Oxbridge - Autistic Child - no extra curriculars?

[ComfortablyGlum]

My son is Yr 11 and about to take his GCSEs. He is high functioning autistic who lives and breathes computers. He has no other interests whatsoever (despite my attempts to get him to try any number of activities!).

He takes his education very seriously and is predicted 8/9s in his GCSEs. He is the computer scholar at his current school and is looking to move to a super selective grammar for 6th Form in September. He has his sights on Oxbridge for comp sci (even though I personally think Imperial is a better fit for his skill set).

Problem is, he cannot seem to grasp that getting a place at ANY prestigious Uni is not just about grades or ‘being clever’ and that they will be looking for applicants that are well rounded, stand out and are passionate about the subject.

His logic is: “Why does climbing a mountain / playing hockey for the school / running chess club (or any other activity under the sun!) mean I’m suddenly better at CompSci?”

He is very emotionless and even when talking about computers, he is unable to convey passion for the subject. It’s all logic. I really wonder if it’s worth putting him through the process of applying as he will struggle to write a well rounded, stand out PS because he has nothing in his life other than computing.

His school have asked him to set up a computer club for the younger years but he won’t (has trouble with socialising and this would mean having to talk to people!) and I’ve suggested doing a summer school type thing for SOMETHING to talk about in a PS - he’s not keen but this has not had a definitive’No’ yet!

Anyone else had experience of a very insular autistic child going through the Oxbridge process?

As others have said it is passion for the subject that is key, not rugby or DofE.

So reading, open source programming, competitions etc.

It's unpopular on MN but if you need to do something like MAT for computer science at Oxbridge then I would actually pay a tutor for that. The MAT is a filter for the interview and proper preparation is worth it IMO.

In STEM subjects, by seeing how they engage with and go about tackling some novel (probably quite mathsy) problems. Not so much whether they get the 'right' answer as whether they can get going on it, try something else if their first approach doesn't work - that sort of thing.

That is about the assessment of the problem-solving ability, not passion. Many people here said that O&C emphasises passion which is something very difficult to sell-off.

I'm not sure that "passion" isn't a bit overhyped - the oxbridge academic upthread said talent was the key.

Ds has a place for Compsci at oxbridge. The only thing they asked him from his application form, other than the problems they wanted him to tackle was about his work experience, which was highly compsci relevant.

@ComfortablyGlum

Thank you all so much for the invaluable information.

It does sound like it’s a more viable option than I thought it might be and I will encourage him to look at olympiads and developing his own software or app.

Just to add- I think this is something you HAVE to start thinking about going from Yr 11 to 12. Applying for high end institutions can’t be done on a whim in the last few months of Yr 13! His application (if he goes ahead) will need to be submitted to O or C in only 18 months from now which isn’t that long at all! Albeit he has a little longer for non Oxbridge unis but not much.

Again, thank you all for your responses - I feel I can give him more useful guidance and support in the process now. We are doing the open days this summer to see if either place would be a good fit for him.

Surely, if he is sufficiently interested in his subject to be of Oxbridge calibre, he will already be doing those things that would show talent out of interest alone. I'm not sure it necessarily has to be planned to any great extent.

Will he be doing Further maths for A levels? His maths ability and attainment will be critical for both Imperial and Oxbridge.
I think you are right to encourage socialising with others, at least with others that share his focus, so a summer camp sounds a good idea. However that is more for his future well being than for degree admissions.
You and he might find it reassuring if he writes a bullet list even now of why computing, what he has worked on in his own spare time, an example of a computing challenge he has enjoyed.
Perhaps he could explore, if he has n’t already, doing some hackathons and British informatics olympiad or Bebras problems.

@ErrolTheDragon

I'm not sure that "passion" isn't a bit overhyped - the oxbridge academic upthread said talent was the key.

DD is studying a subject that wasn't available to her at GCSE or A level so she had no talent in it whatsoever.

She did have passion, however, when talking about what she had read, watched and been to visit relating to the subject. She thoroughly enjoyed her interview and even thanked the interviewer because it was fun.

DS was very 'talented' at his subject at school, as were many others. His passion for it led him to extracurricular projects, awaydays and masterclasses (involving long journeys) that made him stand out from his peers.

So however excellent someone might be at school, I think going beyond just what you're being taught, because you love it and want to know more is what they are looking for. Shorthand for that is passion.

So passion weight more than talent in Oxbridge admission then. DC has the talent who can't sell off will be disadvantaged.

As others have said, super curriculars not extra curriculars.

Hardly any universities care about extra curriculars. It’s a myth that parents worry about for no reason. In fact a number of places which are trying to redress their state/independent school balance actually view them negatively because they’re activities that generally cost money and so are exclusionary.

They don’t need rounded people they need excellent academics.

