Oxbridge Aspirants 2022

[TangoWhiskyAlphaTango]

Hi not too sure if there is another thread started as could not see one. May be waaaaaay too early but wondered if any other parents out there who have a child applying for next year?

Dd would like to apply to Cambridge to study History and Politics in 2022. She is at a state A-level college doing History, Politics and English Literature. I have never had to push her towards studying she is a very motivated child and wants to give Cambridge a shot (a very long shot as we know!). Her GCSE results were good but not top notch (9s in History, English Language and literature and the rest 7s and 6s) so not sure how much this will affect her. So far her A-level essays are coming out at As and A* and those are her predicted grades so if she continues on track that should meet the criteria.

She reads a lot of extra curricular stuff and has a genuine passion for politics, has joined the local Labour party youth group. She has applied for the summer programme at Cambridge & is part of an Oxbridge group that the college puts together.

It feels like a such a long shot and the stats of actually getting in are very low only 18% of applicants successful in 2019 so I am trying to tell her not to get her hopes up whilst actually supporting her!

She is my first born so I have never been through this before. Anybody else out there? Would be lovely to hear from you.

Yes, agreed, not well put!

It's far, far harder with a MFL to bullshit your way into an offer than in a non technical subject.

Teacher made a joke about grammar but also confirms your DD's potential.

Both you and she are probably being too modest. No idea.

But the general point about oh apply for Classics or a MFL and any dimwit can get it is massively wide of the mark.

Also, well done to your DD.

Hi MN, I’m wondering something. Oxbridge confirmed that they lowered their offer ratios this year to mitigate against another bulge year as a result of TAGs. I think Cambridge only offered on a 1:1 basis this year, whereas normally they might over-offer by 20-30% in anticipation of this proportion not meeting the grades in the summer.

On top of this, I heard they’d was a 30% rise in pre-October 15th applications this year, much of which was driven by a 30% rise in those reapplying with possibly inflated grades due to CAGs. Also, in the case of Cambridge (not sure about Oxford), any conditional offer-holder who missed the required grades through CAGs had the opportunity to sit the November exams for a guaranteed place in 2021 if grades were achieved.

As such, it seems that quite a lot at DD’s school who were pooled but not offered places are now thinking of reapplying if they achieve three A this August (or four A if it’s STEM). Does anyone have any insight as to whether next year is also likely to see a surge in early applications, perhaps even greater than this year?

Thank you on her behalf, and I see what you mean now. Teacher is lovely but of an old-school level of ferocity about grammar and had previously described DD’s essays as always interesting and ambitious, but shockingly spelt.

To be honest, I think DD’s interest is more in the literary and linguistic connections than learning the language for the sake of fluency.

The CAG inflation thing is a bit of a generalisation/myth. One day they will actually release some stats on this but it is quite sensitive info as it suggests some sectors inflated more than others. Actually, inflation isn't really the right word : were more optimistic/less fearful of the dratted algorithm. Even this year, the whole conversation in schools is about not being checked up on.
It is true that overall grades rose but not universally , if you see what I mean.

I may have a personal axe to grind on this one! DS definitely missed out on two (potential : let's face it, we'll never know) 9s because of fear of the algorithm. In addition in the school I work in, I was told I was only 'allowed' one 9 for my subject. Interestingly in that case, the algorithm actually put up the class results overall!

Do that many students really defer for Oxbridge? It seems quite a risk.

I blagged my French A Level oral. I had food poisoning the night before and was really ill. For some stupid reason I told the examiner this who then proceeded to try to chat with me about it. I had no vocabulary for medical conditions or even most obscure foodstuffs!

Piggy - a lot of medical applicants this year will have no choice but to take a gap year as they received no offers - despite a full set of 9s and A* predictions! Medicine is always a tough one, but this year has been unprecedented from what I can see if DC friends.

I don’t think it’s that unusual to take a gap year and reapply with grades in hand - particularly if you can find work experience to boost your application. You just have to be very clear and realistic about the odds and want to do the gap year in and of itself. If you still end up at another uni, so be it, but at least you had some great experiences and/or travel in the meantime.

Hmmm... I think you may be speaking from a position of some financial privilege there, perhaps.

I do know that most maths degrees absolutely do not want their prospective students to do this.

