Medicine 2021

[Millylovespuddles]

Hi all
It looks like there’s no medicine 2021 entry thread yet, so it might be an idea to get the ball rolling.
My DD is getting stuck into her A level course, doing well so far, but I’m guessing we parents could do with some mutual support and advice from parents who’ve been here before.

Good idea to go for a visit too, will do that.

Sendsummer that's interesting on the placements.

@Pumpkintopf if your DS is involved in the outreach schemes he is presumably at a non-selective state school which seems to help at Oxford now. If he meets the terms of the Adjustment scheme he would get a second chance at Cambridge on results day if he is not great at interviews and gets the grades.

A big difference in the interview process is that if you get an interview at Oxford you do 2-3 days there, staying and doing several interviews at different colleges. The admissions process is centralised so your choice of college makes less difference. Cambridge do 2-3 interviews on 1 day, depending on which college you apply to. You can try to work out which you think will suit him better - would he "warm up" over 2 days? I don't know about content of Oxford interviews, but most Cambridge interview are completely academic, only a couple look at work experience.

Grade requirements lower for Oxford at AAA, extra A required at Cambridge. Also 3 sciences/maths required for most Cambridge colleges if that is an issue.

Have you been to the Oxbridge thread? Probably best to discuss it over there as this thread can be a bit taken over by Oxbridge which most are not that interested in.

Ah okay Monkey, sorry didn't mean to derail- thanks for the useful info re interviews etc.

He's at a state grammar but in an area of social deprivation that means he's eligible for contextual offers at quite a few unis. I think contextually he'd be showing as having outperformed his cohort at his school also.

my main con for Cambridge is the restriction in attachments for the clinical years (many shared with UEA students) after students no longer had the opportunity to move to London.

Students applying to Oxford next year won't get to go to London anyway. This option is being withdrawn after 2023.

Oxford students traditionally have stayed in Oxford as there is a larger number capacity for attachments. However as Cambridge was a ‘quieter’ hospital region Cambridge students often preferred to move to London.

It's not a derail at all Pumpkintopf. Your DS and other Oxbridge applicants have absolutely equal legitimacy on the medical threads. How bizarre for any poster to try to marginalise. If anything the medical threads get dominated by discussions about UCAT cut off points so there's everything to be said for bringing discussion about Oxbridge and the London schools in too.

Just to correct what Monkey said about Oxford (her DS applied to Cambridge rather than Oxford):

The Medicine interviews take place over a condensed period of time - much shorter than for most other subjects - and interviewees stay only a single night. College choice matters a lot, in the sense that an interviewee will get interviewed at their first choice college for certain, and then by a second one randomly allocated by computer. The reality is that for the vast majority of interviewees, an offer will be made from one or other of these colleges.

It's worth being aware that there are significantly (as in statistically significant) more applicants per place for Oxford Medicine than for Cambridge Medicine, but that's probably a weak factor to determine which uni you choose.

That's really interesting goodbyestranger- even with the October BMAT. Is that due to the (slightly) lower standard offer do you think?

It's true almost across the subjects board for Oxford v Cambridge actually Pumpkintopf, has been for ages. NatSci is an exception as far as I know and maybe one or two others. So not Medicine specific.

@sendsummer
*Excluding those from offers, most offers will go to students with a higher (ie 11+) rather than lower numbers (ie

GANFYD empirically playing around with some numbers will help you understand the difference between means and medians by trying some extremes.

You will get there eventually if you do that and you consider your last statement.

The spread is from 5-15, so hardly showing major outliers one side or the other.

Have a think whether that is consistent with your previous pseudo statistical interpretation based on skewed distributions.

As I say, I shall stick to discussing stats with those who understand them

I am rather amused but also feel just a bit sorry for you entrenched in your present posturing.
I would agree with you that it would be helpful for you to review the basic concepts with somebody in real life. Otherwise you will continue digging yourself into statistical holes and that will lead to uncertainty what part of your advice on these forums is due to misinterpretation.

I recall telling our HT that there was little more I liked as a recreational sport than watching people digging deeper and deeper holes for themselves. So this is splendid (obviously I had different recreational preferences in my youth, this one simply marks maturity).

GANFYD this is the problem I have with your apparently legendary advice, and that is that is simply seems to comprise of collating numerical statistics to do with interview cut off points. You don't seem to go beyond that to the wider picture at all. I can't see why you can't see how limited that it. And yet you urge other to self reflect.

Is, not it (please don't point out my typo).

Ah, I now see I should also correct it to is. That's weirdly pleasing :)

The range takes into account only two scores. It has zero to do with skew and does not even have to apply to a normal distribution. They look at entirely different things. We do not have an SD or an IQ range, so cannot relate spread to skew for this data.
There is no point getting into a complex statistical discussion as it is nothing to do with the thread and using random statistical terms doesn't mean you are making any sense. If you want to discuss further please DM me and we can talk stats.
And people who describe data as "spiky" are using statistical terms I have not come across relating to normal distribution curves, but if anybody cares to explain that, I am all ears?

Ok, so 'spiky' was used for normal, not uptight people who can see at a glance the supremely obvious point that most successful applicants have around 10 A*, as contextualised.

In other words, contrary to your immediate knee jerk reaction to my point that lots of medical applicants are priced out of the Oxford market on account of their GCSEs, hence the pool is smaller and numbers alone can't measure competition, there isn't a smooth spread of A tally from say 7A to 13 A* and so your point that hey, lots of people can actually apply and be in with a shout is, in fact, completely wrong.

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

For ease of access.

your point that hey, lots of people can actually apply and be in with a shout is, in fact, completely wrong.

WHERE have I said this? You just confabulate to try and look important

Confabulate is a curious word in the context.

I posted the link, you said 10A (contextualised) was average (I'm using layman's terms) and the clear implication was that people with fewer - even far fewer - A could make a competitive application.

The reality is that they can't.

I'll go back to find the page, for your reference.

Just to point out, lest anybody be put off applying, that for those who had taken GCSEs with an offer of a place at Oxford, the mean number of As at GCSE was 10.8.
So that was an average, suggesting somewhere around half got more and half got less, that is how averages work* (You, 5th March 22.52)

Leaving aside another bolding fail, you were clearly implying that those with quite a few less A* than 10 could reasonably make an application.

To be fair, shortly after that you saw the point and backtracked - but then tried to cloud the issue by quibbling about the precise interpretation of the graph.

confabulate

PSYCHIATRY
fabricate imaginary experiences as compensation for loss of memory.
"she has lapses in attention and concentration—she may be confabulating a little"

What I actually said, in detail was:
So do not be put off if you have less than 10.8 As at GCSE, though I wouldn't be looking to apply with a lot less than 9 (if not contextual) and it is obviously also affected by the percentage of As. Someone with 9 out of 9 As is probably going to stand a better chance than someone with 11 out of 14 As, as seen on the second graph, all other things being equal - and they never are!

Which is NOTHING like the rubbish you are spouting. Actually reading what people post is a useful tip before you start making stuff up to fit your own agenda.