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.

I disagree that leaving school a year early doesn't put you at an academic disadvantage. Why on earth wouldn't it? You are a year younger and less mature, and have a year less of education - critically a year less of 6th form. I also disagree that Advanced Highers are more advanced than A'levels (I accept that they are in theory supposed to be). They're a 1 year qualification with half the teaching hours of an AS. Pupils are expected to do a lot of work on their own, which has advantages and disadvantages as far as pre-university education is concerned. You could achieve that for your DCs by giving them a project over the summer.

late, what do you know of A Levels? They are a two year course but AS s, which have now largely gone, are broadly equivalent to Highers in content and depth and AHs pick up more UCAS points so the Establishment agrees they are worth more. I am not trying to undermine you but I do know both systems, am Scottish, and went to uni in England (after applying to Oxford). I just don't think you should be fretting as much as you seem to be. The Scottish education system (albeit I accept it has been tinkered with and not everyone is thrilled, but you can't beat England for tinkering! ) is widely admired. I do agree that if you really think your DD is disadvantaged (and I don't think she is) a year out might be best. I agree that if she left at the end of S5 to enter an English uni , she would struggle.

The grass is definitely not greener on the other side!

One thing about many Scots schools is they aren't especially good/ experienced at Oxbridge prep but then neither are the vast majority of English comprehensive schools.

How many teaching hours is there for a Higher?

or AH?

There are a lot of inequalities/unfairnesses in education, period. A lot of youngsters used to go up to Oxbridge at just 17 (the precociously bright), in the days when schools used to allow the brightest to skip a year. I can think of two off the top of my head whom I've known in my time who did just that. One for Classics, the other for Maths. I think if you're really bright age isn't a barrier. You may of course be less mature to cope with the demands of being away at university at that age but that's something different.

I would also say that successful Oxbridge candidates will just have that edge generally with their beyond school self-enrichment. That doesn't come with age necessarily or how many years of schooling you've had, it's just part of those exceptional candidates' approach to learning I'd say.

(And I say this as someone with Oxbridge graduates in the family!).

@Startoftheyear2021 DS's school was very clear that the grade requirements are always the minimum expected and that successful candidates are very likely to exceed them. So I would think possibly it wouldn't be worth applying. But I have zero first hand experience of this (DS is my oldest). Could the school give you some guidance? Maybe it would depend on the course and how over subscribed it is? Also, if the other uni choices are realistic and achievable maybe it is worth a punt?

My uncle told me that in his day (mid 60s), the clever boys at his school did O Levels and A Levels early in order to spend the whole of their last year being prepped to pass Oxbridge interviews and tests.

@VikingNorthUtsire, yes that was definitely a thing in times gone by. Accelerated Sixth wasn't it called?

I hadn't heard of it before. A whole year! Just being primed.

In the past (I'm probably talking entry in the 40s, 50s and 60s), I think it was probably a vastly more unlevel playing field than it is now. I have it on good authority that you could get in on: brains, breeding, beauty or brawn. Make of that what you will! And there were entry exhibitions and scholarships in those days that really sorted the wheat from the (comparitive) chaff!

The past is another country and secret shoe-ins don’t exist now. If they did they’d soon be exposed.

Agree that if you are applying with grades in hand, you must exceed standard offer. Of course the past two years have made things a little more complicated, as so many more aspirants have top grades. It makes it infinitely more important to ace any entrance test.

@Piggywaspushed

late, what do you know of A Levels? They are a two year course but AS s, which have now largely gone, are broadly equivalent to Highers in content and depth and AHs pick up more UCAS points so the Establishment agrees they are worth more. I am not trying to undermine you but I do know both systems, am Scottish, and went to uni in England (after applying to Oxford). I just don't think you should be fretting as much as you seem to be. The Scottish education system (albeit I accept it has been tinkered with and not everyone is thrilled, but you can't beat England for tinkering! ) is widely admired. I do agree that if you really think your DD is disadvantaged (and I don't think she is) a year out might be best. I agree that if she left at the end of S5 to enter an English uni , she would struggle.

The grass is definitely not greener on the other side!

One thing about many Scots schools is they aren't especially good/ experienced at Oxbridge prep but then neither are the vast majority of English comprehensive schools.

I'm afraid it makes no sense to me to suggest that you can take a child out of school a year early (which is what happens in Scotland if you are comparing it with England) without any educational disadvantage. And your view of the Scottish education system is very out of date. The education system has changed drastically in recent years, and has been heavily criticised by international bodies and parents. That is not to criticise DC's school, which does a decent job within the system. DC has 4 single lessons a week on the language she wants to do at university. So half a day a week. She is reading 1 book only in that subject (apart from those she is reading on a voluntary basis). I am very familiar with the A'level system, and it involves far more teaching. Less independent work, but as you say, people interested in Oxbridge will be doing independent work in any event.

But you seem to be writing off Highers as contributing anything late? Did she not read any books then?English students do not get the equivalent of that at all. Most really pretty much waste year 12 ....

My A level classes have 4 lessons a week... OK across 2 years but they have no equivalent of Highers.

I do have relatives still at school in Scotland so not completely out of the loop.

I must be honest, if you do think your DS is so disadvantaged, it is either a year out or sticking to Glasgow, Edinburgh, etc which are very very fine unis .

We obviously aren't going to agree on this and I am not trying to be combative. I was trying to focus on the positives...

