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)

I don't know why that person thinks males are disadvantaged at oxbridge. The sex ratio used to be biased in favour of males till quite recently; in the Cambridge 2020 stats M:F is 48:52%, but that's a higher ratio of males than in U.K. students generally. It does look like male success rate is generally lower regardless of school type (more applicants, fewer offers) but that doesn't mean there is unfair bias against them.

Going back to a PP who mentioned international students.

My dc knows several people who fall into this category. A few of them are USA or European students who grew up, or were educated, in Dubai, Hong Kong etc but also those who are from developing countries such as Bangladesh. The cost to these families is enormous, as it is for students from Eastern Europe.

The article confirms that an applicant like op's won't be pulled out of the pool.

Honestly, if attending a private school is such a disadvantage, then you could, you know, just not send your DCs to a private school… Other options are available.

Just saw this on Twitter 😂

@LuxMea: Mostly going to be off Twitter today but re the embarrassing nonsense headline in the Times, let me remind academic colleagues that if you don’t know anything about access to HE you can just say so when a journalist asks you, you aren’t required to invent fantastical rubbish.

He doesn't offer any stats to support his perception.

It is the case that the Cambridge "summer pool" (places freed up by offer holders who didn't get the required grades) now will preferentially select applicants with disadvantage markers if they didn't get an offer in winter and if they've achieved the standard offer grades in their exams. But that's not what he was talking about, and the summer pool system doesn't in any way discriminate against males vs females or private schools vs good state.

@ErrolTheDragon
The words in the article :
“At the moment the really disadvantaged candidates are arguably the white males from outstanding independent schools. If they are rejected by their first-choice college and placed in the ‘pool’ so other colleges can look at their application, they nearly all sink without trace.

The article is written by someone who demonstrably doesn't know what he's on about.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-47296931
www.thetimes.co.uk/article/lucrative-foreign-students-taking-oxbridge-places-from-state-pupils-5dvtrhlbp

It is the case that more lucrative foreign students are taking the places of UK students. So to me that is a relevant discussion point.
Rich overseas student gets a place because they can pay £32000 but UK born independent educated student does not because they only have to pay £9500 in fees by law.
Is this correct? And is it OK that the foreign students indirectly subsidise fair access for other UK students from less advantaged backgrounds?

White UK working class males being at a disadvantage though is a big thing.

He works there. I assume that he probably knows more.

If this is the case (as there are no stats it is an 'if'), it quite likely means that the independently educated boys who deserved an offer had got one from their preferred college in the first place. The success rate for independently educated boys was higher than for those from state schools in the last stats available.

I thought here we discuss the applicants in the pool state. "they nearly all sink without trace." implies the stats

User he does not work in admissions and has to be corrected by his own institution about his ref to the TSA

The person interviewed in the Times article is a long-retired Emeritus Professor. He will have little, if anything, to do with admissions today.

He has also been very vocal about Cambridge's 'woke environment' and repeatedly attacked the Cambridge VC in the press for promoting said 'woke culture' as part of a very weird public argument with another Cambridge academic about colonialism.

He is in no respect an impartial reporter of the facts.

Not all overseas/foreign students are rich as I mentioned in my post,

My dc knows a student from Bangladesh. Their parents would be considered well off in their home country but poor in the UK. Yes, they can access loans, possibly bursaries etc for tuition fees but are really struggling with paying for living costs Ditto EE students

And I note he was at Caius, which in the 2020 stats had a %maintained (ie state) offer rate of only 55.9%. Go figure...

I have also been informed by a Caius history graduate that "he is a massive twat" 😂

Going back to the OPs question I think the question to be answered is how much of a difference will not going to Cambridge make?

As the above discussion shows the top talent of young people is spread out more widely than Oxford and Cambridge due to the incredible over subscription of these two universities coupled with grade inflation making differentiating between suitable candidates a real challenge.

Employers are more likely to focus on a sub section of the RG or to use university blind entrance methods. Employers simply want the best applicants independent of institution.

London universities are incredibly well regarded booth nationally and internationally by those who matter most - employers. HE teams and professionals do realise this.

it may very well be the case that a greater proportion of "high court's come from non Oxbridge universities in future and university blind recruitment methodology will only encourage this. I think there may be a general change in society's perception of Oxbridge as for a large part of the population the awareness is quite tenuous (boat race, university challenge) and the promotion of the RG as an elite is heavily done in the media and this will filter into public perception.

There are many high profile scientists that come from.non Oxbridge backgrounds, Brian Cox, Sarah Gilbert, Hannah Fry spring to mid (ok Hannah Fry is a mathmetician) and trend will continue.

I also feel with WP at elite universities average salaries for graduates will tend to converge in time as well.

Career preparation through internships and informal contacts with leading employers is important for aspiring undergraduates: possibly as important as university attendees. If academia is an ambition thoughts about Ph.D area should be started early and again links formed with research teams.

Your son may miss out on a few Instagram moments in front of King's college and some gown wearing but ultimately attending a high profile London university probably won't affect discarded opportunities to anything like an extent to justify a year out for reapplication.

Flyers above

Just a comment about the raging discussion about private schools and Oxbridge. While WP is a good thing and pieces appearing in the right wing press are receiving criticism here I have to note that being 'culture wars'' into the argument is ominous as the government has achieved a level of success through its invocation in issues like Brexit.

Perceived 'woke' institutions such as Channel 4 or the BBC do not seem to fare well with this government and I hope Oxbridge wont get too much government focus. Boris Johnson may have a personal interest in Etonians not making it to Oxford.

There's no reason why attending a particular school or type of school makes one an apologist for it. Education isn't ideal if it merely makes you a lemming. Tony Benn went to Westminster; didn't send his kids there. Masses of people prefer a different education for their DC than the one they themselves had, it's not correct to infer bias as a given.

There are many high profile scientists that come from.non Oxbridge backgrounds, Brian Cox, Sarah Gilbert, Hannah Fry spring to mid (ok Hannah Fry is a mathmetician) and trend will continue.

Jonathan Van Tam, Jeremy Farrar, Patrick Valance and Jenny Harries are also non-Oxbridge. And while Chris Whitty did his under-grad there, he is more closely associated with LSHTM.

@goodbyestranger

I agree and it may fit in with the 'levelling up' agenda for the government to be fully behind widening participation. However the government I think has to bear in mind opinion formers in publications like the daily mail, telegraph etc. By bringing university entrance into the 'culture war' debate the right wing press can link widening participation to other 'woke' left wing social issues which resonate with a significant proportion of the public.

@thing47

Peter Higgs of boson game went to KCL. I wouldn't describe him as non Oxbridge material. I suppose the general point is to show high profile professionals that haven't necessarily attended Oxbridge colleges. It may help the OP's son reflect on whether it is ultimately worth reapplying.

Totally agree with you, sorry if that wasn't clear from my previous post.

UCL is a great option and I doubt going there would confer any sort of disadvantage on OP's DS. Obviously it would be a different scenario if he didn't have any other offers, but UCL? He'll do just fine. DD2 has a Masters from a London school and it is actually more highly regarded than the equivalent course at Cambridge.