Reapply to Cambridge?

[Mollymalone225]

What are your thoughts on reapplying to Cambridge? DC was pooled and rejected for Natsci (physics) this year. Was predicted 4 A*s, had gold in physics and chemistry olympiads that was mentioned in personal statement. Since then has grown to like maths/physics a bit more than chemistry.

DC has an offer from UCL (natsci) to start 2022 and if reapplying only wants the following 5 (in order of preference)
Cambridge (natsci again- doesn't like Cambridge engineering course),
Imperial (2 courses in engineering- civil and mechanical)
UCL (natsci/physics and engineering).

He only wants to consider Cambridge, Imperial or UCL and I'm really worried that second time round he will get no offers from these places even if he ends up securing 4A*s. Why? Cambridge favours state school applicants and DC goes to selective private school. Imperial/UCL are incredibly competitive and nothing is a guarantee- especially if one takes a gap year, real passion needs to be shown. Given DC is so unsure about physics/natsci/engineering and wants to apply for different courses at each of the universities, I'm not sure a single personal statement can deliver passion for all this. So his statement will probably be natsci-oriented with a splash of engineering related work experience if he secures it. Gap year opportunities in relevant areas are so competitive and rare.

I'm so scared he'll end up with no offers - is it better to take the UCL offer and move on? So worried. Thoughts, advice much welcome. (of course, reapplying only applicable if he ends up getting at least 3 A*s in further maths, maths, chemistry and physics)

@User11010866 As a former Russell Group STEM admissions tutor I am well aware of these facts, thanks. They are considered to be equity issues, because independent schools do provide varying amounts of tuition, some substantial. (So do some selective state schools. The AMSP also provides some help, though I am not sure of the current details.). As you say, there are discussions on TSR although the quality varies.

Being able to follow somebody else’s solution and being able to create your own are two entirely different things. This distinction is the bane of maths and physics lecturers the world over.

I agree with you that none of this matters for the very best applicants but plenty of others demonstrably succeed at Cambridge. Having learned how to tackle STEP problems is believed by C to help them, and I agree.

@Abuildingwith4wallsandtmrinsid

I can't answer your question in any detail, but all I do know is that alumni at my dc college donated money to subsidise rent costs for those who had to either return to, or stay in college during the holidays in the 2020/2021 pandemic year. Sometimes it's just the basics, not just the big showy projects which count to former students

An anonymous donor has very recently agreed to finance a Foundation Year for up to 50 students at Oxford

www.ox.ac.uk/admissions/undergraduate

Upper echelons my Aunt Fanny.

Check out Stephen Toope's cv and then consider if you're in a strong position to give him advice.

Also, have you not come across the concept of altruism?

It needs to be phrased as very specific positive help cases towards disadvantaged kids (with very well thought out criteria), not the other way round

Pretty sure that's what the unis focus on, but journalists take whatever angle they will. And there's no point trying to hide the fact that if some of the barriers to entry for less advantaged applicants are removed (or at least lowered), then inevitably that will mean that the more privileged ones will get a less disproportionately large slice of the pie than in the past.

Exactly Errol. It really doesn't take the brain of an archbishop to work that out.

@ErrolTheDragon must be a coincidence that journalists from much of the press reinterpret this and parents of children then repeat it as truth? Most of the unfiltered policies I've seen seem clear. Almost all of the stories in certain papers bear little relation to those policies. A statistical outlier, a 5 or 6 sigma event if random.

It's not coincidence, it's one of those things they know they can blow up into a 'story', generate letters and comments etc. Its a subject many people have an interest in - in the sense of not being disinterested parties.

@User11010866 The maths interviews aren't (or weren't) really about doing 'hard' maths. They were about seeing you work something through on the spot. The hard maths was tested by the A levels / Special papers, & the entrance exam, and now the STEP.

