Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Higher education

Talk to other parents whose children are preparing for university on our Higher Education forum.

Reapply to Cambridge?

383 replies

Mollymalone225 · 09/05/2022 11:09

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)

OP posts:
FreedaDonkey · 24/05/2022 20:16

Not sure if it's been mentioned but the admissions person from Cambridge is on WIWIKAU and answers any questions like this. You could ask for advice directly.

HoneyMobster · 24/05/2022 20:20

@Abuildingwith4wallsandtmrinsid - there is something about the world being a bigger place post Brexit. I think that's what is going on in DS2's head.

It's not about thinking Oxbridge will reject him but about the truth that there is life and opportunities outside the UK and Europe. I don't blame him and if a highly ranked US university offers him an opportunity (doesn't have to be Harvard ;)) I'd be delighted.

HoneyMobster · 24/05/2022 20:24

Thanks for the link to the list of 'world rankings'@Abuildingwith4wallsandtmrinsid

As with any ranking list it needs to be taken not with a pinch of salt but I'm glad my thinking about what a 'good' US university doesn't look like it is too far off the mark.

Lolliepoppie · 24/05/2022 20:30

Some of the judgmental posts here from alleged Cambridge graduates show an alarming lack of critical thinking.

Based on this thread, I would seriously question the calibre of its students.

SlightlyGeordieJohn · 24/05/2022 20:42

Lolliepoppie · 24/05/2022 20:30

Some of the judgmental posts here from alleged Cambridge graduates show an alarming lack of critical thinking.

Based on this thread, I would seriously question the calibre of its students.

I think it’s far more likely you just aren’t able to understand the point they are making than that Cambridge is turning out people who lack critical thinking.

poetryandwine · 24/05/2022 21:00

Hello, @HoneyMobster . The list of American destinations for Westminster pupils would be a credit to any school in the world. Until the last 15-20 years I would have said that USC was the weak link, but since then I have heard that for UG admissions it is more competitive, and more highly thought of, than UCLA.

@OhYouBadBadKitten, math55 is infamous and has produced a number of the world’s most eminent mathematicians!

HoneyMobster · 24/05/2022 21:40

Thanks @poetryandwine - that's helpful as I wondered if I was missing something.

goodbyestranger · 24/05/2022 21:53

Oh goodness HoneyMobster I haven't cast any aspersions on Westminster ever and I haven't cast any aspersions on its list of recent destinations. I think I've only ever said its a fabulous school and variations on that theme. I'd have been delighted for my DC to go to Westminster. It wasn't ever an option geographically or indeed financially.

There are plenty of dubious calibre US colleges. I'm sure someone prepared to do it will name them if asked. I'm not going to or some Eton parent will propel themselves at me and be vile and it won't end well. FYI we lived in the US for several years and became friends with a lot of US grads, so not completely plucking stuff out of thin air from the sheep fields of Devon although obviously compared to the London crowd on MN I do accept that I should really know very little indeed.

HoneyMobster · 24/05/2022 22:23

It's a shame Eton don't post their leavers destinations. I'd genuinely like to see which destinations figure on it. Maybe someone has that list and we can review the institutions?

poetryandwine · 24/05/2022 22:27

Hi again, @HoneyMobster -

To provide some context, every university on the Westminster list has an undergraduate acceptance rate of well under 20%, with a number under 10%. (Any placement firm will tell you that international students have a lower acceptance rate to US unis than domestic students.)

In contrast, I searched the UG acceptance rates of a number of English universities, excluding Oxbridge but including Imperial, UCL, Durham, Warwick and Bristol. I can’t think of another English candidate for an acceptance rate below 20% (and we already know C and O have this). Warwick’s UG acceptance last year was a rate of 14%. Every other uni had a UG acceptance rate of over 25%. Some were over 60%. All of these unis are excellent.

There are plenty of undistinguished universities in America, but no one from Westminster last year is attending one.