@User11010866

So passion weight more than talent in Oxbridge admission then. DC has the talent who can't sell off will be disadvantaged.

At interview, he wouldn't need to sound passionate. He'd need to sound as if he knew his stuff and could work through mathematical problems, the latter being critical.

Actually having Googled the Oxford Computer Science entry requirements the most important part is acing the MAT. Only 19% are interviewed so that is a huge filter.

In the OPs shoes I'd spend any spare cash on tutoring for that.

DS had a few tutorials with a tutor for the PAT (physics) and loved it. He came out absolutely buzzing after all of them.

Just to clarify - “passion” isn’t exactly what we are looking for. You can be passionate about something - pretty much all of our applicants are “passionate” - but enthusiasm is not the same as ability.

By “talent in the subject” I mean ability in the subject - this isn’t demonstrated just by what you know, but how you think. That’s why we ask questions and give unseen problems to students at interview - they don’t have to have lots of knowledge or even get the “right” answer, if their thinking shows they have an aptitude for the subject.

To some extent doing extra work in the subject does help a bit - we’d want to see applicants seeking out extra reading and learning beyond the syllabus - but expensive courses and tutoring are not necessary. Just doing some additional reading off their own bat is fine. And even that isn’t strictly required. We are very aware that not everyone can afford such things and we deliberately ask questions that don’t rely on anything like that.

If anything, rather than “passion”, I would say one of the key skills we are looking for is the ability to synthesise new information quickly and then adapt a line of thinking accordingly. This is why tutoring and expensive preparation aren’t that useful. We give a student an idea, text or problem to work through that they can’t prepare for in advance. What we’re looking for is the combination of raw ability and the ability to synthesise existing knowledge into new thinking that gives someone talent at a subject.

Able and talented students tend to be enthusiastic and passionate about enjoying their work, but that doesn’t mean that enthusiasm and passion is the thing we’re measuring in the interview.

However, as a pp said, the UCAS form goes not just to us but also to other universities that (mostly) don’t interview, so it might be that your DC wants to think of how they demonstrate interest in the subject on the PS for those universities too.

PS - the tests used like BMAT, ELAT etc. really do not require tutoring to do well in (and I’d be pretty sceptical of anyone claiming to tutor a student in how to take one). Everyone in the process is well versed in screening out coaching and tutoring.

@User11010866

So passion weight more than talent in Oxbridge admission then. DC has the talent who can't sell off will be disadvantaged.

That's the opinion of one parent. I don't think it's always the case.

Actually, I think that they give offers to a range of types. Some may have demonstrable specific or generalised talents - in the case of subjects taken ab initio of course they may not be able to show a specific talent. That's really not the case for comp sci though.

Definitely agree with the PP who mentioned further maths - check the course requirements at the universities he may be interested in, it's probably 'highly desirable' ie if the school offers it then should take it. That's not just to get the offer, it's so you aren't playing catch-up with hard maths on the course.

Some tips for helping DC hone their skills in thinking flexibly in advance of applying for Oxbridge:

• get in the habit of questioning your thinking. Always be asking, Is this really true? Could this be done / could this problem be solved another way? What if I looked at this from the opposite viewpoint? What if the answer is the very opposite of what I expect? Could the problem/question be posed a radically different way?

• start thinking about some of the basic assumptions and methodologies that underlie my chosen subject. How did these come about? Were they always how they are now? What has caused them to change over time? Is the framework used for thinking in my subject helpful; in what ways could it be restrictive? What are the key differences in method between school and university study? What are the big controversies or unsolved problems in my chosen subject/field?

• thinking about how do I personally go about solving problems/developing arguments? In what ways could I change or challenge my usual methods of working? How do I test new knowledge against my existing expectations and what happens if I encounter new material that suggests I might be wrong? How do I go about testing reliable sources and arguments and distinguishing them from non-reliable ones? How do I evaluate information and go beyond basic internet searches to arrive at reliable new knowledge and ideas?

All of these things can be done off their own bat, with an internet connection and library access. A bit of extra reading and thinking and seeking out new ideas and reflecting on how the subject works is far better than being sent on innumerable expensive additional summer schools and tutoring. Of course you can do both if you can access them. But students who can’t, should not feel they are at a disadvantage as the skills they need can be honed without all that.

Not necessarily directly related to the question of 'what to put on his PS'...it occurs to me that while it sounds inappropriate of his school to ask him to set up a computer club, it might be good for him if he could participate in one - maybe as a bit of a 'guru', not even necessarily requiring face to face interactions. The thing about actually being a computer scientist is that a lot of the interesting stuff is of necessity collaborative. It's not all lone geniuses nowadays. I've been a scientific software developer for decades... getting experience of working on coding projects with others, communicating with them etc etc really would make him "better at Comp Sci".