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)

Melbecfan - of course that's true re- grammars in other parts of the U.K. and I was by no means claiming London is typical of the whole U.K. I was just saying there is a high concentration of super-selective independents and grammars in London and 10-15 applicants per place is typical and pretty much all of these applicants will have been the in the top few in their primaries.

As I said, no idea about boarding schools in such as Eton which have a different entry point at 13 plus and it's a totally different application system (CE).

I don't think it really matters whether UK degrees are more 'in depth' or not. I don't think anyone at Stanford or Harvard will be losing any sleep over this.

Great minds and all that 😂

I don't think it really matters whether UK degrees are more 'in depth' or not

Well of course it might matter. If you're recruiting a, say, chemist and you have the choice between someone who has studied nothing but chemistry for 3 years and someone who has studied it for 2 years (and from a lower starting point), the English recruiter is likely to choose the more knowledgeable chemist. (The US recruiter will probably prefer the latter, which is precisely why I specified 'if you are planning to return to England for work').

Of course, this can always be addressed by further study – a Masters, PhD, professional qualifications etc etc. But a newly minted graduate from an English university will generally have more specific subject knowledge than the equivalent from an American university.

Comparing MIT and Cambridge. MIT attract most of the IMO medalists and its four-year course compared with 3 years in Cambridge. I wonder how you conclude that UK degrees are more 'in depth'?

Most olympiad students who are at Cambridge stay on for Part iii maths. It is incredibly in depth and reputed to be one of the hardest undergrad maths courses in the world. But its comparing apples with oranges. It depends what you want from your course and equally able students choose from either, or others, depending on their aspirations and what they are looking for in a university experience.

I'm not clear why the talk is about Stanford and Harvard. Faces are being saved by applying to the much less good US colleges. Those who successfully apply to Harvard are few and far between, even at Eton. Or should I say, even at Westminster, which is probably more to the point, given its academic reputation.

www.stpaulsschool.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/2021-destinations-for-website-page-Feb-2022.pdf

Not Westminster or Eton but here is the list for St Paul's. I'd be interested to know which if those YS destinations would be considered 'less good'. My understanding is that the 'good' universities in the US aren't restricted to Ivy League.

Here's Westminster

www.westminster.org.uk/academic-life/university-destinations/university-entrants/

I don't think too many faces are needing to be saved at any of those institutions Sandy!

And 2021 was a year when Oxbridge announced they were making significantly less offers across the board due to the December announcement TAGs and also effects of the hangover from the previous year (ie more to accommodate for to CAGs).

From SPGS, about 45 out of 115 went to Oxbridge in the last cycle and another 20 odd to top US institutions. No different to any other year really.

HoneyMobster I'm not convinced that you've disproved my point: one successful Harvard applicant from Westminster in 2021.

So do you think 'much less good' is anything but Harvard @goodbyestranger ?

Some kids have been going on summer schools at US unis since about Year 11. My observation is that it's particularly those with aspirations to work in the world of finance who seem to have it all mapped out - eg. UPenn with various summer internships facilitating entry to Wharton Business School. Maybe it's what the parents themselves did, but they seem to know what they're doing.

No of course Harvard isn't the only excellent US college HoneyMobster, that's a ridiculous thing to say (or impute). I pointed out that despite all this talk of clever Eton boys going for Harvard, in fact very few go each year even from Westminster. You then kindly confirmed my point. Three to Stanford is good going though and a couple to Princeton too. Not really surprising, it's a fabulous school. Obviously there are heaps of not very good colleges too, just as there are not very good unis in the UK. Easy to get into but generally cost a fortune to attend as a UK national and resident. So, some element of glamour will attach by virtue of almost no-one being in the position to apply, because they couldn't afford to attend. Easy to see the appeal to incredibly well off young people who can't make it into Oxford or Cambridge any more, because of positive discrimination in favour of poor people.

I agree with you "it's comparing apples with oranges." I heard that Harvard has a module called Math55, which is the most difficult one in the world. Both US and UK have world top universities. US probably has more. I just wonder how they conclude that UK degrees are more 'in depth'.

If they opted for a 4 -year degree at a Scottish uni having not got into Oxbridge, would that also be 'face saving.?' Or would that just be - 'going to Scotland?'

Bring serious for a moment, I'm not saying some parents aren't miffed because they perceive their DC are being squeezed out of Oxbridge. But I don't think this is as big a deal as you are making out, goodbyestranger and mainly, people are applying to the US for all sorts of reasons that have nothing to do with Oxbridge. Don't get me wrong, my DC was very lucky to get into Oxbridge - but he doesn't think its the end-all-and-be-all and he would be the first to say he knows loads of people far more intelligent than him at other unis here and abroad.

