Mental Oxbridge complex?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by Abstract_Prism
I think a lot of people on TSR feel this way.
The problem is that they get told how intelligent they are when they are really young and might even get taken on trips for 'gifted' students to Oxford/Cambridge and so get an inflated self-image. But in most cases they aren't really Oxbridge standard. I think the 'everyone's a winner' mentality is what enables this.
These people are in line for a barrage of disappointments in life. They will constantly feel like they aren't good enough and that they should be achieving more because that's what they were told they were capable of. I suspect a lot of them will experience depression.
The only way out of it is to make a conscious effort to reduce your perceptions of yourself. You have to accept that you are not Oxbridge standard, you won't be Prime Minister, and you won't win a Nobel Prize. And that's okay.
And of course practically, there are dozens of UK universities that can be described as 'great' and have excellent international reputations. Oxbridge is not the be all and end all.
The problem is that they get told how intelligent they are when they are really young and might even get taken on trips for 'gifted' students to Oxford/Cambridge and so get an inflated self-image. But in most cases they aren't really Oxbridge standard. I think the 'everyone's a winner' mentality is what enables this.
These people are in line for a barrage of disappointments in life. They will constantly feel like they aren't good enough and that they should be achieving more because that's what they were told they were capable of. I suspect a lot of them will experience depression.
The only way out of it is to make a conscious effort to reduce your perceptions of yourself. You have to accept that you are not Oxbridge standard, you won't be Prime Minister, and you won't win a Nobel Prize. And that's okay.
And of course practically, there are dozens of UK universities that can be described as 'great' and have excellent international reputations. Oxbridge is not the be all and end all.
The notion of someone objectively being "Oxbridge standard" or not is rather facile. For one, Oxbridge has a variety of courses, with a variety of entry requirements. For another, it depends on singular performances - single exam performances, single interview performances. And lastly, plenty of people reapply and get in, so how is one to know whether or not someone is "Oxbridge standard" based on a first rejection? Also, there is a huge difference between an achievement like getting into Oxbridge vs an achievement like becoming Prime Minister or winning a Nobel Prize. The vast majority of Oxbridge students are just bright people who were passionate about a subject, got good grades and gave a good interview. They aren't all ridiculous geniuses either. Let's not aggrandise thousands of people when the vast majority will also not achieve anything notable either, or pretend that it is some particular level of intellect that gets you through the doors.
Original post by 1 8 13 20 42
The notion of someone objectively being "Oxbridge standard" or not is rather facile. For one, Oxbridge has a variety of courses, with a variety of entry requirements. For another, it depends on singular performances - single exam performances, single interview performances. And lastly, plenty of people reapply and get in, so how is one to know whether or not someone is "Oxbridge standard" based on a first rejection? Also, there is a huge difference between an achievement like getting into Oxbridge vs an achievement like becoming Prime Minister or winning a Nobel Prize. The vast majority of Oxbridge students are just bright people who were passionate about a subject, got good grades and gave a good interview. They aren't all ridiculous geniuses either. Let's not aggrandise thousands of people when the vast majority will also not achieve anything notable either, or pretend that it is some particular level of intellect that gets you through the doors.
Would you prefer if I said 'good enough for Oxbridge'?
The point is that most people aren't good enough for Oxbridge - and it would be wrong to say that there isn't an rough expected standard - but they've been constantly told that they are good enough, and that's where the problem lies.
Of course becoming Prime Minister is harder than getting into Oxbridge, but that's not the point. The point is that most young people nowadays have an inflated sense of self-worth and believe they are capable of things which they are not capable of, then are crushed when they can't achieve them.
Original post by Abstract_Prism
Would you prefer if I said 'good enough for Oxbridge'?
The point is that most people aren't good enough for Oxbridge - and it would be wrong to say that there isn't an rough expected standard - but they've been constantly told that they are good enough, and that's where the problem lies.
