Oxbridge Applications 2019 (Part Three)

[windowframe]

Today is a big day for many... time for a new thread too

If it is on the website (I haven't checked - our website is ghastly to operate) then it probably will be true going forward. It just completely doesn't reflect what's happened up until now. The school is also being very active on the widening access front too, so the thing will hopefully come together. I don't think most Oxbridge tutors have the faintest idea how little prep so many good grammars give, they just assume that they're bastions of middle class privilege with every bell and whistle that that would normally entail. They may not fully understand the stretch created by lack of funding/ limited resources etc.

It is a shame when discussion becomes about private versus state. It seems that Oxbridge has tried to make it a fairer process by taking context into account. This ensures that naturally able students from a less privileged background are not penalised to the extent they once were. My DS has just been appointed to an Outreach committee at Oxford because he feels very strongly that we as a society need more state school applicants. Essentially you have to be in it to win it. There is, and never should be, discrimination against the brightest privately educated students who should win their places on merit just like their state school counterparts.

Yes, I agree, Hubble, and I'm sorry for my part in it - I shouldn't have been drawn. I was reacting to comments a way back on the thread which seemed to suggest that private school children don't need to do anything much to get an Oxbridge offer and that state school children are constantly frustrated by their weakness, whereas we all know that all of our children have worked very hard and the school their parents have chosen for them is not their fault.

That should read there is not* and never should be. Tired eyes.

Yes it would show a little more grace Ontopofthesunset. not to single out the DC of another poster and their school. But if you wish to apologise I'd accept that apology with good grace.

Ontopofthesunset it is easy to get drawn in but your point about parents' choice of school is a point well made.

Hubble I entirely agree that everyone should win their place on merit, but it's a supremely difficult thing to achieve, which is what all the efforts are about - your DS's included (along with several of my own DC).

I can see why that was upsetting Goodbye.

Ah cheers Hubble. It was super snarky that's all and so wide of the mark historically. Not sure why my DC are fair game. Maybe because I'm an annoyance :)

And I do apologise, goodbye - it was wrong of me to single out your children's school and I certainly didn't wish to derail a supportive thread.

Great! Now we have consensus on this we better not discuss Brexit.

No problem Ontopofthesunset and thanks for that.

I won't mention the B word but it's been compulsive viewing!

I don't know if it's helpful for me to chip in on the state vs private debate, but here goes...

I was a girl at a state (grammar) school and we had no additional prep whatsoever -- except for being taught by a very feisty cohort of teachers, many of whom were Oxbridge graduates, and who gave us the idea that of course some of us should apply and that we had a good chance.

At my dd's state comprehensive, there is tons of help with all aspects of the process. They absolutely pride themselves on how many Oxbridge successes they have. I don't quite know how they fund it but presumably the "voluntary" parental contribution fund (fuelled by standing orders following personal, individual meetings with the Head) helps...

Finally, dh interviewed for medicine at Cambridge for several years in the 1990s. They absolutely bent over backwards to try to admit state school candidates. The private school candidates were just exceptional. Not only academically, but in their confidence and experience. Their extra-curriculars were beyond the wildest dreams of a "normal" person. We're talking playing with world-class orchestras, work experience at the UN, etc. So the panel had a difficult job of trying to see which of the exceptional private school candidates should be rejected in order to achieve at least a modicum of balance... Of course medicine is a special case but still...

Why is playing in an orchestra relevant to a medicine degree?
Why is medicine a special case?

Their extra-curriculars were beyond the wildest dreams of a "normal" person. We're talking playing with world-class orchestras, work experienceat the UN, etc. So the panel had a difficult job of trying to see which of the exceptional private school candidates should be rejected in order to achieve at least a modicum of balance... Of course medicine is a special case but still...

Either Cambridge has changed a bit in the past couple of decades, or the nice AT from Murray Edwards who spoke at the 'Subject Matters' event that I attended with DS fifteen months ago was telling massive porkies when he said that the one thing they take zero account of in the process is the kind of activity that is out of the reach of the generality of applicants, particularly those where cost is a major factor. Absolutely no mention made of Medicine or any other discipline being an exception to this.

Medicine is an exception, because interviewers are looking for evidence of aptitude and vocation for being a doctor, rather than academic excellence in biomedical science. This is really very different from other sciences - medicine may well reject candidates that are academic stronger, but don't seem to have the strongest aptitude, personality, etc for practising as a doctor.

That said, world class orchestras and work experience at the UN would still have very little relevance for medicine. I guess the only (marginal) relevance is that in medicine they look for the ability to balance a high workload (this is why they don't like GCSEs and A levels taken in separate batches). But I can't see why playing in a world class orchestra would ever outrank relevant work experience such as helping in nursing homes and other medical places.

At Oxford this year for medicine, 13.1% of the U.K. applicants from state schools received an offer and 14% of the applicants from private schools received an offer. Given the small numbers on the course, the difference could just be one pupil. That seems like Oxford have done (whether consciously or not) a pretty good job in creating an even playing field for applicants once they apply.

Do you have inside info Abetes or is that data already publicly available?

I know that Oxford very much strive to be as objective as possible (I don't know why they don't publicise their process more, as it's pretty robust), and they would have no idea about orchestras, model UN, etc unless the candidate brought it up at interview.

Playing in an orchestra may well be how an applicant relieves stress and for that reason - and for time management reasons - will be important. DS1 is a recent Oxford medic and was asked very specific questions at interview - not simply as 'ice breakers' - about what he did to manage stress. The tutors don't seem to have their heads turned by medical work experience of the sort which can generally only be acquired through a family member or contact, and recognise that long term volunteering eg in a care home can clash with other commitments or be difficult for DC not living in towns, so even that isn't a big deal. DS1 did none of that but he had worked for several years in a cafe, so they adapted their 'people' questions to that. Anything goes tbh, provided it's something, and legal.

For Atia:

www.medsci.ox.ac.uk/study/medicine/pre-clinical/statistics

Surely they would know Atia, from the personal statement.

They don't read it. Actually, possibly they read it between selection for interview and interview, but I didn't think so. It's definitely not read in that first selection process.

I don't think they care how stellar an extra-curricular activity is, but rather what it shows they can do, such as working in a team or time management. Ds had a Saturday job in a shop which one interviewer seemed very interested in. It certainly was not at the UN !! Ha ha.

If someone wants to go on a fancy trip to build an orphanage, then fine, but it doesn't carry any weight with interviewers. When I used to interview job candidates, you regularly got the "I like to traaaavel" ones. I just replied crisply that we all like a nice holiday.