Cambridge offer - DS might want to turn it down

[AndyFloss]

DS has a Cambridge offer. He's delighted, but he is now starting to consider whether he wants to go down this path of unbelievable pressure.

If he commits to getting in, he'll be under massive pressure to achieve the required grade for 4 A levels PLUS the step exam (Maths).

This is making him think that although he could really push himself to do it and he has the capability, it is possible that once in, he'll be under unbearable pressure for 3 years. And all for what?

He potentially risks getting a lower grade in his degree, whilst if he goes somewhere like Warwick, also good for Maths, he could do very well and also have a nicer life.

Of course he then goes back full circle thinking that if he rejects a Cambridge offer, he'll regret it for the rest of his life.

I'd love to hear opinions please.

@PPCD

A maths degree at Warwick is going to be just as difficult as at Cambridge.

Also to the previous poster who said living out at Warwick is a 30 min commute. It really isn't a problem and at Cambridge you can end up living quite far out in years 2 and 3 as well. I wouldn't base any part of the decision on this.

Nowhere in Cambridge is far, it’s such a tiny city. The furthest he’s likely to be is a 15 minute cycle to the maths department if he ends up at Homerton.

It's a once in a lifetime opportunity. Take it. If it doesn't work out there are lots of other options, but I can't see why it wouldn't 😕

He should accept the Cambridge offer. That’s not an offer he’s ever likely to get again so he needs to be absolutely sure before rejecting. In the worst case scenario, with the A level results he’s likely to get, he can have his pick of universities (except Cambridge) a year later. I would urge him not to rule anything out - he may feel quite differently when he gets his results in seven months time.

I agree Cambridge will be a door opener for the rest of his life.

If he doesn't like it, he can change it.

If he doesn't try it, there's no going back.

It's the next few years versus the rest of his career.

DietrichandDiMaggio it’s because for good or bad Oxbridge is treated differently by companies and others when hiring for well paid undergrad roles

Poetryandwine, you are right about clearing. What I was trying to say is that it is worth putting Warwick as insurance even though it is not a safe option. Warwick will have a number of Cambridge near misses.

If he misses his grades altogether than clearing and reapplications are an option. Better that than playing safe from the beginning.

The Cambridge experience can vary on how easy you find maths. The naturally talented have plenty of time for other things. The more marginal may find that it is three years of hard slog. (My point earlier about the over tutored.) He should work hard and keep an open mind. If he gets Cambridge he is good enough. If he goes to Warwick it is a great University/course which will open the same doors.

It is true that Cambridge over-offers and uses STEP to decide. But DP missed his STEP offer - I think he was offered 1,1 and got S,2 - and still got in as it will depend on how others did as well

Just a quick comment on Cambridge being a "door opener".

I have just applied for a Civil Service role. I have a 2:1 from Cambridge. But they don't know that, because their application process prevents you from naming the educational institution where you got your degree.

This is part of their effort to minimise unconscious bias in the recruitment process. That is clearly a positive move, but it does mean people shouldn't be counting on future employers knowing that their 2:2 from University of Big Name is on a par with someone else's First from University of Everyone Gets a First.

The actual maths at Warwick will be very similar to the actual maths at Cambridge. Warwick has an excellent maths course, but I would be choosing Cambridge for the breadth of mathematical opportunities. Part III is not for everyone (and of course your DS could do it after Warwick) but it’s amazing for broadening and deepening your mathematical knowledge as a 4th year mathematician.

I did Part III and got a distinction, and i didn’t have to spend all day doing maths - I spent lots of time doing sport and with my DH (we weren’t married then). You can always keep Warwick as the backup offer.

Thanks, @Needmoresleep. Your advice makes sense but it is mainly for the brave, I think. I agree that OP’s DS would be a top Clearing candidate, but Closed is Closed. Luckily he can do quite a few STEP mocks between now and decision time.