Because in England you just study 1 subject for 3 years (there are exceptions such as joint degrees or PPE etc, but in general). In the US you study a variety of subjects for the first 2 years (and from a lower starting point) and only major for your third and fourth years. It's purely a numbers game – you just spend more time studying your primary subject as an undergraduate in England than you do in US, ergo, it's more in depth.

This isn't a criticism of US universities, I hasten to add, I am merely highlighting something to be aware of. US universities are set up to be a part of the US education system – obviously – where more specialisation comes in at Masters level than at under-graduate level.

@thing47 and @Malbecfan , Having taught at a US uni considered the intellectual equal of Harvard, one considered the intellectual equal of Penn, Brown or Cornell and an upper Russell Group university, my perceptions are a modified version of yours.

Of course three years of studying almost exclusively within your discipline will give you a greater breadth of knowledge, and this is very valuable to employers. Perhaps this is what people are referring to?

But the general education requirements during the first two years at excellent American universities seem to up students’ games. They definitely take fewer course units in their major subject(s), but the depth of knowledge in each unit compares very favourably to anything I have seen outside the COWI unis (I am in STEM). Upon moving to an excellent U.K. uni, I had to scale my courses back. Several other academics I know who have moved eastward across the Atlantic have told me the same thing.

For most professional employment, competence across a broad swathe of one’s subject is probably more desirable than pockets of deep expertise within it. Against this, someone who has ‘learned to learn’ - which is a deeper purpose of the first two years of the American system and can certainly be achieved in the British system, also - can pick up new material fairly quickly.
For those doing PG training the point is moot.

I see practical advantages to employers from the British system. The American one is more intellectually stimulating.

itsinmybag of course getting into Oxford or Cambridge isn't the be all and end all. None of my DC approached their application that way and of those who have graduated (not all have yet), none would claim that in retrospect either. Which isn't to say that they didn't enjoy and value the experience hugely, because they all did. But my experience over the years that they've been applying (first one was in the 2008 cycle, the last one in 2020) strongly suggests that there are quite a number of independent school parents and students who are very miffed indeed that a place due to their DC has been snatched away for political reasons. Perhaps for some reason I come across that attitude in a magnified way and there are only a tiny number of such parents, not sure why that should be though. Even when I was doing the viewings for my house last year I got three separate diatribes when people saw my gallery of graduation pictures (it's on the landing out of the way, but still caught an eye or two). One couple did their diatribe then made an offer, or I might have started to have doubts about the process too :)

No, but it’s a possibility. They’ll need to prove through their first degree that they have the ability.

U.K. degrees are generally sing,e-subject, so you do nothing but the chosen one from the beginning.

It’s normal in the US to pick a variety of courses over the time there. Yes, there’s a “major”, but in the U.K. that’s all there is.

@poetryandwine - as someone with direct experience of US universities I wonder what you make of that list of destinations for Westminster students? They strike me as very good institutions that as a parent I'd be delighted for my child to attend. But I don't have much to go on as have no direct experience myself.

Are there any that you would put into a 'much less good' category? It might be a silly question as they all have different strengths (it would be a bad question when talking about UK universities) but as we're considering US options at the moment I'm wondering if I'm missing something as a number are on our long list as highly desirable.

Can take over to the US thread if it's a bit off topic.

Berkeley
Brown
Caltech
Carnegie Mellon
Chicago
Dartmouth
Duke
Georgetown
Harvard
John Hopkins
Princeton
Stanford
USC
Yale

Absolutely this.

It’s normal in the US to pick a variety of courses over the time there. Yes, there’s a “major”, but in the U.K. that’s all there is.

In England maybe, but the Scottish 4 year degree allows a wider range of subjects to be taken for the first 2 years before narrowing down for the last 2 years.

www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2022#!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats

There is such a thing as the World University Rankings. Anybody care to comment? Of course, England does very well for a small country but it is dominated overall by a number of US unis and definitely not just limited to Harvard.
I think the discerning international student does look at the whole list, the courses they like best, bears in mind practicalities, costs etc. and future employment and visa opportunities.
Post Brexit there are a lot of privileged “international” Londoners (with dual/triple nationality) aspiring for their own kids to start again in another country. It is hardly surprising and I do not think it is just down to Oxbridge. It is trying another country for uni with a view to perhaps staying there long term.

Oxford still top, which is nice to see. Cambridge has dropped back a bit, it’d be good to see them getting back up to number 2.

I hadn't heard of Math55 user. That looks incredibly fierce!

I can certainly think of some exceptionally able students who would suit the US system best, and other equally able students who would suit the UK system best. I think it would be arrogant of people here to assume the UK system is somehow superior.

There are UK universities who allow students to pick and choose more across the curriculum, including Warwick, who on their MMath course allow students to choose 25% non maths courses. I think there's a lot to be said for that approach for many.

This is huge thread drift!