Continuation of Oxbridge 2025

[BananasAllofIt]

I for one still have a kid waiting to hear about interviews. Thought I'd carry it over...

DD went for an in person interview. Apparently every other kid had a parent sat in the waiting room, including one who was relentlessly grilling to the last moment.
That certainly wouldn't have happened in the 90s.
She was also surprised to see a lot in school uniform ish type clothing, that does sound a bit 90s.

Same era as me (within a year or two). Yes, everyone did the exams, but Oxford marked the exams. They could let in anyone they wanted, effectively.

And I had the entrance exam and then a college interview, which is even more open to abuse as anyone who fluffed the exam could "star" in the interview (aka be a schoolboy international rugby player, or the daughter of a benefactor) and get the EE entry.

Was that this week? My DD said she most people were in smart clothes and jackets, dressing for sixth form. Parents weren't allowed in the college but she said she guessed about a third of parents were walking around town with their children. (I expect some had to drive their kids.). Parents were probably just more hands off in the 80s and 90s, mine certainly were.

Opposite experience here. Parents weren't allowed anywhere near the waiting room, a few waited in the college cafe/bar but any prep areas were out of bounds. I wandered round the college and saw dozens of (presumably) candidates and only one school uniform.

I was only there because we drove up to be safe, he's done all the open days etc by himself and very much doesn't need me around. I remember getting trains /coaches everywhere myself for the uni interview rounds too, wouldn't even have occurred to 80s parents that they should do that.

It's a relief! I was a bit worried about my mind!

No, not everyone did the exams. There was a choice.

Exams + interview = unconditional offer
No exam + interview = conditional offer.

I was advised (from a very ordinary comprehensive school, not knowing anyone who had been to Oxbridge) that if you were a strong candidate then you should take the exams as it gave you a better chance to credibily prove it than a short interview. I think that was probably good advice.

anyone who fluffed the exam could "star" in the interview (aka be a schoolboy international rugby player, or the daughter of a benefactor) and get the EE entry.

Evidence, or just a hunch? To be honest, I can't speak for 1989, except to say that this wasn't at all my experience. And I can tell you categorically that isn't how it is now. Everyone is beyond careful and has no interest at all in rugby players anyway.

tbh I didn't know/remember that Oxford used to give conditional offers. Thought they were all unconditional (because that's what happened to me). What I do know is that there were a not inconsiderable number of people who really shouldn't academically have been there, and I don't mean people from state schools, I mean people who were networked in, which was rife.,

I know it doesn't happen now. There were definitely rugby players and rowers who got in that way in my generation. Not to mention eg Toby Young when his dad Sir Michael Young rang up the Brasenose admissions tutor. And that's before we get to the royal family.

I'm glad you don't think it happens any more.

I mean... it can't happen now because everyone has to get AAA minimum. That's the point of the old EE offer being open to abuse (whether you think it was actually abused or not)

Anyway, sorry to sidetrack the thread. Back to this year's applicants not the dim and distant past!

Interviews are all over here, hooray!

One thing my DD mentioned with one of the panels was that the way they phrased some questions seemed deliberately obtuse. Once she understood the question, she could work out the answer. She wondered why they did that and if it was in itself a test (and perhaps one she was failing).

The other panel just asked harder questions, but I think she preferred their style as she felt she knew where she stood a bit more. Even if she didn't know the answers!

I was grateful to her school for doing a prep interview with her, but actually the things they told her to prepare were quite far off the mark, eg being able to talk about her skills and experience, as if for a job interview.

Sixth forms round here are distinctly casual. It's interesting that other areas are more formal.

I was grateful to her school for doing a prep interview with her, but actually the things they told her to prepare were quite far off the mark, eg being able to talk about her skills and experience, as if for a job interview.

I've heard this before. It's interesting how schools persist with this. From what I know from doing Oxford admissions myself (and speaking to lots of colleagues in different colleges and subjects) interviews are never about skills and experience and always about the subject itself. You might sometimes get a bit of "what period of history are you most interested in and why" type questions but mostly it will be much, much more specifc and not something you can prepare in advance. For a reason!