HoneyMobster · 24/05/2022 22:34

Thanks @poetryandwine - those stats provide great insight. It looks like both the Westminster and St Pauls US destinations are 'desirable' and not of 'dubious calibre'. I wonder if Eton is sending pupils to a different set of institutions?

goodbyestranger · 24/05/2022 22:34

I think your wish is unlikely to be granted anytime soon HoneyMobster, about that list.

goodbyestranger · 24/05/2022 22:35

Cross post. Are you on some kind of mission HoneyMobster? :)

HoneyMobster · 24/05/2022 22:38

Not particularly. I'm just bemused that your 'intel' on Eton doesn't match what I've picked up from current parents. I'm wondering why that is and what the facts are. It could be that one of us is being misled. It could be me.

goodbyestranger · 24/05/2022 22:44

poetryandwine just to clarify - and I'm aware that places like Durham have sky high offer rates - I'm not clear if you're comparing international acceptance rates to US institutions with domestic rates to UK unis or domestic rates to both? Or even international rates to both?

goodbyestranger · 24/05/2022 22:46

I suspect that you doubt that you're wrong HoneyMobster :)

goodbyestranger · 24/05/2022 22:47

Perhaps the difference is that you know the parents of the brighter Eton students? Being serious here.

goodbyestranger · 24/05/2022 22:52

In fact the more I think about it the more that makes sense, as an accident of geography. I'd better start being careful what I say....

poetryandwine · 24/05/2022 22:56

Hello, @goodbyestranger -

The rates I quoted are overall Year 1 acceptance rates in both countries. I did some online digging and there seems to be a consensus that in America the international acceptance rate is lower. When I was a U.K. admissions tutor, our international acceptance rate was higher. I think this is fairly typical because of the financial incentives (if your School has a good enough reputation to attract strong international applications).

Mollymalone225 · 21/06/2022 15:32

Bimkom · 22/05/2022 16:39

Well I can't speak for "people", but my DS pushed very, very hard to do his A Levels at one of these very selective private schools - one of those who are known in the press to get a significant number of pupils into Oxbridge, after doing his GCSEs at a state comprehensive - and after sitting the exams and getting through the interview he was accepted and did his A levels at this school (yes, huge financial stretch even just for two years, even though I consider us financially well off). This was very much driven by my DS, all we did was support what he really, really wanted. But as I don't think there are that many in our position, here are my observation on the differences:

It was a huge shock to the system going from a school where he was one of the high fliers (remember a comprehensive takes anybody) to somewhere where "everyone is really bright". Bigger shock than the facilities. He found it enormously motivating, although at times highly demoralising. On the other hand, amazing experience to have working lab equipment, and allowed to do dissection and really build up lab skills. At the stage of A Levels, it wasn't so much the breadth of clubs (although he did love having a politics club, and got heavily involved in it - one of the issues at the comprehensive was that debating politics if you didn't necessarily agree with the dominant narrative - eg Brexit, wasn't really possible, and no doubt would have done extra curricular drama, were it not for covid. He had always loved, but not had an outlet at the comprehensive since Year 8,- when the drama teacher left), but the ones that were specifically focussed on STEM subjects especially has he had decided his ultimate goal was medicine.
At the comprehensive there often wasn't enough equipment for the large classes, and the school was so paranoid about health and safety and the fear of what a bunch of rowdy teenagers could do with lab equipment that the absolute bare minimum required by the boards was done, and absolutely nothing more.
The chance to participate in clubs after school/lunch time where one could do dissection, research etc was mind blowing.
Also having a gym (and other amazing sports opportunities) rather than the small patch of concrete at his comprehensive where the boys played football - being the only place to let of steam. The comprehensive was/is scarily overcrowded and there is barely enough room for them to move, certainly not exercise.

But in terms of Oxbridge and academics
Going to the private school was what put him off applying for Oxbridge.
At his comprehensive there had been a lot of encouragement for the high fliers to consider Oxbridge, with trips to Cambridge in Year 9 etc etc. Not saying there was much actual coaching or that anybody had much of a clue, but it was sort of pushed. At the private school, after seeing what the competition was like, he decided he was not going to try. He felt there were far better candidates, and he was very relieved he didn't put himself forward for this when he saw who Oxbridge rejected. He also decided that he wanted a more hands on medicine course, with patient contact as early as possible, and that wasn't Oxbridge.
The one Oxbridge reject that particularly horrified him was the boy who, according to my son, was doing at least university level research and who didn't even get an interview for Oxford. My son got a 9 in Chemistry at GCSE (at the Comprehensive), and an A* at A level (at the private school), but he felt he felt the difference in both knowledge and passion between himself and this boy was vast. On the other hand, the boy had had the opportunity of these amazing labs (compared with the comprehensive), but even so, my son was sure that there was no contest. Now this boy was the most extreme case, but my son felt he was not the only one. That pretty much all the boys put forward for Oxbridge were better candidates than pretty much anybody at his comprehensive and he couldn't dream of competing. He felt it was very clear that in order to get into Oxbridge from this prestigious private school, you needed to be significantly more able than you did from the comprehensive, and that even then,many who would have walked into an interview and offer if they had been one of the very few from the comprehensive who applied, were knocked back pre or post intervew. He also felt that the comprehensive school had very much seemed to suggest that Oxbridge was the pinnacle of university experience, whereas at the private school, my son started considering questions like, did he really want shorter, more intense terms, and an essay a week? No question the private school knew Oxbridge much better than the comprehensive. But some of the coaching was also a winnowing - is this really right for you? And he decided it wasn't.

