Oxbridge Aspirants: Sep 2021

[funkysatsuma]

Not sure if it's too early to start this thread in Nov 2019 :)

DS would like Cambridge Economics as the first choice. Would like to know where can we get some help to prepare for the ECAA test - appreciate any pointers/links. Thanks in advance

Witches ShalomJackie? Oh dear. Any chance of a link?

Hoghgyni it was more an observation than a concern :)

I've a message from TSR:
They've requested that we keep OxfordRadcliffe.

It's tempting to join.

TSR is very happy for parents to join as long as you don't set yourself up as a self-proclaimed expert and link to your page at every opportunity...

TSR Thread

Thank you Witchend - great name - what a treat :)

Well that was an interesting read

As goodbyestranger says, The official resources are the best and the most accurate and up to date. The aim to "demystify" the process is laudable but any experience as an applicant or applicant's parent/supporter very rapidly becomes out of date. For example, I helped DS to research and prepare for the NSAA (a Cambridge pre-interview assessment) last autumn. From this year, the structure of the test will be completely different.

I have been known to browse TSR and happened to spot DS1 once. It slightly freaked me out. I mentioned that I'd had a look at TSR (definitely didn't mention the spot) and DS1 was really not impressed. I think it's best left to the students (clue is in the name).

She did leave in a bit of a huff didn't she? I'm incredibly grateful for all the lovely people who've helped me (and indirectly DS1) but it's all about tone isn't it?

Mi

Interesting that I appear to be being accused of grooming my own DC .

People are so dead weird.

@goodbyestranger I suspect there's more than a little of the green-eyed monster there. She's known on the TSR boards for being competitive and wrong and you've got her dead beat there.

I've been watching both the tsr thread and this one with considerable interest! I'm not saying my username on tsr bc I'm very identifiable on there lol, but I probably spend as much time on there as I do on here (I'm a student, I commented upthread). I will say that Oxfordmum does genuinely mean well, although she definitely misjudged the tone on here! Most of her linking to "book chapters" whilst perhaps coming across as patronising, is really just links to blog posts written by offer holders and current students from a template she provides, and she is just trying to give people who don't have oxbridge contacts a leg up. Yes, it might come across as overly imposing, and there's a risk as there is with any well-known name on a forum that her word is taken as gospel truth by applicants when ofc it isn't, and yes, she might be a leetle over-protective of her "book" (anyone who argues about it on tsr is a troll lol), but when it comes down to it she is just trying to help. There's no need to be nasty about her tone! Anyway, good luck to all your kids, hope to see some of them next year

Cheers Witchend. This whole idea of needing to groom/ demystifying/ evangelising on student forums all contributes to the very wrong idea that if you're in the Oxford or Cambridge zone in terms of intellectual ability you need something extra to get in. A bit of luck on the day maybe, but that's in the lap of the gods, so not much one can do either way on that.

Mind you a lot of people don't like the idea that it is, in fact, pretty straightforward - apart from the gods bit :)

Gosh, I seem to have annoyed a couple of people. Up-thread someone was discussing whether low GCSE grades were a barrier to applying at Oxford, my response was to illustrate that they were not.

However, it is also wrong to assert that there are no contextual offers. I also happen to know that there are. I can only share what my DD has experience of, she was very involved in open access at Oxford, and was mentor to a particular student from a challenging background. I could write an essay on that, but I won't, suffice to say it was a disaster . It is also openly reported on some colleges admissions procedures, I will try to find one, that some offers are made on a contextual basis.

Re-read the above, and I have worded it badly.

I am not saying you get a reduced offer, I am saying that you get more leeway in your application.

It's not more leeway in your application, it is simply that the full context of your circumstances are considered. A student applying from an area where only 29% of school children get 5 GCSEs including English & Maths or a child who has a background in care should not be at a disadvantage because they do not have a straight run of GCSEs at grades 8 or 9, if they can show the same academic potential as someone who has benefited from the education they have been lucky enough to receive so far.

Unfortunately there is an annual debate about whether this puts some students at a disadvantage, rather than recognising the hurdles some others face. I can assure you that although their GCSE score may not be weighted as heavily, they have to perform just as well in assessments and interview as every other applicant and they receive exactly the same offer as every other offer holder.

Blimey, that went well 😁. Had a quick look at the TSR thread and it's all a bit Netmums

@Baaaahhhhh nope the words ‘contextual offer’ have a very clear meaning. It means when a university gives a student lower grade requirements to enter than other students for the same course due to contextual factors. Oxbridge never have done this.

However they do contextualise GCSE attainment as @Hoghgyni explains your even out the playing good for those who went to schools with lower attainment.

I’m sorry you may not understand the context but this has been debated heavily on previous threads where some posters seem to believe those in state schools get lower offers than those at private schools when this is explicitly untrue.

I’m sorry you may not understand the context but this has been debated heavily on previous threads where some posters seem to believe those in state schools get lower offers than those at private schools when this is explicitly untrue

I KNOW THAT..... I said that. I give up.

I’m sorry I think I started this argy bargy by using the term “contextualise” when what I probably meant was contextualising the whole application. I think there was some discussion about whether the HAT was now contextualised, which does seem a bit off. Of course GCSE results are to some extent (or maybe a major extent) school dependent - the dcs went to a blah comprehensive so I know only too well about teaching to the middle. But a candidate’s performance in an entrance exam should be clear to see, not elevated or reduced.

I think one of the myths that Oxford Mum has helped to dispel is that unless you have 10 x Grade 8/9s then it's not worth applying.

That may be the case for some course and it would be more likely at Oxford than Cambridge....I think some MN posters could put mere mortals off applying.

I think one of the myths that Oxford Mum has helped to dispel is that unless you have 10 x Grade 8/9s then it's not worth applying.

That may be the case for some course and it would be more likely at Oxford than Cambridge....I think some MN posters could put mere mortals off applying.

@IrmaFayLear well that’s a question to ask Cambridge admissions team. I am sure that if you email them they will be all to happy to tell you whether it is or not.

I am just tired of actual misinformation being spread that there are contextual offers when there are not.

@IrmaFayLear also if you are fine to accept that someone’s poorly performing school could affect their GCSE results then I don’t see why you have an objection to the idea that it may also affect the results they get in the admissions tests?
Meaning there is a case for contextualising admisssions tests.

But I don’t even want to start this argument so let’s just agree to disagree on that.