Oxbridge applicants 2026??

[Justlurkingmostly]

Is there a thread for this year’s applicants - I can’t seem to find with a search. Thanks for signposting 🙏

If DD had got an in-person interview I would definitely have gone with her. Yes, she can catch a train by herself but the journey is a fair bit more complicated than that plus she’d have wanted moral/emotional support for something she will be extremely nervous for. As it is her interviews are online.
My other DD went off to uni this year. She’s autistic. In lots of ways she was way behind her peers and I had a few people suggesting I should do more to prepare her. Believe me, I was trying. So off she went to uni having never really having done loads of things like cook (she has significant issues with food). I was worried but I also knew my DD. She has to figure things out for herself in her own time. And that’s exactly what has happened and she’s having a blast.

For all those Oxbridge interviews - please check that your DC has in fact confirmed the interview. [oops]

Fortunately I checked, as DS told me a few months ago I was a helicopter parent he wanted to be more independent.

But really hate all these hoops to jump through.

Good luck to all those waiting for news.

Good luck to your DS. Mine is at C reading engineering and had online interviews. Just in case you didn't see my earlier post, his interviewers went straight in to questions, without any settling preamble so something to perhaps be aware of!

Agree with Panicmode. There won't be any fluff. DD had one Q linked to her EPQ which was relevant to her course. Everything else was a flight of fancy exploring hiw she tackled problems and thought about abstract ideas.

Yes I think I've decided to go with DD to Cambridge. She would be fine going on her own and it's a straightforward journey but I think why not take away any of the practical stuff from her load.

My parents had nothing to do with my university applications and that was fine and it would have been laughable at the time had they done anything else. But I don't wear a watch and didn't have an alarm with me so was awake all night in a strange room in Oxford counting the church bell chimes to make sure I got up on time for my interview. Maybe a bit of handholding and forward thinking from them might have been helpful. Executive function and the ability to foresee practical issues is almost the last skill that an adolescent develops.

Very much agree @ClaireBlunderwood - parents know what works for their own DC and there's no need for anyone to be saddened about apron strings etc. It's great that some want to go it alone and great that some want their folks there. Whatever works and no doubt they'll all find their way in the world at their own pace and learn as they go as we've all done - and are still doing. Good luck to everyone's DC with the interview prep, and to anyone still waiting to hear.

@pinkdelight you've put it better than me but yes that's what I was getting at.

@ClaireBlunderwood I feel for teen you listening for the church bells (very relatable!)

Re the 'niche' discussion up-thread, I think I used that word somewhere on the thread and meant it in the context of less commonly applied for courses (that are therefore a bit outing). DD is at a comprehensive so not one of those subjects that only a few can apply for, it just seems a less popular option. I wasn't suggesting they are more competitive, in fact those subjects are prob less competitive than, say, maths, engineering, english, PPE/HSPS etc

@ilovemydogandmrobama2 good shout re checking they've accepted the invitation, just the sort of thing my DD would forget to do in all the excitement. I will ask now!

@Muchtoomuchtodo if the idea of classics (at Oxford at least, not sure about Cambs) is your son's jam he absolutely can apply without prior ancient languages.

Classics is absolutely open to those without ancient languages and lots of people apply from state schools. Nowadays it is a minority of applicants who have Latin and Greek. Often they get interested because they have done Classical Civilisation A Level (which a lot of state schools offer) but that isn’t necessary either. In fact there are no required A levels for Classics, just a motivation to learn an ancient language if accepted.

Re: Helicopter parenting. I would definitely call myself this, I'm not particularly proud of it, but it's a result of my own upbringing where my mother was completely hands off from when I was very young. I went home to an empty house, prepared my own meals, sat at darkened bus stops for hours and I hated it, so I have probably boomeranged too far the other way. BUT it doesn't seem to have affected my eldest ds, now 22, in the slightest as he has now moved away to another city to work, and is completely independent...

DS has a friend who did Classics at Cambridge without Latin or Greek, he did the 4 year course rather than the 3 year one.

DD's Interview is a week tomorrow. It's online and they want to do a tech check at 7.30am. She was hoping to do the online interview at school but not sure if school can accommodate a 7.30am start.

Motivation and a high level of linguistic ability (as well as an aptitude for literature, philosophy, history, art etc).

And so the demands of the course inevitably limits the numbers who are both willing and able to apply - that plays into the seemingly high acceptance rate. It's to do with the challenge of the course, not its ease.

It's exactly the same logic as Further Maths at A level clocking up an extremely high percentage of A*.