Although I was at a comp, my father had been to Cambridge. He arranged an 'informal' interview at his old college, which then was still all male. I was told they would admit me if I waited a year until they were co-ed. This looked like my idea of hell, so I applied elsewhere. But definitely happened. 1984.

The gap between different schools knowledge is huge. A colleague of a friend has 25 offers for this year's cohort. Has experienced expert staff every step of the way. Lots of practice interviews. Debrief and careful notes taken.
Our local sixth form got one kid in two years ago.
The staff haven't the time or the resources to upscale their help.
DD has had to really be on top of it, booking the exam, arranging transport (no public transport available at that time to get there for a 9am start) .
Asking the nicest teacher to give up a lunch break to go over some questions.
Getting to the interview.

The information provided by Oxford and Cambridge demystifying the interview process gets better every year. Really puts the power in the organised but lone wolf in many sixth forms.

Things were very different "back in the day"!

Dd was asked a skills type question at the start of interview one, which was mentioned on the PS and is extrenely relevant to the subject she wants to study. However, the tutors specificially said her answers would not form part of the official interview and wouldn't be marked. It sounds like they just genuinely wanted to know a bit more about this but were deliberately stressing NOTHING extra-curricular will count, only how you respond to the problem-solving type questions on the day.

I agree that the demystification videos help hugely and everyone should know at the very last that they’re not going to get a cozy chat about hobbies and bulshitting about resilience like you might in a job interview/.

DD had both of her interviews today. She described the first as neither good nor bad, and the second as good. She seemed very buzzy after the second one and told us that none of the questions were hard. 🙈

This worries me. I’m glad she is happy and untraumatised, but I cannot help think that they decided she wasn’t up for it, so they just tossed her easy questions and let her gambol off. I won’t voice this out loud, of course.

We’ll just have to wait for January. Best of luck to everyone and Happy Christmas!

Agreed @Stockpot both seemed to go almost too well for my DD, who normally is the biggest drama queen of all time and comes out of every exam weeping hysterically that she’s failed, but this time she said she knew lots about everything they asked her about. Her calm has taken me aback. But I don’t think you can read anything into it either way. I’m one of the many people on here who did a Cambridge interview back in the day, I thought it went well and it had gone well because I got an offer so hopefully for your DD’s sake and mine that’s the case here. she’s been told she may get a third interview next week but won’t know until Monday morning, which puts a bit of a downer over the weekend.

DS has his 2 interviews tomorrow. My fingers are crossed for him. I know he is really capable so I just hope nerves don't get the better of him.

"And I had the entrance exam and then a college interview, which is even more open to abuse as anyone who fluffed the exam could "star" in the interview (aka be a schoolboy international rugby player, or the daughter of a benefactor) and get the EE entry."

It certainly didn't work like that in the early 1990s when I was doing Oxford admissions.

@Pallando that is very reassuring to hear. DS is doing in person Maths tomorrow and he is wearing cargo pants & hoody along with v old trainers. I did manage to at least wash and iron them beforehand, and did my best with the trainers. I had suggested that he wear something else but he was insistent and I thought it better that he is comfortable. DH is appalled and has said (privately) that he thinks DS is putting himself at a disadvantage by wearing that.

Some great anecdotes here, so I'll add mine!

I applied to Oxford for Phys/Phil, late '80s. I didn't do the exam, as both Physics and Philosophy papers were on the same day, which was also the first night of a school play I was in. So I travelled by plane and train from the Channel Islands. On Day One, we sat in the Hall and did a physics test. On the evening of Day One I recall that we all went to the Turf and drank beer. On Day Two, mine was the first interview. I know this for a fact because I was given a permanent marker by complete mistake, and my bad graph-sketching stayed on the whiteboard all day. Then the man who was to become my main philosophy tutor asked me to explain a phrase I'd quoted in the sample essay I'd sent to them ("the microphysical distribution of states over space-time") and I got a bit carried away.

Happy days?

We heard today that DD has a third interview tomorrow (Oxford). Different college to the one she applied to, and was interviewed for, earlier this week.
Having read on here that it could be for moderation, I told this to DD who was adamant it wasn’t. She said the initial interviews are already moderated because there are 2 interviewers in each interview.
Who is right? Can a third interview be for moderation? If not, what is the point of a third interview? I’m just interested.
Thanks.