Of course becoming Prime Minister is harder than getting into Oxbridge, but that's not the point. The point is that most young people nowadays have an inflated sense of self-worth and believe they are capable of things which they are not capable of, then are crushed when they can't achieve them.
The point is that most people aren't good enough for Oxbridge - and it would be wrong to say that there isn't an rough expected standard - but they've been constantly told that they are good enough, and that's where the problem lies.
Of course becoming Prime Minister is harder than getting into Oxbridge, but that's not the point. The point is that most young people nowadays have an inflated sense of self-worth and believe they are capable of things which they are not capable of, then are crushed when they can't achieve them.
Sure, but it isn't "most people" who think they have a shot. Yes, sometimes an "everybody's a winner" sentiment exists, but I think, where Oxbridge is concerned, it is people who perform well in school who are encouraged. What do you need to get into Oxbridge? As I said, passion for the subject, a good interview, and good grades. It's completely reasonable for anybody with the predicted grades to think they have a shot at Oxbridge, and, provided they interview well enough, and their grades are backed up by previous performance, and there aren't too many candidates performing better than them, and, of course, they end up achieving the necessary grades, they should get in. Of course, nobody should expect to get into Oxbridge but I think your reasoning does more harm than good: rather than recognising that it can be somewhat of a lottery, what with all the very capable applicants they have to choose form, and often one bad performance can screw you, you put forward this notion that there are just people who are good enough, and people who aren't.
Although, yes, perhaps this is true, but when it comes to TSR, and anyone with an "Oxbridge complex" we tend to be talking about the people who are good enough, as they are the ones who have had a strong academic history. Being "good enough" does not mean you get in. It means you have a chance to get in. Such is the selectivity and stringency. Someone who is simply not good enough is simply not good enough, somebody who has the capacity to get in can easily get a B in an important AS subject due to one bad exam, or fluff the interview, and be rejected. You could say that simply getting rejected is what renders someone not "good enough", but this doesn't make sense because plenty of people reapply and get accepted.
I do agree though that there is a more general problem. Nowadays it seems everyone has to go to university, and try to get a graduate job. Other professions are seen as something to escape from. Everyone has to make something of themselves. They have to try to win, they have to try to climb the ladder. They have to achieve. They have to be a success. Eurgh.
Original post by physicsmaths
The 'imperial get better grades then oxbridge students' is ******** mate.
Imperial get around 519 UCAS points and Cambridge 567.
That difference is massive.
Even taking into account Imperial has more internationals ie IB takers who heighten UCAS point averages by alot.
Cambridge has arts subjects which always achieve less then sciences, given Imperial has 100% sciences it still doesn't match it.
On sciences alone(like imperial), cambridge hits 600+.
Imperial get around 519 UCAS points and Cambridge 567.
That difference is massive.
Even taking into account Imperial has more internationals ie IB takers who heighten UCAS point averages by alot.
Cambridge has arts subjects which always achieve less then sciences, given Imperial has 100% sciences it still doesn't match it.
On sciences alone(like imperial), cambridge hits 600+.
You cannot conclusively state that more UCAS points = better A Level grades. It generally means more A Levels taken.
Imperial has standard offers of A*A*AA for all engineering courses, with A*AA-A*A*A for nearly everything else. This is easily higher than Oxford's, but marginally lower than Cambridge's - but since I was comparing it to the average Oxbridge student - Imperial comes out on top (as you need AAA to get into lots of courses at Oxford).
GG.
Original post by physicsmaths
Imperial get around 519 UCAS points and Cambridge 567.
That difference is massive.
Imperial get around 519 UCAS points and Cambridge 567.
That difference is massive.
Considering that a BHS diploma in horse knowledge and care is worth 45 points, the difference is horsesh__.
Original post by GradeA*UnderA
Imperial has standard offers of A*A*AA for all engineering courses
No
MechEng at Imperial A*A*A or A*AAA
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/study/ug/courses/mechanical-engineering-department/mechanical-engineering-meng/
And what's your source for your "higher grades at Imperial than Oxbridge" assertion?
