Oxbridge Rejects 2023 - Come this way and commiserate

[Rejects]

As mentioned on the other thread a safe space for those who'd like a bit of support while not dampening others' moods Sorry that I have gone on a lot about this rejection already on here - it's helped me keep outwardly calm and cheerful when my ds has been very upset.

I am acutely aware in the scheme of things a university rejection is not a huge deal and that amazing lives and outcomes no doubt await all our dc wherever they go, it's just getting through the time between now and A levels and/or offers from other unis arriving, keeping dcs' morale up. Good luck everyone

I’m afraid I think this passion thing is much overhyped on here – I’ve come across of Oxbridge students/grads - me included - who were/are just pretty good at their subject, but it wasn’t an overarching, consuming part of their life. There are just too many good candidates for the number of places available.

True but I think the passion for subject criteria is now more important than it was a few decades ago in my experience.

DD's subject (Biology) is also administered departmentally at Oxford. She was interviewed at two colleges and received an offer for a third college.
For Cambridge, college choice might be more important as far as the interview goes because DS had a single subject interview with a supervisor (who is now his Director of Studies) and a general interview with another supervisor from the same college but an unrelated subject. The admissions test is however administered departmentally.

Probably true, but I haven’t seen a shortage of people with no consuming passion, getting places in recent years – and I don’t think that’s a bad thing necessarily, it’s simply unrealistic to think two large universities are going to be 100% filled with super geeks. I also think “passion“ is one of the easiest things to fake in an interview with a bit of pushing in the right to direction

@Rejects
I agree. DD got in but wasn’t passionate. Maybe now it’s harder they have to demonstrate more? My DD did some extra above A level. However she’s capable of logical thought and is good at explaining what she thinks and why. She wasn’t coached for anything.

@Rejects I agree - certainly looking at the kids we know who have got in they don't seem to be any more passionate than the ones that didn't - and they all have perfect grades across the board. Indeed, how could 'passion' really be determined in a short zoom call with any level of accuracy with different interviewers and different questions and different colleges is very questionable.

I do think the whole Oxbridge/Non-Oxbridge split is getting a bit ludicrous - way way harder to get into Imperial, UCL, Warwick, LSE, Durham, St An etc. etc. for lots of subjects and with perfect grades (1 in 10 to 1 in 15 offer rates) than for Oxbridge for many subjects (where for some subjects 1 in 2 or 3 are getting in). There are many 'super geeks' at other unis and lots of normal bright kids everywhere (including Oxbridge!) and that's not a bad thing for the sector and for students. I also think its great that there is such a range of subjects offered (as someone who did a philosophy degree first) but for those waiting for comp sci, economics offers etc. it is just a bit demoralising when others doing less competitive subjects get a clean sweep of offers almost overnight and you are still waiting, can't make any plans and are dealing with mocks etc. I'm not sure unis are as honest as they could be especially when they give out what the usual offer tariff is on their website but don't tell you that they only give offers to c. 6% of candidates (at least Oxbridge are clear on that). I suppose its all about going into this process with your eyes open.

I didn't get in more than 30 years ago - thank goodness! Went to London instead and had a brilliant time. I think it's easy to get taken over by the hype – but ultimately it's marketing. The main reason I was glad not to have gone was that I didn't realise at the time that Oxbridge terms are so short. Eight weeks would have seemed like no time at all – and then back at home again.

Just posting because I wanted to say is don't let the DC internalise the 'Oxbridge rejects' tag. It's easy to fall into thinking that's what you are and to describe yourself as a failure when actually you've done really, really well and will no doubt succeed in whatever you want to do.

Any level of undergraduate success is only the first step – after that it's all about how you approach what you want to do in life. Some of the most successful and also some of the most intellectually curious and interesting people I know went to new universities, or didn't go to university at all. Some of the Oxbridge graduates I know have had great careers, others haven't so much. In the long run it doesn't really matter.

*lovefizzycolabottles agree with everything you say and @Changes17 yes, you're totally right too!

Why do people keep trotting out the passion nonsense,please find a single Oxbridge admissions member of staff that claims that's what they are looking for .

God I agree re. passion. Apart from the fact that none of them ever say they're looking for it and it's near impossible to gauge when talking to a 17 year old in a glitchy zoom interview, have you ever met any Oxbridge tutors? They're not exactly brimming with contagious passion themselves.

