Redirected from Oxford and Cambridge 2024

[MirandaWest]

Thought I’d start this thread in case anyone else with a DC who didn’t get an offer from Oxford (or Cambridge in a couple of weeks time) wants to say anything - I feel a bit out of place in the Oxbridge thread now but could be good to have somewhere to talk about how they are and what their plans are now.

Thank you both. Well done to both your children.

@SeaofTranquility that was early for Durham. I hope it's oktoask but was it the standard offer or contextual please? I know ds will be eligible at some universities for a contextual offer and I've been lead to believe that these are sent out earlier to the standard offer.

They were all standard offers.

Our experience of Durham offers: DN three years ago received offer in December. DS two years ago received offer in January. Neither were contextual and neither applied for Oxbridge.

Thank you both.

Manchester don’t interview everyone. If your application is strong they will just make an offer. Something to ask about if you go to an open day.

Manchester’s offer is high but they were offering much lower this year through clearing. Can’t guarantee that of course.

the whole uni process is so opaque!

north51 for Physics they interviewed all candidates and it's on UCAS info.

north51 that is a very good point. It makes total sense that it would be good for the mindset to have a quick response. Much appreciated!

I think you might be right, I can't explain it any other way either. I wish the very best for your son and so glad he is looking forward to the next stage!

With Durham do you have the opportunity to fill in a supplemental Durham PS - as the main UCAS one might be too focused on Oxbridge - maybe this is the only clue to Durham that you have applied to Oxbridge and maybe they hold back offers here until post Oxbridge offers? Just my musing.

My DD got her Durham offer in in November- (and Glasgow within 24 hours), she was PQA though.
That's a good way of looking at it @Jaxx - all the better things of Cambridge without the bad (is there a bad though), though not expecting Durham to exactly be a walk in the park! I think she is very relieved to get her first choice college and doesn't have to share - over on WIWIKAU there are quite a few who either missed the deadline for applying for accommodation or their application went astray and are without a college and accommodation! But she would not have been happy at one of the hill colleges (I know what everyone says about loving where you end up but I think it would have been the last straw for her).
We are gearing up for her move in a couple weeks. Picked her modules (only one optional choice anyway), all she has yet to do is pick her ID photo out of the 100 I took! Sadly it looks like our old dog (15) is on his way out. We got him a month before her dad died so he has been a real constant and both my kids will be devastated.
Cambridge was a last minute post results decision- if it had been a long term goal she would have picked different A levels and prepared better. But she had totally bought into the dream. And people do light up when you mention Oxbridge! Which is why she didn't tell many people she was applying - a friend missed her grades and said having to tell people she wasn't going after all was humiliating.
Anyhoo we must look forward! I'll miss her but I'm more excited than sad.

DC had a Durham offer in Jan, a week after getting rejected by Oxford post-interview. We’d expected to have to wait until much later, so that was a relief and helped DC get over the Oxford disappointment. I think he would have been more disappointed to be rejected by Durham actually.

For what it’s worth, I get the impression that O&C turn away a far higher proportion of really well-qualified candidates these days.

Partly because (rightly or wrongly) today’s selection process gives weighting for non-academic factors like postcode, having been in care and so on; partly because compared to 30 years ago, when I went to O from a state school, there was a huge attainment gap between private and state sectors.

The gap is still there (and lockdown compounded it), but it is narrower and has many more bridges across.

Oxbridge is very much engineered for a past era, when only a small fraction of sixth-formers had an education that was adequate to get them there. You hardly ever hear the phrase “Oxbridge reject”, because these days it has much less predictive meaning, if any, about a person’s life chances.

@Ponyclubgirl
Partly because (rightly or wrongly) today’s selection process gives weighting for non-academic factors like postcode, having been in care and so on; partly because compared to 30 years ago, when I went to O from a state school, there was a huge attainment gap between private and state sectors.

I do take issue with this paragraph. No aspect of the admission process is non-academic. All selection is based on meeting the entry requirements and showing the potential to thrive. Using contextual data is a means of selecting the best and most able from all types of schools. It is not a perfect system and needs more refining but is way better than the days of getting in because it was your Headmaster's old college. The attempts at outreach and having open and informative websites are slowly breaking down the barriers and many state pupils likely to get the grades are giving it a go and getting in.

@trickortrickier non academic has been a factor in very recent years and acknowledged by both C & O.

I know of several dc who were offered a place despite lower academic achievements, including College specific admissions testing, and the deciding factor was non academic, including fees from international students. A near retirement professor from C was very open, blunt and disapproving about the choices they had to make.

In addressing the previous bias, the pendulum may have swung quite far and in some cases may not have been right, which C has certainly acknowledged. No doubt it will settle down

Even students in care need to get the same grades. They just get more chance of an interview. Because their lives are a bit more rubbish than others.

70%+ of Oxbridge students went to state schools.

I know of several dc who were offered a place despite lower academic achievements, including College specific admissions testing, and the deciding factor was non academic, including fees from international students.

Where is the evidence for this? I would be very interested to read it.

And me. I support many students in care every year and no one has ever been allowed a place without the academics.

Colleges are open about giving contextual offers, which means granting higher academic value to lower grades, if certain background criteria are met. Are the background criteria themselves academic? Looks like a pretty academic (pun intended) question. End result is that some of the students with higher grades but a comfy background, who in the past would have displaced lower-income students with lower raw grades, have to go elsewhere. No harm done - they’re high flyers, they will thrive - and a much greater talent pool for non-Oxbridge admissions tutors to pick from. Win/win.

Anyone know why it is so low? Does the old boys network still exist?

There was some interesting data shared on a thread a while back which showed that a significant % of places won were from the same 6 elite schools - cant remember the names but mix of state and public schools.

@5starzz I didn't see that thread, but I did read this some time ago:

https://www.timeout.com/uk/news/the-uks-top-10-schools-for-oxbridge-offers-according-to-last-years-results-111224

@Ponyclubgirl - can you provide a link to show colleges being open about contextual offers. I know Oxford contextualise ALL applications and then make a standard offer but I would not consider this a contextual offer. Or if it is it applies to all the offers made.

This seems a strange thing to be disputing. Oxford launched its Foundation Oxford scheme, which explicitly requires lower grades if evidence of disadvantage can be shown, some years ago now. Like I said - win/win.

Outreach schemes are a great thing, but the one thing they cannot do is reduce the academic attainment of the people they’re not aimed at. It’s hardly rocket science.