Re your comments on ability, and to PPs who see little difference between C and W, I will pass on the gist of thoughts from DH. He did have an active social life during his first two years at C, but he doesn’t think that mattered much to his marks. He just didn’t have the repertoire of tricks to get top marks. In Y3 when he could elect intrinsically hard courses with relatively straightforward exams, he blossomed and was encouraged to sit Part III where he was one of the top students. Only then did he really gain confidence.

So there are different kinds of talent. Warwick is also outstanding but of the COWI Schools I think C Maths may have the greatest reputation for rewarding a certain type of cleverness in the early years. It’s neither good nor bad. It is a cultural identity.

Warwick is not easier. You need to be more driven in a way because there's more emphasis on large lectures than Cambridge, and less tutorials. I don't know the current percentages of 1sts but Warwick is not a given for one, I also know 3 recent drop outs from Warwick because of the lack of support.

My advice, try for Cambridge basically. If he really wants an easier university I wouldn't opt for Warwick

@ErrolTheDragon

Southampton is very tough anyway! A first isn't a given even for those with 4*'s at a level. I love the assumption that other universities are easier

Southampton have a bit of a specialty and DD's course is ranked 1 in the country currently, it's very difficult with less than 5% getting firsts

@pitterpatterrain

DietrichandDiMaggio it’s because for good or bad Oxbridge is treated differently by companies and others when hiring for well paid undergrad roles

Well obviously I realise that one of the reasons is the doors it potentially opens career-wise, although I think for many it is the prestige of saying you/your child went to Oxbridge, but just think it's interesting how being happy with the city/type of place you go to stops being seen as a priority if you have potential to go to Oxford or Cambridge.

I think it would be madness to turn down a maths offer from Cambridge.

I don't think there's anyone who's going to find cambridge really challenging for maths and Warwick a breeze. Warwick will still be a lot of work, it will still be a lot of pressure.

I also think that a first from another university is not of the same value as a maths degree from Cambridge just because it's a first. If we think logically the number of people who've said they could get a first elsewhere but not Cambridge shows the value of the degree. A degree from Cambridge does open doors.

Firm Cambridge, insurance Warwick. Work hard, because working towards the STEP will only benefit his degree wherever he goes.

I don't think it's just about the doors that it opens, though that has definitely been a factor for me. Personally, the biggest thing for me about Oxbridge is the supervision system. As far as I am aware, no other university offers that level of individual attention at undergraduate level, and the impact of that on my academic development was immeasurable. I do think it would be a shame to miss out on that opportunity if you have the chance to benefit from it. Whether it's fair that Oxbridge students are the only ones to benefit from that type of teaching is another question entirely.

Of course, there might be some students who genuinely wouldn't benefit from that style of teaching, but I imagine that they would be the minority. Obviously, those that wouldn't would be advised to go elsewhere.

Poetry, I think most COWI third years will allow a good choice of options so students can pick those which suit/interest them most, often causing the third year to feel easier than the first two. Some may even be shared with Masters programs and provide valuable stretch for the most able. DS, who was not at Oxbridge, still started his US PhD with noticeably strong maths/metrics skills in a cohort that included good graduates from North and South America, China, Russia, Europe and elsewhere.

The issue is for marginal students who find first and second year compulsory courses tough going. University is then not much fun. OPs DS should be content that if he focuses on his exams and STEP and works hard, que sera sera. A narrow miss for Cambridge may be a blessing in disguise. Warwick will also stretch the most able but, since STEP is seen as a good predictor, may have recruited a bigger range of talent, so allow more chance to be within a comfort zone that allows for work hard/play hard.

Alexa, did you study maths?

There are arguments both for and against the Oxbridge approach in STEM. For example DD does not regret opting for a different teaching approach for medicine. And indeed enjoyed the collaborative group working approach used when she took an intercalated degree in engineering at Imperial. As I said upthread that a friend of DS found her supervisor, in a small arts subject, totally unengaged, to the extent that she felt she was paying fees to teach herself.

Is this sense of pressure coming from him? From you?

I went to Cambridge, and in my first week I was given what turned out to be very sage advice by my college "father" (it's a fresher mentorship thing where you're shown the ropes by an older undergrad).