Yes you can prep for STEP independently. My director of studies RIP wrote the book on maths prep for university. But I still bet it's a lot easier with a teacher to hand if needed to provide support and encouragement.

(Interestingly at work we used to use an apparently 'easy' question about sorting algorithms which gave us a good insight into ability of interviewees.)

If private schools give no advantage, why do people pay for private school?

And no I won't accept because the extra curriculars are better or the longer day makes child care easier. If that was the case there would be more threads on 'which school is better extra curricular' or 'which school has longest hours' rather than lining schools up by academics.

@TeenPlusCat Don't be unfair. There must be dozens of people for whom the independent school is the only school close to home/work and the pesky state school is a long way away. sometimes independent schools cluster so some parents will be surrounded by a donut of independent schools pushing away state schools.

doughnut?

doonut?

by a ring of independent schools...
a wall of independent schools...

she was asked in her admissions interview (below your post) are pretty typical and schools that send many pupils to Oxbridge will know them
Comments on Poet Upper words. I agree that assess the ability of on-spot problem-solving doesn't need the difficult questions. I don't think the professors interviewing the applicant will be fooled by coaching either.

It's not that kind of coaching though is it?

First to get through to interview you have to have done well in the tests. Everyone is bright.

Then you go to an interview as a 17yo to a world famous institution:

The feel of the buildings will be more familiar to a public school pupil before you even start, making them feel more at ease. If you have an idea of the type of questions that might come up then you are less likely to be thrown by them. if you feel confident in your clothes, your accent, that helps. If you know how to look the interviewer in the eye and shake their hand confidently, it all helps.

Basically if you feel at ease you are more likely to feel relaxed and present yourself well.

In the end, you do need to show the ability of on-spot problem-solving.

@User11010866 I agree with you ultimately you need to demonstrate the ability to solve problems on the spot (though I think you may underestimate schools’ ability to build up problem banks). My point is that this ability can be cultivated, like any other.

@TeenPlusCat speaks eloquently of some of the other ways in which preparation and sheer comfort confer an advantage.

Of course independent schools (tend to, some don't) give an academic advantage. And imo parents seeking the best possible education for their children is a good thing. Where there's a problem is when advantage bestows more advantage, and where parents are happy for their children to benefit by others disadvantage.

Yes of course.
But a) you have to make it to the interview, and b) you have to be not so overwhelmed you can't think straight.

Also I suspect in the past on things like humanities there will have been unconscious bias towards candidates who had been places or done things related and could talk about them, when they were 'out of reach' of many state pupils.

All they are trying to do is get the playing field a bit more level. I don't see how anyone can reasonably object to that. It isn't as if all private school applications are going in the bin.

“Check out Stephen Toope's cv and then consider if you're in a strong position to give him advice.”

Eerm, I did, before I posted, plus all the controversy surrounding him re Huawei and the fact he is leaving 2 years earlier than intended for “family reasons” and the uni will be without a permanent VC. The fact he has drawn a huge salary etc.

Yes, the more right wing press have it in for him, however, he does not appear to be to have been the right “man” for the job. Because, in my humble opinion, that includes understanding British politics, the powers to be, the press and the large sources of funding and juggling all of that whilst still putting the university first etc and yes making admissions fairer. It is a complex job, indeed.
Hopefully the next VC will be a better fit.

So why is he still making big statements when he is leaving anyway?

Well you clearly didn't know who he was before.

He isn't someone who needs nods and winks from MN about how he should play politics. I'm sure he could eat a lot of his detractors (certainly those on MN) for breakfast. It's absurd to talk about the upper echelons etc, as though Cambridge needs to guide its admissions policy to pacify the so-called (or rather self-styled) upper echelons. You clearly need to shift into the 21st century.

Also of course you can't go schools blind without context.

A lot of uni blind recruitment policies are producing a larger intake of Oxbridge entrants, not smaller.

Presumably blind is only a good thing for Oxbridge interviews and not for the original allocation of pupils to schools in the first place?