On the other hand, maybe you can say that with the advantage of the private school, you don't really need Oxbridge, at least in a STEM subject. The boy doing the amazing lab work will be doing world class research in a couple of years so long as he goes to any university with even half decent research capabilities, of which there are dozens in the UK. Whereas someone from the comprehensive may need Oxbridge to bring out their talent (close mentoring of the tutor system). In addition, despite my son's 9 in all his sciences and maths for GCSE, and having managed to do well enough in the entrance exam in these subjects, he felt he was distinctly behind those in the private school in both Biology and Chemistry (less so in maths, but he had an inspirational teacher in maths at the comprehensive), and it took him all of year 12 to catch up and start getting As in his A level assessments. although luckily he had two years to get the A*s he wanted. He started off Year 12 close to bottom of the class in both of those subjects, which was a bit galling, although he was determined he wouldn't and didn't finish there.

Another factor that really struck us seeing the make-up of the school is that the UK, and particularly London, is a magnet these days for global talent. And while it is a gross over-generalisation, the sort of people who can get a visa to come here from all parts the world based on their skills are often exceedingly bright, and often have exceedingly bright offspring. And a significant number of the children who get into these highly selective private schools are these offspring.
The days when the make-up of these schools were the English upper classes is long gone. That is, there was a sense when discussing the other DC in the school was that it didn't just take the very bright from the UK, they were increasingly taking a significant number of the very bright from the world, albeit the world who are making a shedload of money and have moved to London to do it. And if they have been legally resident here long enough to put their DC through school, good chance won't be classed as international in terms of university application.
Sorry, maybe overlong.

Agree absolutely with everything said in this comment @Bimkom. Especially how DCs enthused enough to be working at university level are easily not called even for an interview if they are the wrong school type- especially at Oxford where there is grade adjustment.

Here's a clear example as to why I think my DC has a low chance of success during reapplication entirely due to his school type: Say a Cambridge college has 8 places of which only 25% is to be filled by private school kids, following what the VC recently said. If the college had 20 applicants each from state and private schools respectively, the private school applicant has a 10% chance of getting a place (2/20) while the state school applicant has a 30% chance (6/20).

My take on all this is simply this: If you have a bright kid who is determined and keen, she will do better at the state comprehensive as far as university admissions are concerned. Plenty of university coaching sites available that can prepare her for interviews and tutors, for a fraction of private school costs.

And as for my DC? Reapply to Cambridge next year? I still don't know and thanks a lot to all who took the time to answer. Even if he gets his 4 A stars, it still means very little. The US it is, if he is up for it.

OP posts:
Mollymalone225 · 21/06/2022 15:53

sendsummer · 10/05/2022 18:15

Sorry if this has been mentioned in the thread but one anecdotal note of caution. This admission cycle a student reapplied to Cambridge for Natural Sciences having turned down Imperial and UCL offers from the previous year. Got in to Cambridge, 4 A stars but rejected this time round by UCL and Imperial.

Reapplying may be higher risk than in previous years.

@sendsummer, yes, and I know many who've been accepted at cambridge but not UCL/Imperial/LSE etc. Its all a bit of a gamble.

OP posts:
cantkeepawayforever · 21/06/2022 18:24

ay a Cambridge college has 8 places of which only 25% is to be filled by private school kids, following what the VC recently said. If the college had 20 applicants each from state and private schools respectively, the private school applicant has a 10% chance of getting a place (2/20) while the state school applicant has a 30% chance (6/20).

I don't think - with respect, that this is the right way to look at the maths of this.

Say you have 420 children who are of similar very high ability at 11. using the oft-quoted 1 in 7 as a rough indication of numbers going to private schools, 60 will go there. 360 will go to a range of state schools.

