Oxbridge 2024 Entry

[Lightsabre]

Thought I'd start a thread for parents of dc considering Oxbridge applications for entry in Oct 2024 (I don't think there's a current one)? Past threads have been so informative and supportive and hopefully this thread will offer that too. Please feel free to add to the thread if your dc have recently had experience of the process, good, bad or ugly!

I started this thread as a supportive environment for those going through the Oxbridge process. It is difficult for those of us and our dc (some of whom are significantly disadvantaged in some way) who have never been through this particular application process before and I'm glad of the contributions and general discussion particularly from those who have done it all before. There's a lot to learn in a short space of time.

I think it's helpful to have a public forum for other parents/care givers and students to read and is open to all. I'm definitely not 'over invested' but interested in the whole uni application process so I can support ds. It's so different from my day.

I also think that parents attending open days is natural given a lot of us will have to contribute £££ over the coming years. Personally I want to make sure the institution/course is offering value for money. Ds is mostly interested in the food offerings

Just for those who don’t know (because I had to search for the info) I believe all oxford colleges are interviewing online in 2023. For Cambridge: Caius, Pembroke, Peterhouse, Trinity, Kings and Selwyn are doing in-person interviews for UK applicants (Kings and Selwyn you can ask for an online interview).

Also worth noting that last year at Cambs only Trinity returned to in-person interview. They had a 10.26% increase in applications vs a 4.5% decrease in applications generally across all colleges (presumably including Trinity).

So that suggests that it is likely the in-person colleges will attract more applications, and be more competitive for direct entry, than the online-interviewing colleges.

Thanks @Delphigirl, very useful information.

Are there any other universities other than Oxbridge that still routinely interview applicants? (We've not come across any, but that might be DD's choice of universities).

@lifeturnsonadime so yes DS1 got 4 A*s and DS2 predicted the same. DS1 went to St Andrews and I am going to beat the drum for it. It is outstanding. The history dept had hundreds of tutors, the depth and breadth of study areas is amazing, the dept don't stress you and there is the added advantage that you can pick side modules from other subjects entirely. It's also very international which is nice and also traditional but not stuffy - red gowns, pier walks by torchlight, balls etc. Have also recently done the tour for Durham and it seemed v good. DS2 still wants to go to Oxbridge but I do not really like their style teaching or their lack of breadth and I don't think it will suit DS2 particularly.
@singingstones re social criteria - it is no secret that Oxbridge are under pressure to alter the social makeup of their intake. For example, tutors in History at Oxford were quite open with me that those sitting the HAT test were scored partially how well they did but also partially on their socio/economic background. So in other words you can sit the entrance test and do brilliantly and see it marked down and then someone does worse on the test and it is marked up (and they may get a better overall score). I think this happened to DS1. When he did his A level his three papers were scored 99%, 98% and 97% and his coursework 100% yet .....he got 60% for a HAT he found quite easy. It's their call obviously but we were pretty certain at the time he was marked down and having chatted to them last week, I'm now sure of it.

Another Fellow told me that his peers were happy their college still seemed to accept the candidates they felt were good rather than turn them away ("like other colleges") because they had to take others they would not have normally chosen. I won't debate this as some will be for or against but it is a fact at Oxbridge.

Someone asked how you know which college operates which system. I honestly don't know. I would pick a few and call them up. Their admin team will explain how that college approaches it as it may even differ by subject. However, it is easy to get the stat pages by googling and see how many maintained school vs private schools get into certain colleges and what the ethnic minority, gender etc makeup of each college is. This might guide your choices according to your own situation.

Hope that helps!!

@lifeturnsonadime You asked whether there was benefit to applying for one college or an open application. A parent at Oxford asked that question last week at the admissions talk. The guy said, all colleges receive your application anyway and it's just first dibs to the college you chose. They release you if not interested and then others can pick you up off they like the sound of you. But as a tactic it doesn't help your application one way or another in terms of getting in. Other than if your first choice likes your DC of course!

Manchester do a lot

Actually my son was extensively interviewed by Southampton for oceanography too - a good 50mins of being quizzed on data sets and graphs and chemistry. But I don’t know if that was just that department.

The HAT is not "marked down" but contextualised as are GCSE grades to identify high performing students from poorly performing schools. It is supposed to be challenging - this is from the Oxford website:

What is the History Admissions Test (HAT)?
The Colleges of Oxford University use a History Admissions Test (HAT) in the selection of candidates for all degree courses involving History.
This test, which aims to examine the skills and potential required for the study of History at university, gives us an objective basis for comparing candidates from different backgrounds, including mature applicants and those from different countries. It is designed to be challenging, in order to differentiate effectively between the most able applicants for university courses, including those who may have achieved or can be expected to achieve the highest possible grades in their examinations.
The History Admissions Test consists of one question based on an extract from a primary source, to be answered in one hour.
Candidates are asked to offer thoughtful interpretations of the source without knowing anything about its context. The HAT is a test of skills, not substantive historical knowledge. It is designed so that candidates should find it equally challenging, regardless of what period(s) they have studied or what school examinations they are taking.