Apart from guessing.
Posted from TSR Mobile
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by jneill
No
MechEng at Imperial A*A*A or A*AAA
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/study/ug/courses/mechanical-engineering-department/mechanical-engineering-meng/
And what's your source for your "higher grades at Imperial than Oxbridge" assertion?
Apart from guessing.
Posted from TSR Mobile
MechEng at Imperial A*A*A or A*AAA
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/study/ug/courses/mechanical-engineering-department/mechanical-engineering-meng/
And what's your source for your "higher grades at Imperial than Oxbridge" assertion?
Apart from guessing.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Mech eng needs to catch up :/
It's because the requirements on average, are naturally just higher. You can get into many courses at Oxford with just AAA, with only a few asking for A*A*A. Cambridge students, as I mentioned, are going to have better than Imperial, but when you consider them as Oxbridge, the result is likely a total lower than Imperial's.
Reality is, basing grades off UCAS points is inaccurate in itself,(especially when you consider than general studies and critical thinking is standard in schools that send many to Oxbridge) but basing it off entry requirements, is likely more accurate, but still questionable (it's why I said "probably" in my initial post) In terms of the qualitt of A Level grades in meaningful subjects:
Cambridge > Imperial > Oxford
Imperial > Oxbridge
I challenge you to find an imperial student on TSR with less than 2A* You'll find plenty with less at Oxford.
When you consider the context of Imperial as a science university, and how easily the prospective students rack up A*s, particularly in maths and further maths, it's expected they'd have better grades.
Original post by GradeA*UnderA
Mech eng needs to catch up :/
It's because the requirements on average, are naturally just higher. You can get into many courses at Oxford with just AAA, with only a few asking for A*A*A. Cambridge students, as I mentioned, are going to have better than Imperial, but when you consider them as Oxbridge, the result is likely a total lower than Imperial's.
Reality is, basing grades off UCAS points is inaccurate in itself,(especially when you consider than general studies and critical thinking is standard in schools that send many to Oxbridge) but basing it off entry requirements, is likely more accurate, but still questionable (it's why I said "probably" in my initial post) In terms of the qualitt of A Level grades in meaningful subjects:
Cambridge > Imperial > Oxford
Imperial > Oxbridge
I challenge you to find an imperial student on TSR with less than 2A* You'll find plenty with less at Oxford.
When you consider the context of Imperial as a science university, and how easily the prospective students rack up A*s, particularly in maths and further maths, it's expected they'd have better grades.
It's because the requirements on average, are naturally just higher. You can get into many courses at Oxford with just AAA, with only a few asking for A*A*A. Cambridge students, as I mentioned, are going to have better than Imperial, but when you consider them as Oxbridge, the result is likely a total lower than Imperial's.
Reality is, basing grades off UCAS points is inaccurate in itself,(especially when you consider than general studies and critical thinking is standard in schools that send many to Oxbridge) but basing it off entry requirements, is likely more accurate, but still questionable (it's why I said "probably" in my initial post) In terms of the qualitt of A Level grades in meaningful subjects:
Cambridge > Imperial > Oxford
Imperial > Oxbridge
I challenge you to find an imperial student on TSR with less than 2A* You'll find plenty with less at Oxford.
When you consider the context of Imperial as a science university, and how easily the prospective students rack up A*s, particularly in maths and further maths, it's expected they'd have better grades.
Goddamn Oxford letting the side down
Original post by GradeA*UnderA
Mech eng needs to catch up :/
It's because the requirements on average, are naturally just higher. You can get into many courses at Oxford with just AAA, with only a few asking for A*A*A. Cambridge students, as I mentioned, are going to have better than Imperial, but when you consider them as Oxbridge, the result is likely a total lower than Imperial's.