Having no offers is certainly an awful situation.

Yes you’re right, it’s not recommended for maths. But this is not the case for many degrees.

Your observations are, I believe, correct, @2022ornot .

In normal times 3 or 4 A*s was not usual (I speak of humanities subjects) so someone would be tempted to (re)apply with these grades thinking they had a pretty decent chance.

Last year, however, way above the normal number received high grades, encouraging them to have a go - an indeed judging by the student room some applicants were applying with just one A* - encouraged by the ‘it’s only one slot on the UCAS form” gang.

This will happen again, as there’s nothing to lose. Of course admissions tests and GCSE grades will weed out the weaker applicants, but it is a blow for pupils who under normal circumstances would have got high grades and now don’t stand out. Dd is one of those pupils really disappointed that there are no exams; she was sad that content was cut and that they were told the “mini” exams subject. She feels quite deflated.

To be honest I think DD might well have missed one of her grades under ‘normal’ circumstances - whichever one had been hit by the worst period pain. Certainly that’s what happened at GCSE. (Whether it’s fair to judge a girl on what she can achieve while clutching a hot water bottle and mainlining painkillers is of course another question.)

Piggy, I can well believe your point about CAGs and your son's GCSE grades. DTs did their GCSEs in 2019 and they both got nearly all 9s: no way would their school have dared give them those CAGs if exams had been cancelled that year. They were terrified of even predicting 9s.

Even last year the new grades were what, only 3 years old, and the distinction between 8 and 9 must be tiny, and often come down to performance on the day. How can any teacher be confident, especially in humanities subjects, of the exact difference between an 8 and 9? Oxford and Cambridge don't distinguish between them for admissions and I guess there's good reason for that.

Just one A*!? Blimey.

My subject has had two A* in 10 years at my school. This mirrors the national average.

Re the period pain : I'd always say get the GP to write a note that this has affected concentration; exam concessions for mitigating circumstances should then be applied. Assessments can also be done in smaller rooms. Period pains and hay fever are so overlooked!

The other thing that happened in this last cycle is that Durham had such an unprecedented surge in conditional offer-holders who made the grades on 2020 results day, they not only offered a financial incentive to anyone who deferred their place to 2021, but also allowed them to reapply through UCAS while holding this deferred place. So many would have tried Oxbridge again, as they had nothing to lose. If it didn’t come off, no problem, as they had an unconditional place at Durham (inc. first choice college and accommodation type)!

In a normal year, do unis such as Durham, Bristol, UCL etc penalise those who reject places on results day and then reapply? Or do they not care or even notice? I don’t know?

Sorry, by “penalise,” I mean not offer places to re-applicants!

@Piggywaspushed

Re the period pain : I'd always say get the GP to write a note that this has affected concentration; exam concessions for mitigating circumstances should then be applied. Assessments can also be done in smaller rooms. Period pains and hay fever are so overlooked!

That’s such a good idea and I’m ashamed to admit it never occurred to us. She’s tried many things to manage it over the years, so the problem is on record, so to speak, but we’d never thought of asking for mitigation. Thank you.

Sorry to derail the thread. It does at least show that a full hand of 9s at GCSE isn’t always needed. DD’s included a couple of 7s, one of them in her ‘best’ subject.

@2022ornot

Hi MN, I’m wondering something. Oxbridge confirmed that they lowered their offer ratios this year to mitigate against another bulge year as a result of TAGs. I think Cambridge only offered on a 1:1 basis this year, whereas normally they might over-offer by 20-30% in anticipation of this proportion not meeting the grades in the summer.

On top of this, I heard they’d was a 30% rise in pre-October 15th applications this year, much of which was driven by a 30% rise in those reapplying with possibly inflated grades due to CAGs. Also, in the case of Cambridge (not sure about Oxford), any conditional offer-holder who missed the required grades through CAGs had the opportunity to sit the November exams for a guaranteed place in 2021 if grades were achieved.

As such, it seems that quite a lot at DD’s school who were pooled but not offered places are now thinking of reapplying if they achieve three A this August (or four A if it’s STEM). Does anyone have any insight as to whether next year is also likely to see a surge in early applications, perhaps even greater than this year?

