal that a candidate comes from a particular social and educational background where they have access to those kinds of experiences. It would be pretty unfair of us to allow those considerations into our assessment process, as many or even a majority of our applicants haven't had the chance to access expensive music lessons or high-level sport, or similar. We're also highly aware of the social confidence that can be a superficial product of certain kinds of schooling, and we aim to look beyond that.

I would say you need to be incredibly knowledgeable about your subject area and far beyond the a level curriculum imo from the questions my dc was asked.

Rather than asking for knowledge beyond the A-level curriculum (which would be, again, very unfair to candidates who don't have the financial or social resources to cover this), we aim to assess academic potential by asking quite simple or even basic questions in an unusual way, to get the applicant thinking. Most often (at least in the humanities and social sciences), there may not even be a "right" answer. We might ask a "devil's advocate" kind of question to see if a candidate can break a problem down to its basic constituents. Or give a candidate some new information they don't know, then ask them how they would revise their opinion based on this new evidence. Or ask them to use knowledge they already know from A-level to make a judgment about an unfamiliar problem. One of my colleagues in the hard sciences asks, for example, if the pitch of a wine glass goes up or down when you add more liquid to it (and actually expects the candidates to produce the wrong answer if they and their A-level knowledge is good - because the problem is not quite what they think it is!) In the humanities, I might ask a candidate who has done Tudor Reformation history at school, for example, what might be different about our understanding of history if we knew nothing at all about religion at all during the period; and if so, what other kinds of historical events from the time might then seem the most important ones to us?

I might pick out something they have said on their personal statement about what they think is interesting about their chosen subject, and ask them why they think it's true; I might then give them an opposing opinion, and ask them if it might change their view.

None of these kinds of questions require additional knowledge beyond the A-level curriculum; but they might require some thinking on the spot, or some extrapolating from existing knowledge applied to a new situation; or a willingness to challenge received ideas. I'm sure the other interviewers on this thread can think of their own examples, too - but, in essence, we're looking for how a candidate thinks. We also want to find the people with potential who haven't had the good luck to have gone to expensive schools, or have academic parents; but who are sharp thinkers and have a natural aptitude for the subject. We are very much looking at the individuals they are, how they think, and whether they would be intellectually a good fit for the course.

OrlandaFuriosa · 25/06/2017 23:38

Lancelottie, no, but sometimes..

There are lots of words I don't know how to pronounce or where the stress lies..