Reality is, basing grades off UCAS points is inaccurate in itself,(especially when you consider than general studies and critical thinking is standard in schools that send many to Oxbridge) but basing it off entry requirements, is likely more accurate, but still questionable (it's why I said "probably" in my initial post) In terms of the qualitt of A Level grades in meaningful subjects:
Cambridge > Imperial > Oxford
Imperial > Oxbridge
I challenge you to find an imperial student on TSR with less than 2A* You'll find plenty with less at Oxford.
When you consider the context of Imperial as a science university, and how easily the prospective students rack up A*s, particularly in maths and further maths, it's expected they'd have better grades.
It's because the requirements on average, are naturally just higher. You can get into many courses at Oxford with just AAA, with only a few asking for A*A*A. Cambridge students, as I mentioned, are going to have better than Imperial, but when you consider them as Oxbridge, the result is likely a total lower than Imperial's.
Reality is, basing grades off UCAS points is inaccurate in itself,(especially when you consider than general studies and critical thinking is standard in schools that send many to Oxbridge) but basing it off entry requirements, is likely more accurate, but still questionable (it's why I said "probably" in my initial post) In terms of the qualitt of A Level grades in meaningful subjects:
Cambridge > Imperial > Oxford
Imperial > Oxbridge
I challenge you to find an imperial student on TSR with less than 2A* You'll find plenty with less at Oxford.
When you consider the context of Imperial as a science university, and how easily the prospective students rack up A*s, particularly in maths and further maths, it's expected they'd have better grades.
Computing at Imperial: Standard minimum offer for Computing courses are A*AA or A*AAA overall
Chemistry at Imperial: Our minimum entry requirement is AAA or A*AA overall
Medicine, yes Medicine: Please note that a standard offer is likely to be A*AA (minimum is AAA). I'll type that again: AAA for Medicine
And, challenge accepted, here's a TSRian getting into Imperial with AAA http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showpost.php?p=66938508&postcount=1938
What do I win?!
Also, TSR is not representative of the typical student population. And again, you are simply guessing.
According to Entry Requirement rankings it is Cambridge > Oxford > Imperial.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by jneill
Computing at Imperial: Standard minimum offer for Computing courses are A*AA or A*AAA overall
Chemistry at Imperial: Our minimum entry requirement is AAA or A*AA overall
Also, TSR is not representative of the typical student population. And again, you are simply guessing.
According to Entry Requirement rankings it is Cambridge > Oxford > Imperial.
Chemistry at Imperial: Our minimum entry requirement is AAA or A*AA overall
Also, TSR is not representative of the typical student population. And again, you are simply guessing.
According to Entry Requirement rankings it is Cambridge > Oxford > Imperial.
Computing isn't engineering just because it has the abbreviation - just like maths isn't art, just because has the abbreviation of BA. Chemistry is never AAA, that's the minimum, the standard is A*AA and a lot of offer holders actually ended up getting A*A*A offers.
Additonally, TSR grades against the general population will be vastly different, TSR grades faints top unis like Oxbridge and Imperial? Not so much, which is why they are, in fact, pretty representative.
On the topic of guessing, yes, I admitted to that, but using entry statistics based off UCAS points and using this to determine the quality of grades, when in actual fact the QUANTITY plays just as big as a role is arguably worse, or just as bad as guessing.
The difference between the UCAS points of Cambridge and Imperial is easily outweighed by a modest grade in A2 critical thinking... Or, as someone mentioned earlier, a qualification of sorts in horse knowledge
I certainly would think that the average Imperial student is probably smarter than the average Oxford student, given that it's physicists, engineers, mathematicians against other science students overwhelmed by students studying classics, Celtic studies, art and other worthless crap - and that physicists and mathematicians typically have the highest IQs out of all degrees.
I feel like this is going to cause some controversy :/
Original post by GradeA*UnderA
I certainly would think that the average Imperial student is probably smarter than the average Oxford student, given that it's physicists, engineers, mathematicians against other science students overwhelmed by students studying classics, Celtic studies, art and other worthless crap - and that physicists and mathematicians typically have the highest IQs out of all degrees.