At the end of 7 years of education, 20 of the students from each group will apply to Oxbridge. have they had equivalent experiences? No. Will they have had equal amounts of interview preparation? No. Has a similar proportion (remember these were all the same ability at 11) applied to Oxbridge? No.

Remembering the matched abilities, it would be 'fair' for the ratio of students admitted to be 6:1. The process as it is, rightly, does take notice of actual attainment and actual performance in interview, so this is not what they do, and not what they aim for. However, a redressing of the balance that recognises that the two 'groups of 20', while equal in potential (state school pupils with the same A-level grades do better at university than privately-schooled ones, research has previously shown), may have had differences in journey that lead to an imbalance in offers for candidates from different routes, seems pretty reasonable.

The removal of privilege DOES feel like discrimination, I can completely understand that. But that is to ignore the much greater 'wind' that pushes against some candidates in terms of them getting to the starting line at all.

cantkeepawayforever · 21/06/2022 18:39

I do understand how frustrating it is if you feel that your child would be one of the 6/20 but perhaps not one of the 2/20, and wish that you were in the 'other' group.

Remember that if that was the case, he might very well not have been an applicant at all. In my example above, the question is what happened to the 340 state school pupils who didn't apply, compared with the 40 from private schools.

I know I can talk - successful state school applicant's parent. However, in that process I was struck by 2 things - one, how many of the similarly able state school cohort simply didn't apply, thinking it 'not for them' or saying 'I'm not good enough'. Second, comparing the preparation and contact with expertise in the application process they had, compared with private schooled friends and peers.

Mollymalone225 · 21/06/2022 21:35

cantkeepawayforever · 21/06/2022 18:24

ay a Cambridge college has 8 places of which only 25% is to be filled by private school kids, following what the VC recently said. If the college had 20 applicants each from state and private schools respectively, the private school applicant has a 10% chance of getting a place (2/20) while the state school applicant has a 30% chance (6/20).

I don't think - with respect, that this is the right way to look at the maths of this.

Say you have 420 children who are of similar very high ability at 11. using the oft-quoted 1 in 7 as a rough indication of numbers going to private schools, 60 will go there. 360 will go to a range of state schools.

At the end of 7 years of education, 20 of the students from each group will apply to Oxbridge. have they had equivalent experiences? No. Will they have had equal amounts of interview preparation? No. Has a similar proportion (remember these were all the same ability at 11) applied to Oxbridge? No.

Remembering the matched abilities, it would be 'fair' for the ratio of students admitted to be 6:1. The process as it is, rightly, does take notice of actual attainment and actual performance in interview, so this is not what they do, and not what they aim for. However, a redressing of the balance that recognises that the two 'groups of 20', while equal in potential (state school pupils with the same A-level grades do better at university than privately-schooled ones, research has previously shown), may have had differences in journey that lead to an imbalance in offers for candidates from different routes, seems pretty reasonable.

The removal of privilege DOES feel like discrimination, I can completely understand that. But that is to ignore the much greater 'wind' that pushes against some candidates in terms of them getting to the starting line at all.

@cantkeepawayforever nice logic. But at sixth form, 1 in 5 (20%) of children are in private school, not 1 in 7. Private sixth form basically 'poach' some of the high performing state school kids. So as a cohort, sixth form private school kids have a narrower ability range than state school kids.

OP posts:
Mollymalone225 · 21/06/2022 21:44

cantkeepawayforever · 21/06/2022 18:39

I do understand how frustrating it is if you feel that your child would be one of the 6/20 but perhaps not one of the 2/20, and wish that you were in the 'other' group.

Remember that if that was the case, he might very well not have been an applicant at all. In my example above, the question is what happened to the 340 state school pupils who didn't apply, compared with the 40 from private schools.

I know I can talk - successful state school applicant's parent. However, in that process I was struck by 2 things - one, how many of the similarly able state school cohort simply didn't apply, thinking it 'not for them' or saying 'I'm not good enough'. Second, comparing the preparation and contact with expertise in the application process they had, compared with private schooled friends and peers.

just to add, many of the private school oxbridge places go to those readings classics. Many state schools dont offer this in sixth form. This means for STEM subjects and social sciences, oxbridge allocations for private school kids must be less than the 24%. But as many of you rightly point out, perhaps the value added of being at Oxbridge maybe higher for state school kids with genuine differences in journey.

OP posts:
Swipe left for the next trending thread