I think the disadvantages for a state educated student from a low income background in a coatsal area are huge.

I just think your arguments are illogical. I doubt that you would want your DC to leave school at the end of Year 12. And do they really only get 4 single lessons per week in each A'level subject?

But that's the way the Scottish system is. Many people move around the UK to improve their opportunities. Indeed there's significant family home movement at secondary school (st)age to get DC into the best schools possible. Presumably, @Lateyetagain, if you were keen on your DC being Oxbridge-ready and you thought the Scottish education system disadvantages them in doing so, you could have considered moving to England?

I'm afraid there is unfairness all around. My irritation at the moment is that DD has no chance of a place at Edinburgh for Medicine despite 'perfect' GCSEs and IB predictions. If she were Scottish she'd be welcomed with the same UCAT score. How can that be fair?

No need to answer that question. Just wanted to point out that unfairness presents in lots of different ways.

Oxbridge is designed around the English system, and I accept that. It makes sense. I wouldn't move to a different part of the UK just to increase the chance of a DC getting into Oxbridge, no. It wouldn't be practical, and there are other decent university options.
From what I've read, it's actually easier for an English student to get into St Andrew's and Edinburgh than a Scottish student, because an English student pays far far more than the Scottish Government pays for a Scottish student, so the universities would rather have an English student, once they've filled their agreed quota of Scottish students. There's discussion on Scotsnet about how difficult it is for a good Scottish student to get into St Andrew's due to how the finances work.

@Lateyetagain

I just think your arguments are illogical. I doubt that you would want your DC to leave school at the end of Year 12. And do they really only get 4 single lessons per week in each A'level subject?

I want my DS to leave school at the end of formal education : so in England, year 13; in Scotland S6 - it's not 'year 12' it's a totally different thing and this seems to be the bit you are fixed on, but they have passed through formal school education in either country at that point. In Scotland, of course, he could leave - and go to uni- at the end of S5. I didn't but I knew loads who did,and they were fine.

To answer your other bit, they get 9 lessons in total across two weeks at my school, split across two teachers for most subjects. MFL gets 8 lessons a fortnight, irritatingly.

Do you find Scottish students want to go to St A's, out of interest? This may well have changed, but back in my day, no one went there. We focused on Edinburgh, Glasgow, Aberdeen, and others . Most of my friends were at Glasgow or Edinburgh and lived at home.

In my admittedly not extensive experience, Scottish schools are more academically relaxed than many schools in England appear to be, although that changes somewhat in the senior years. I feel that in S6 they are just getting into the idea of thinking for themselves rather than having to include 3 facts per paragraph to get 1 point, etc. It would be good if they could have a 2 year 6th form, to give them time to enjoy the extra-curricular, school responsibilities, etc and to grow into more grown up academic work, including following their interests, not always in the shadow of the exams. Studying a language at university when you've only read one book OR studied one film (mostly on your own) at school doesn't seem ideal (not everyone will do extra reading). And that's assuming they do Advanced Highers - the many who stop at Higher level don't read any books in the language at all, but can then study the language at university. It would also save parents money to cover that level of education while they're at home, rather than having an extra year at university.
I'm surprised to hear that A'level students are only getting 4 lessons per subject per week. For the standard 3 A'levels, that's only 1.5 to 2 school days. What do they do with the other 3+ days of the school week?
I've asked DD about St Andrew's, and she doesn't know anyone who's applying there. I don't know what the reason is - whether it has anything to do with people assuming they wouldn't be accepted, because it has a reputation of not accepting many Scottish students? From the little I've read, I get the impression that they need or want to allocate spaces to less privileged children from Scotland, and once those Scottish Government funded spaces have been allocated, they give preference to students from outside Scotland who pay more. They may prefer the English school system too, for all I know. I haven't researched this though, as DD is not applying there, and I'm not suggesting that a top class Scottish student wouldn't get in there. There is a view here that it is considerably more difficult for a Scottish student to get into St A or E than for an English student.

A level MFL students in English read one book and one film. Not in much depth.

Re the hours : they have loads of frees and do nothing in them for two whole years of their education!

Just as you think I am perhaps romanticising my Scottish education (guilty as charged) I think you may be idealising the depth of an average English one, honest.

The spoon feeding you describe (3 points per para etc) very very much exists in our education system too and the independent learning is really not very valued by students or by schools measured by hitting targets. We do have EPQ , though, which has its merits. I guess an Oxbridge student, wherever they are, needs to reach beyond the confines of school , which is a pretty sad indictment of what is seen as the purpose of education these days.

Certainly in my day, no one applied to St A : largely because we thought it was full of English people, not because it was harder (it wasn't back then), or anything to do with fees and funding, luckily for me. It was just not 'Scottish'!

I don't think you're romanticising your Scottish education. But there have been big changes since then.

I think it depends on the school as well. I have/had children at one school and a close family member teaching at another. At the children's school they get 5 hours a week per A level plus additional 45 minutes "talking time" if doing a MFL. At the other school they get 4 hours a week. At my children's school, independent learning on top is expected as the norm - in the other school they assume no one will read around the subject at all.
So there are plenty of variations even within a system...

At DD's school it's 4 hours per A Level per week and most do 4. Two afternoons a week of sport or community service. Not many frees. The expectation is of independent study and reading around the subjects.

I know when DS1 applied to Oxford he had been reading around his subject for pleasure for at least couple of years and had plenty to draw in both his PS and at interview. DD has been doing the same.