Who ever said that less competitive courses were easy; or, by extension, that students on those courses were any less able than those on more competitive ones?

The point about highly competitive courses is that for these courses there are far more students who have the potential to do well than there are places. Oxford make this very explicit in the Admissions Reports they produce. If you start with 12 applicants per place, you may well end up with 3 or 4 candidates who are deserving of the place. If you start with 2.5 applicants per place, you can only ever end up with 2.5 who are deserving of the place. So more competitive courses may well not end up with smarter students, but they are still more competitive.

Same! Completely negligent mother, it blows my mind that she is so respected professionally in the caring profession.

DD1 is at uni with adult problems - internet crashing, can't get a GP appointment, ran out of money and I desperately want to help but since she's 19 years old I can't helicopter in.

DS did eventually do the registration form for the interview, he did forget about the pizza in the oven setting off the smoke alarm.

Am sure there is a balance

I think that you may be missing the point about the type of applicant for each course Emptynester2. It's never going to be an exact science but the quality/ numbers of applicants is going to vary according to the nature of the course.

I just think the use of the word 'competitive' is misleading. More heavily applied to/ less heavily applied to courses is nearer the mark. There are several reasons for variation in volume of applications. But numbers applying is not a complete or even a particularly good measure of competition; it assumes that there's no variation between the thousands upon thousands applying which is of course light years away from the truth.

Once into Oxford your DD will find that certain courses are definitely regarded as significantly more/ less demanding in terms of challenge/ workload - I'm not in a million years going to name those courses and offend people (besides it's widely known which they are) - and there's certainly no absolute correlation between numbers applying and the perceived demands of the various courses. It should also be obvious that a lot of outstandingly bright students read these less intense subjects purely because that's where their interest/ talent lies.

It does sound a little dismissive of other applicants to refer to your DD's 'very competitive course', that's all. I understand that you mean volume of applicants but my fairly mild point is that there's more to it than that.

My daughter applies to a small admission course indeed and at one point she was so self doubt she asked her high education head at her school whether she should switch applying pure maths and/or maths and stats instead. So indeed. Small admission sounds very scary to them. If it was just maths then it might be C instead.

Many congrats to those interview offers and sorry to hear about no. Its still a waiting for us.

Greenleave one thing about courses with small admission rates is that offers can relatively often be made for a single subject rather than the joint one (since these are often joint courses at Oxford eg Classics and English, Physics and Philosophy, History and Modern Languages, Computer Science and Philosophy).

All your posts suggest to me that you have an axe to grind. And also that you believe you have more knowledge and/or experience of Oxford than any other person posting. Very patronising.

I just think the use of the word 'competitive' is misleading. More heavily applied to/ less heavily applied to courses is nearer the mark.

I think this is precisely what everyone means by competitive here. More applicants per place available. That’s it. No value judgements about easier or harder courses once you’re on them.

Nonsense. I have absolutely no reason whatsoever to grind and axe and I'm not sure how you get that from the few things that I've posted.

I do find a claim that certain courses are 'very competitive' is what's a little off here. It's dismissive of other applicants, by inference.

Of course Oxford says there are more applicants with potential to do well at the uni than there are places for. It's not going to say that there are also a lot of students who wouldn't fare well at all and don't have what Oxford is looking for, but that's equally true. The quality of applicant is far from uniform.

People posting on these threads have more or less knowledge of Oxford. I don't think anyone cares who knows what, if posters have something to say which might be helpful. Not everything is a competition. Indeed the students who go up to Oxford or Cambridge having been fiercely competitive all their lives would do well to give themselves a break on that front, because trying to be top in the Oxbridge environment isn't calculated to lead to a good experience at all.

It's misleading. The courses with more applicants aren't necessarily harder to get an offer for. That would only be the case if applicants to all courses were all of roughly the same ability.

The point about the challenge of the course itself is separate.

We didnt know that! Wow! That changes alot. She is passionate about both. The head of higher education at her school did say that if she only chooses either subject she might regret. US also allows for dual degree so she is applying US too. Xmas will be busy with essays and application and Jan will be TMUA for Imperial.

Nonsense. I have absolutely no reason whatsoever to grind and axe and I'm not sure how you get that from the few things that I've posted.

I do think you're unaware of how you come across sometimes and how things can read as supercilious/dismissive of others, but I'm sure it's not intentional and that you're trying to help, and this is a supportive thread generally so I've held back saying anything before - and won't say anything more now, except that we're all wanting the best for our DC and negotiating this system that everyone has views on and no one definitively knows, so let's keep positive and building each other up. We've got a long way to go, whatever the outcomes for DC.