Extracurricular - when does it matter?

[Fireflygal]

More for my interest.

I have older dc who have gone through the Uni process and 2 who will applying. All have applied or planning to apply to competitive universities so non academic extracurricular activities haven't been a factor on PS. They might have added a sentence at the end of PS if sufficient space but it was never referred to in interviews.

However friends with DC applying say extracurricular is important "to show they are rounded" and I often see comments on posts about DoE or music grades as helping Uni applications.

I know US College applications are getting popular and I think it's much more relevant to their applications but when does it matter for UK universities? I appreciate you can convert music grades to UCAS points so that might be a factor but generally do Uni admissions look for the person to be "rounded" or is it still mostly academic based?

Also if it isn't relevant where has this belief come from? A good friend is unshakeable in her view Oxbridge will care about their Grade 8 whereas I know it isn't the case.

I think encouraging independent experiences (such as sports, hobbies etc)is good for teens and it helps to cope with Uni but not sure it helps to actually get in??

We were told Oxbridge wouldn't care but other universities might. For example I can see when applying to Loughborough why an interest in sports may matter .......

Also if it isn't relevant where has this belief come from?

I'm pretty sure there was an entire section on the old UCCA form for extracurricular activities and I was certainly asked about hobbies in interview back in the dark ages. It definitely helped that I bonded with the (STEM subject) Professor who was interviewing me because his wife played the same instrument so we chatted about concertos for at least 5 minutes. I think it did matter when the parents of DC applying now applied to university.

Supercurricular activities are more important than extracurricular activities for Oxbridge.

Ds used one very short sentence for his very boring extracurricular activities, something about why it was important to him to balance school studies with football, gym and socialising with family (as if!) and friends. He never even mentioned his Duke of Edinburgh.

There are more important things to write about. He got 4 unconditionals for MEng Mechanical Engineering (only applied for 4 as he had the first unconditional in for his 2nd choice before putting a last choice in). Of course it might be his course/unis never even read his PS and went on his achieved grades and school reference.

Dh played a sport internationally as a teen. He also went to Cambridge. His Director of Studies forgot what sport it was he played so not interested in his sporting prowess. However, he did comment that someone who got perfect GCSEs whilst spending 30+ hours a week training must be a number of very clever, very organised or very hard working. And he did care about that…..

Unis want to know about a student's passion for the subject they're applying for.

My ds had a couple of interviews (for Engineering) and they were focused solely on maths and physics questions!

In my albeit limited experience extra-curriculars are only really important if they are conducted at a high level. For example someone who swims at national level and trains before and after school every day and still manages to get good A levels would be more impressive than someone who lists their extra curricular as going to the gym and enjoying socialising with friends.

They don't matter. Not really. It's a myth put about by organisations and (private) schools which offer lots of extra-curricular activities, and it's perpetuated by MNers who spent a fortune on extra-curric in the hope that they would get Tristan into Durham, but when they don't, they're too embarrassed and distraught to admit it!
I've had 2 x DCs get straight offers from Top 20 universities. Neither had much room for their hobbies on the UCAS form and neither were asked about them.

HOWEVER you could argue that extra-curricular activities = hobbies which might be good for overall wellbeing and mental health/ making new friends/ getting fit/ going outside/ having a break from academic work etc etc. All of those are excellent reasons for doing them and why they DO matter!

I did a long stint as an admissions tutor in a Russell Group STEM School just below Oxbridge/Imperial/Warwick. We could not have cared less about most extracurriculars.

I agree with PPs that having something to balance one’s studies is important, hence possibly reassuring to admissions tutors but hardly necessary. (Oxbridge don’t want it) Representing one’s country is always worth a mention. Overegging one’s DoE Bronze or amateur theatrics just sounds naive. Be proportionate. The letter of recommendation from the school should cover school honours, offices, activities and service.

Increasingly they are becoming a non thing - as many extra curricular are only available to the priveleged that can afford them and/or afford the time to chauffeur etc for them ), and with unis now under pressure to improve social inclusion they will go, I think, along with the PS in general. Certainly much work experience is often nepotistic as well.

They aren't important or relevant for most courses or universities. The admissions tutor for biomed at Newcastle told us that they don't even read personal statements unless the student is borderline.

I think schools place more importance on them than universities do TBH.

The letter of recommendation from the school should cover school honours, offices, activities and service

Unless the students pretty much write these themselves I found the school letters fairly hopeless! DS's school made much of his role as a Prefect (for which he did nothing) but almost omitted to mention he'd had the lead role in Hamlet and won a place at National Youth Theatre (which was slightly relevant as he was applying for a drama-related course!)

Why would swimming and singing in a choir even matter make any difference to your aptitude to study, say physics?!

Unis select students on the basis of their passion and aptitude for the subject they're applying for.

Yeah no one cares!

Think about it, why would a History lecturer, who's love is History, be remotely interested in a random 17 year old's D of E! It doesn't make him any better a history student.

I don't think it matters, unless the extra curricular is relevant to the course. E.g. if you're doing a teaching course and have 3 years experience as a young leader at guides/scouts, or you're applying for a drama course and have been in many productions etc.