In my opinion kids who would have got four a stars in a normal year will outperform (in admissions tests and interviews )those who get four lucky or generous a stars in 2020 and 2021 So the cohort who get in to Oxbridge will be the same people. Same for medicine I guess as the ucat is the decider. For subjects where there is no interview or other testing, I guess some “lucky” kids with generous schools will unfairly outperform kids at harsher marking schools but I don’t know what you can do about that really.

But to answer the question. Yes there will be more competition, but that competition won’t stop an Oxbridge standard person getting an offer. Like it won’t bother Mo Farah if I join in on the marathon!

In my opinion kids who would have got four a stars in a normal year will outperform (in admissions tests and interviews )those who get four lucky or generous a stars in 2020 and 2021 So the cohort who get in to Oxbridge will be the same people.

Completely agree. Before the pandemic I caused outrage here by saying that sure, unis for the moment are treating 8s and 9s as a single band, but that those who managed to get a straight sweep of 9s were likely to outperform those with a straight sweep of 8s. Not a popular view :)

UnkindlyMay
"It does at least show that a full hand of 9s at GCSE isn’t always needed. DD’s included a couple of 7s, one of them in her ‘best’ subject."

True. My DD had three 7s (out of 11 GCSEs) though did get 9s in all her A level subjects, including uni subjects.

@ClarasZoo

But to answer the question. Yes there will be more competition, but that competition won’t stop an Oxbridge standard person getting an offer. Like it won’t bother Mo Farah if I join in on the marathon!

I do think there are kids who would have been accepted in a normal year who weren't for 2021 (and perhaps 2022) due to caution/lower acceptance rate by colleges. I feel really sad for all 2021/2022 applicants, for many many reasons, and for GCSE kids too. Lots of kids would have hit high marks that teachers would be surprised by and wouldn't think to predict. I'm not sure my DD's actual GCSEs would have matched what predicted grades might have been.

DD got a 5 in her Physics mock because she had a headache as it was the last test after a full week of mocks (also hasn’t revised much). In the real thing, she got a 9, but there no way the school would have predicted that.

What I would say is that, in our experience, the Cambridge admissions process is much less standardised than it seems to be at Oxford. You live and learn! At Oxford, if you interview well but there’s no space at a given college, they will send you to another to have a shot there and they also send the highest interview performers to other colleges for standardisation on a departmental level. Not so at Cambridge where the colleges seem to operate more as separate entities. You can be “pooled” yes, but it’s obviously not the same as being given a shot at another interview in person. Also, tutors often use the pool to ensure they meet their widening participation criteria, so good luck getting out the pool if the student happens to be applying from an independent school. A sweep of 9s and all A* predictions will likely be treated as just “meh” from an selective independent, even when combined with a good interview score. They are now contextualising grammars in the same way as selective independents, having realised that despite the increase in successful applicants from the maintained sector in recent years, the majority of these were, in fact, from about 200 selective grammars.

Also, I don’t know about Oxford colleges, but Cambridge colleges vary hugely in their selection processes, even for the same subject. So, say for a humanities subject, some colleges will give two interviews (so they are seen by 4 interviewers overall), but some only one interview with two interviewers. Some require written work (to various specifications), others don’t. Some may even opt out if admissions tests while other colleges still use these tests for the same subject. So it’s far from standardised and you do wonder how they compare like with like. I wouldn’t go far as to say it’s a lottery as there will always be stand out candidates and those who clearly would not be suited, but I think
for the bulk of them, it’s all a bit of a dark art as it’s an archaic system for sure and definitely an element of luck involved in there somewhere!

Period pain is a bit dubious.... it could potentially apply to half - or I believe more than half - the entrants. And I speak as someone who was crippled with period pain but my dm didn’t believe in medicine (that’s another story) and I actually made myself ill with Nurofen when I discovered it at university as I was so in thrall to its magical powers of relief.

Anyway, worst exam experience surely goes to dsis in O Level Maths where the girl behind was sick and it went all over dsis’s cardigan. The the girl was sick on the way out over dsis’s paper. Dsis left in - literal - disgust and failed the O Level... No mitigating circs in those days!

Period pain is only dubious because women and girls are expected to suffer. If a girl is flooding a lot she should have rest breaks. If she is in excruciating pain, a GP would provide a medical note.