He said you can either work your arse off trying to get a first (and not necessarily achieve it, because a Cambridge first is about more than just hitting targets), or you can make the most of your time there, join clubs, have fun, put some effort in for exams and come out with a respectable 2:1.

I did the latter. I pissed off some supervisors from time to time, because on the whole I put more work into directing plays than I did my studies, but I got my 2:1 and I had a brilliant time. I knew many people who busted a gut to get a first, putting themselves through tortuous pressure. Some got firsts, some didn't. Some people got firsts despite not studying day and night, because they were simply brilliant. That's how it goes there.

I felt that getting into Cambridge in the first place proved anything I might have needed to prove to myself. I didn't need to compete to be the best there - I knew I never could be, and wasn't planning on an academic career anyway.

Cambridge is not a hot house unless you want it to be.

No, not maths, so I can't comment specifically on that. And of course, the system falls apart if you get crappy supervisor but I never did. Also had plenty of opportunities for collaborative learning through college based classes, but it might not be the same for everyone.

@StarMouse879 - that is a terrible policy. There is no parity amongst degrees. I read the other day that Chester University had a trigger warning for students doing English degrees warning about Harry Potter. They were also studying The Hunger Games An Oxbridge student would be studying Ulysses and the Metaphysical Poets! Does the civil service not want high-calibre entrants?

DS accepted a Cam maths offer and ended up at his insurance which was Warwick because he missed the STEP grade. Got a first at Warwick.

There are some very gifted mathematicans at Warwick so it's no easy ride. Plus there was very little tutor contact, supervision or support. I suspect the short terms at Cam are compensated by the additional help.
Your DS really has nothing to lose by accepting the Cam offer. If he meets it he can still change his mind at the last minute and his insurance (or indeed other unis) would still have him.

Thanks Alexa. Maths is different. (I am using DS’s experience of a very maths heavy economics degree as well as that of a friend who read maths at Cambridge.) Courses are building blocks. Put simply, compulsory first and second year courses, give you the skills needed for third year options. Those who find concepts easy can breeze through, but others will need to concentrate and practice as otherwise they will struggle with the next stage. My friend said it became quite lonely, and that she found it depressing to lose the thread 10 minutes into a lecture.

The “Cambridge is better” across all subjects because it is Cambridge is curious arguments. DD gets them a lot as many of her school friends have just graduated from there. (As a medic her response is simple…can you think of any Cambridge medical students who you would not want to be treated by…) I imagine it is fantastic for a very talented and secure mathmo. But for some others, Warwick or Imperial might suit better. Longer terms, so less concentrated social and academic pressure. Imperial is wonderfully International and diverse, with less social pressure as everyone else is STEM. DD, who is dyslexic, found Imperial’s essay writing support first rate.

It’s about fit. The Cambridge 50% rejection rate in the summer is tough and forces a brave or safe decision for insurance. To some extent you have to trust selectors and STEP. If you are in you are almost certainly good enough.

[quote DottyHarmer]@StarMouse879 - that is a terrible policy. There is no parity amongst degrees. I read the other day that Chester University had a trigger warning for students doing English degrees warning about Harry Potter. They were also studying The Hunger Games An Oxbridge student would be studying Ulysses and the Metaphysical Poets! Does the civil service not want high-calibre entrants?[/quote]
Lots of employers do blind applications, not just the Civil Service. Obviously those who really care that they are getting Oxbridge candidates won't, though if that's all they focus on they'll miss out on outstanding candidates from many other excellent institutions.

Institution blind, but including competency tests, is very normal. Why should it matter which University you studied at as long as you have the skills for the job. That said, those recruiting maths graduates may have high requirements for competency and the tests will rule out those who simply don't have the skills. Good grads from Cambridge and Warwick will then stand out.

My son is also very good at maths but I’d be worried if he wanted to apply to Cambridge to do maths because it’s incredibly difficult.

He’s getting almost 100 percent in maths A level assessments and over 80 percent in further maths but he’s going to apply for computer science which he finds easier.

He could give it a try and switch to a different course if he hates it.