My DS had one half an hour zoom interview for Cambridge. No extra exams, no tests, no written work to give in - just his GSCEs, PS and predictions. He does love his subject and loves talking about it, though I wouldn't call him passionate (because that would be slightly weird). Even if he were, how on earth would he have gone about conveying that as a nervous 17 year old on a screen?

Just popping on to say that the passion thing is overplayed. DD who was successful in her application wanted to do Cambridge NatSci precisely because she wasn't sufficiently passionate to choose a single science at UG level. She told the interviewers that as well. She was however genuinely intellectually curious and questioning. It is not easy to work out what finally tips the balance. She loved her chemistry interview- caught positive glances between the interviewers etc but came out of the maths interview in tears saying that she should never have applied, she was stupid and the academics were horrible. I think you do need to be robust about it all whatever the outcome. For balance DS had previously applied and was rejected. He was very happy elsewhere and stayed in academia which DD did not.

Rather than “passion” then (although many students are actually) I would say an ability to enquire and think. And the interview process does examine this.

@lovefizzycolabottles
Some of the easier to get into degrees at Oxford are not widely available elsewhere. They are 1:3 for a reason. Too few taking MFL for example. Or wanting Norse. You cannot compare these degrees with the maths types who all get Astars. Totally different scenario.

I do agree that it must be harder to differentiate between STEM-type candidates than humanities ones. Also (just about to flee from thread!) I would bet good money that Old Norse applicants are more passionate about getting a place than Old Norse itself….

You'd have to be pretty desperate for a place though to be willing to spend three years studying Old Norse if you were not interested in it!
I disagree about "passion" - I have seen several presentations by Oxbridge admissions tutors saying they look for evidence of this. That doesn't mean that all successful applicants have real passion for their subject but it does seem to be a factor.

Passion is obviously one factor and of course dons aren't going to say they want passionate students and not just people who are there for the LOLZ but it's a step up from enjoying a subject and being good at it to adoring it and I'd agree it's a quality you can fake. A successful English candidate I know happily admits she doesn't enjoy reading books and never reads for fun but of course she didn't say this in an interview - anyone can bullshit and make the right noises about obscure authors if they think that's what dons want to hear. Does that make her unworthy of a place? No, because she's clearly smart but she'd be the first to admit she doesn't actually love English and just wanted to go to Oxford. Another English student I know freely admits to just reading the Sparks notes and never touching the original texts. Again, if he can get away with it - then great.

First offer tonight (thank goodness 😅).

MEng Durham for computer science.

Offer is AA in two advanced highers which is very achievable. He is taking four advanced highers this year and achieved all As in his mocks.

Hope the good news keeps coming for all.....

@Aurea That's wonderful news! Well done to your ds (and you!)

Aww thanks laundry monster. 😘

It's such a relief (for me more than him)!

I have no dog in this fight (not for the next 5 years anyway) but the lack of transparency is worrying. Without clear markers or precedents, this process can easily sink into a “we will never admit to it but still do it” scientific quota/contextual offer system, within which the bucket selection is done via unconscious bias => you can call this passion if you like, but if an English don cannot spot a non-reader and is blinded by fake passion, then the interview has had to be superficial enough for unconscious bias to seep in and take over. Not a good sign for the future of Oxbridge

Amazing news @Aurea . May the offers now start to flow for everyone!

Great news @Aurea! Enjoy.

@WEEonline I shouldn't worry. This series of blogs is a few years old now, but it explains how Oxford ensures that they don't just end up with identikit students from a few chosen schools. Oxford admissions

Now they make offers to students who don't have straight A star predictions, who haven't got perfect 8s and 9s for their GCSEs, who may not have taken all facilitating subjects (as was), who haven't won essay prizes, but who they can see themselves sitting in a tutorial with over the next 3 or 4 years. Thank goodness.

They don't make any contextual offers either. Every Oxford offer holder has to achieve exactly the same grades for their course, regardless of whether you went to a Eton, a London day school or a comprehensive where less than 30% achieve 5 GCSEs grades at grade 5 or above.

Cambridge do contextual offers - I don’t see what the problem is? Oxford offers are quite low - 3 As. There’s going to be a fight on here forever about the gang who say “gosh, these professors absolutely know what they’re doing” and those who say “they (sometimes) get it wrong.” Admissions tutors on here fall into both camps. I don’t see how it can be an exact science, there will always be guesswork unless you go on exam results alone and there will be slips.