The relative weighting of GCSEs/HAT/submitted written work/interviews changes through the application process https://www.history.ox.ac.uk/admissions-facts-and-figures

There's only one thing worse than over-invested parents, which is parents popping up on here to boast their dc are on course for a first at Oxbridge and then to sneer at over-invested parents

@JulesJules There’s nothing in that passage to suggest the HAT scores are contextualised. I think the uni have tried hard to come up with a test that requires no prior training!

I'm not sure if any other unis as a whole do. Some subjects may be more inclined to than others - all 5 of my DDs choices did, the other 4 being for electrical and electronic engineering. We'd heard of chemists being interviewed elsewhere and joked it was subjects where there was a chance of burning down the department.

Interesting information and you may be right in your final paragraph but I feel a potential interview question as to why your conclusion may be false :)

1. Is the 10% increase in Trinity applications statistically significant or part of normal year to year variance? Have applications gone up or down by such amounts before in say last 20 years? Did any other colleges who kept online see similar increases last year even if the average was down?

2 Even if was statistically significant will that information change things this year? Like you many may see that information and decide chances are better at online places this year so that as a result applications to Trinity etc actually fall. This used to happen at Oxford with the Norrington table. Sometimes people assumed the number 1 college would be extra hard to get into the following year so didn’t apply thereby making it easier.

I think there might be a danger of overthinking it and if you can do in person perhaps just pick your favourite college that best suits your interests and desires.

@JulesJules the Oxford HAT wasn't that challenging according to DS - but it was very off the wall. Nevertheless, the college fellow I spoke to specifically said it was 'marked down or up' - his words- depending on several factors (as you say a sort of contextualisation).

1. No, unusual. There were no other colleges in cambs interviewing online last year.
2. Who knows. I’m not a statistician or a psychologist, do with it what you will. I accept no losses arising from any illfounded reliance on my random musings.

No my question was did any other college see a 10% or close rise in applications last year (ie one that was doing online).

You may be right in your conclusion but you could also be wrong due to statistics and psychology. Just offering a cautionary counterbalance.

Sidney Sussex, Pembroke and newnham had between 10% and 20% increases. So who knows why and whether that can tell us anything about the reasons for trinity’s increase. Everything else fell except a couple that had less than 3% increases.
answers on a postcard, I guess.

Just on this - for Cambridge, it's probably more relevant to look at variations in applications per subject at individual colleges, rather than variations in applications to the colleges as a whole. They are only being compared to others applying for their subject.

Having said this, it can be very unpredictable. For instance, DS applied to a college with a fairly stable and seemingly good ratio of offers to applicants for his subject (according to the graphs for the last 5 years). Only to see, when the stats were updated, that three times the normal numbers had applied to that college for that subject in that cycle. So you never can tell.

However, the graphs will show that some admissions tutors seem to take from the pool each year, while others never do. Some tutors take exactly the same number each year, while others are more varied. Some tutors appear to be more successful at having their pooled students accepted by other colleges. This kind of thing may be worth weighing up in the mix.

@looffa where do you find this information out please? Is it by searching each college or a subject? I find the Cambridge info quite hard to negotiate my way round.

@looffa i think this could be a very time consuming and not very rewarding approach - i would suggest better if DCs chose their favorite college incl staff, and trust in the pooling system to work; for some it just wont work out but no amount of trying to predict some very fine margins is going to change that for the majority. The fact is there are more great applicants than places, and some people wont get in. Surely DCs should focus on where they will enjoy most and can work with faculty that has common interests (if that is a differentiator for their subject)?

My DS says he wants to do the interview in person and possibly spend the night before

@Reusername The graph feature can be found Here. Just select last 5 years and a course at a college options.

I’ve just had a quick look for history. There was a big lift in Trinity direct applications last year but that may have been down to above average application to offer ratio for the previous 4 years rather than in person interviews. I am surprised at how much variation there is - but will resist the urge to start a spreadsheet! My son has chosen a college and what will be will be.

No it doesn't, does it. I think they were experimenting with contextualising the HAT, along with the GCSE scores, but perhaps they've dropped that now.

D1 (third year Oxford History joint) sat the HAT for 2020 entry, she'd only tried one HAT previously which they had given them at school. I know the idea was that it was challenging, couldn't be coached for and designed to see what information the student could tease out of an unfamiliar passage. She definitely found it challenging.

I don’t believe Oxford will change the mark they give to a person’s HAT essay based on the school they went to - that makes no sense. They might accept a lower mark on the paper from a candidate for contextual reasons, but there is no way to artificially uplift the actual mark given for that paper which makes sense. Tbh, if a candidate found their HAT paper “easy,” but only scored 60% on it, then they missed something - it’s assessing the way you think, after all, not your historical knowledge, so if you thought it was “easy,” then that’s all on you and the level at which you chose to respond to the question. How well you score in your A-level papers and coursework is irrelevant to how well you analyse a HAT paper, as they are not focusing on the same things.

“So if I’ve got this right, I’m being labelled as ‘over invested’ by someone posting at 2am”

Here I am @10ppicnmix posting late again. You are clearly struck by my early hours’ posts (2am yesterday and again now - shock, horror - at 1.30). You are implicitly suggesting readers of this thread should cast judgement on me due to late posts (do I have MH issues? A drinker?). Nope, I am simply in a different time zone to you. That’s it. Cheap shot on your part