However I do think extra curricular activities are really good to help teens have a well rounded experience and try new things and also to be independent. Many of my best memories as a teenager are from my experiences playing in the orchestra, doing guides and d of e.

I agree with PP that if you are achieving really well academically and performing at a really really high level in an extra curricular - eg made the final of Young Musician of the Year/are representing your country at sport it is worth a mention as it indicates that you have achieved the academics whilst putting in the equivalent hours to a full time job into your extra curricular activity. It indicates dedication, organisation above the norm and that you have achieved your academic grades without a huge amount of overworking/slog. Even Oxbridge admisions tutors will take note of that. It might also explain a lack of supercurricular activities.

If they really don't matter (or not for most students) why did the representatives of Manchester and Durham at the online Russell Group massive advertising information sessions this week explicitly say that the PS should be 80/20 academic/outside interests. It's an percentage I hear a lot. Surely they should know? Or not?

My 5 children mostly mentioned their interest in the university subject not their hobbies on the form. In fact I remember with one daughter we deliberately tried not to mention some of her hobbies, skiing, having her own horse and show jumping in case left wing entrance tutors took umbrage!

However for the rest of your life it can be nice to have interesting hobbies. I am quite musical and sing or play the piano most days. I was on a law committee where by chance about 50% of us sung in chamber choirs which was a coincidence.
People look at your linkedin profile in due course and it can certainly be interesting see people's hobbies but at the end of the day it is whether you can do the job not if you happen to have the same interests that counts. Some jobs like team players or people who can organise things or do public speaking so people good at that stuff might find it worth mentioning in some contexts.

DD got offers from all 5 unis without mentioning ( or doing) any extra curricular. She talked about her subject, a couple of books she skim-read sufficiently to get quotes from, and podcasts she'd listened to. She didnt apply to Oxbridge, but 3 of hers were Russell group, and her offers were lower than the ones on the website.

My husband used to interview for a RG STEM course. Because he is a keen amateur musician, the team dividing up the interviewees would send anyone who mentioned music on their PS to him. He would ask one question about it if they ran out of other things to discuss.

@Kango, you have asked an excellent question I cannot answer. It conflicts with what I’ve heard from students rejected from Oxbridge that they were advised not to waste precious word count on extracurriculars. I suppose Oxbridge applicants tend to be very strong relative to the general population of Durham and Manchester, so that if they also apply to these unis their personal statements can be forgiven a lack of extracurriculars.

@Whippet’s example of a DC offered a place in the National Youth Theatre is the sort of thing I would think every uni in the land would find relevant, if only because it speaks to organisational skills, etc as other PPs have said about elite sport

PS @Xenia is leading to an interesting point: UG extracurriculars seem to me to be very useful for the first CV when job hunting. Again I think they speak implicitly to organisational skills, values and even personalities that are thought suitable to certain employment sectors

It is a difficult dilemma for HR people who want to avoid the company recruiting people just like the senior people who want the staff but still want people who can do the work and if it is client facing get on with the clients. Also as you say if you have no hobbies because you have to work so hard just to keep up with university work that may not look good or does it look fine? Or what about someone who has unmentionable hobbies like hours on computer games, drinking etc. Those tend not to be wise to mention although sitting around watching football or rugby and whaqt the class indicators of those two mean etc is a can of worms never mind the sexism of sports conversations given most women are not quite so keen on football etc etc. Were my daughters' showjumping hobbies etc better than my older son's computer games hobby and who judges that? Is it better someone is outside mucjking out a horse or taking risks on horse back than sitting in front of a screen playing a game which might give you good hand and eye co-ordination and online friends? Does any of it matter anyway if all you are looking for is somone strong enough to work 12 hour days without overtime in top jobs and never crack under pressure?

@poetryandwine
its not just elite sport that takes time and effort though. Believe it or not singing in a choir or playing an instrument requires the same dedication especially if an orchestra or ensemble is involved. There are things young people can do that shows they can juggle work and other things they enjoy. Generality it does make them more interesting people and might be more engaging with clients if they are in that sort of role.

I can see universities won’t care but the idea that people are successful if they are boring is an interesting debating topic.

I think some young people appear very one dimensional and don’t have much to talk about. Doing plenty at university and learning about things outside your narrow area of study could make you more engaging and employable. Possibly not for stem people but even DH (engineer), prefers to employ people who can juggle lots of jobs and not be one dimensional.

@TizerorFizz, I agree with you about all kinds of music, sports, etc participation at university, and I have been impressed by how much these, and volunteering, have mattered to my tutees’ prospects for the reasons you cite.

As a uni admissions tutor the main reason only elite participation in any of this mattered to me is that the ability to craft a statement ginning up a routine level of participation is largely an acquired skill. It too easily becomes a proxy for social class. I was always impressed by significant time in employment whilst studying, however. Interestingly pupils often do not seem to realise the significance of this.

Good point - totally can see if applying for Sport courses then achievements at sport would be highly relevant.

@Kango, Interesting. I have never heard that quote but obviously does perpetuate the narrative. My friend would have seized on that comment! I wonder if they meant...IF you mention activities make it mostly about academics using 80/20 rule.

Ime, I don't think you can't mention activities just that it's largely non relevant to admissions.