Oxford interview meaning

[blackshoe]

What can we try and deduce from this scenario?

Applicant A: Has the two standard college interviews. Is then asked by another college for two more interviews at their place. Then is further requested for another interview at a different college. Is requested to stay the full span of subject interview period.

Applicant B: Has the two standard interviews. Is then released from the Oxford interviews, at less than halfway through the no. of days required for an applicant for that course to stay for. (Released early)

Both applicant A + B receive an offer from the original college.

Could be applicant a was used for standardising (sorry - tired can’t think of the proper word).

I certainly wouldn’t try to deduce from it that one applicant was better than the other. They’ve both had offers so are both of equal merit.

I had 6 interviews at 3 different colleges and was accepted by my first choice. I still have no idea what was going on after 20 years!

They get done applicants to be interview at multiple colleges to ensure the standard is the same at all colleges. Otherwise the college you applied to would have a large effect on your chances of acceptance. It doesn't mean anything about either candidate.

Did they apply for the same subject?

When I interviewed they were really clear that, for my subject, you had three interviews at your first choice college and then if they were sure about you (either way) that would be it, but if you were borderline, you would go into a pool that other colleges could choose to interview you over the next few days.

DH applied for a different subject to me, and they all had interviews at first choice college and at two further randomly assigned colleges which were all arranged before they even arrived for the first interview.

I hope they're not worried about it. No one will even think of the interviews after the first week and everyone I knew had an amazing experience, regardless of if they got into their first choice college.

hi yes, they both applied for the same course at the same college.

There were only two places for that course and they got both.

7 others were rejected and one got an offer from another college

Well, they must both be there now, so I don't suppose it can really matter. Are they all sitting around comparing interview experiences?

This happened to someone I was at school with, in the year above: the headmistress called after to find out why - they said she was the best candidate they'd ever seen, so other colleges wanted to take a look too.

Told to us so we didn't go to pieces if we were called by multiple colleges, I think. I now work at Oxbridge and suspect even thirty years ago it was more about ensuring consistency in the process - but it was a great story!

Some of applicant A's interviews may have been for moderation.

OP since they're both at the same college doing the same course and seem anxious to settle the question (are both weirdly competitive?), they can easily just ask their tutor. The tutors seem to like to relive interviews at the after finals dinner, so they clearly remember. But how about spending energy on something a bit more worthwhile!

When I interviewed we (for my subject) all had an interview at our own college, and most of us had one at our second choice second, and a couple had a third, which included one person at a "pool" college. (In those days you chose 3 college choices and a "pool" college was one you hadn't chosen).

The 5 of us at our college, 3 were first choice, 2 were second choice (which I believe was usual pattern for my college) and none of the others who interviewed got into other colleges either.

My second interview was slightly weird for an Oxford interview. They asked a few questions, but it was much more of a nice chat. I think they'd known that either I was getting into my first choice or they already had their candidates and knew they wouldn't take me anyway.

The second (and third) interviews were all arranged before we arrived, so nothing to do with ability in interview.

I think it most likely was just one of those things (ie random and could have happened the other way round) or

1. Candidate B was so obviously getting in that they didn't bother passing him on. Candidate A was likely to get in, but was closer to the borderline so wanted to make sure if there was a better candidate they saw (including potentially a second choice) they had a chance elsewhere. They might have been touch and go with the other one who got the second choice place.

1. They knew fairly quickly that they were taking both A and B, hence sending B home early, but A was used for moderation-which could be because they were good, or randomly chosen.