I feel like this is going to cause some controversy :/
I feel like this is going to cause some controversy :/
Nobody said Computing was engineering (although the MEng awarded does certainly imply it has aspects of engineering rather being an MSci), you said all engineering was A*A*A and I showed you Mech (at least, and there may be others I haven't checked - oh wait BioMedical Engineering : A*AA, anyhoo...) wasn't. You then moaned. So I listed other Imperial courses with below A*A*A requirements in the same way you spouted off about Oxford having AAA courses.
And now you are calling humanities; worthless crap.
At this point I'll leave you to troll elsewhere.
I had the exact feeling, for about a year I was obsessed with getting into Oxford. Then I got rejected post-interview (
) and gained a bit of perspective on life that there are at least some other unis that are worth going to. Now I'm on a gap year and reapplying and the obsession is building again, so it appears I've learned nothing!
In all seriousness though, it is a fantastic milestone to reach for some people but it is also important to remember that it isn't for everyone. We're fortunate in the UK that there are so many great universities to choose from, but it's great to aim for the top! I wish you luck with your application
) and gained a bit of perspective on life that there are at least some other unis that are worth going to. Now I'm on a gap year and reapplying and the obsession is building again, so it appears I've learned nothing!In all seriousness though, it is a fantastic milestone to reach for some people but it is also important to remember that it isn't for everyone. We're fortunate in the UK that there are so many great universities to choose from, but it's great to aim for the top! I wish you luck with your application
Original post by jneill
Nobody said Computing was engineering (although the MEng awarded does certainly imply it has aspects of engineering rather being an MSci), you said all engineering was A*A*A and I showed you Mech (at least, and there may be others I haven't checked - oh wait BioMedical Engineering : A*AA, anyhoo...) wasn't. You then moaned. So I listed other Imperial courses with below A*A*A requirements in the same way you spouted off about Oxford having AAA courses.
And now you are calling humanities; worthless crap.
At this point I'll leave you to troll elsewhere.
And now you are calling humanities; worthless crap.
At this point I'll leave you to troll elsewhere.
A*AA is still greater than AAA, isn't it?
Furthermore, I never said humanities were crap, I stated that those specific humanities were crap, and they are, literally.
Original post by GradeA*UnderA
Mech eng needs to catch up :/
It's because the requirements on average, are naturally just higher. You can get into many courses at Oxford with just AAA, with only a few asking for A*A*A. Cambridge students, as I mentioned, are going to have better than Imperial, but when you consider them as Oxbridge, the result is likely a total lower than Imperial's.
Reality is, basing grades off UCAS points is inaccurate in itself,(especially when you consider than general studies and critical thinking is standard in schools that send many to Oxbridge) but basing it off entry requirements, is likely more accurate, but still questionable (it's why I said "probably" in my initial post) In terms of the qualitt of A Level grades in meaningful subjects:
Cambridge > Imperial > Oxford
Imperial > Oxbridge
I challenge you to find an imperial student on TSR with less than 2A* You'll find plenty with less at Oxford.
When you consider the context of Imperial as a science university, and how easily the prospective students rack up A*s, particularly in maths and further maths, it's expected they'd have better grades.
It's because the requirements on average, are naturally just higher. You can get into many courses at Oxford with just AAA, with only a few asking for A*A*A. Cambridge students, as I mentioned, are going to have better than Imperial, but when you consider them as Oxbridge, the result is likely a total lower than Imperial's.
Reality is, basing grades off UCAS points is inaccurate in itself,(especially when you consider than general studies and critical thinking is standard in schools that send many to Oxbridge) but basing it off entry requirements, is likely more accurate, but still questionable (it's why I said "probably" in my initial post) In terms of the qualitt of A Level grades in meaningful subjects:
Cambridge > Imperial > Oxford
Imperial > Oxbridge
I challenge you to find an imperial student on TSR with less than 2A* You'll find plenty with less at Oxford.
When you consider the context of Imperial as a science university, and how easily the prospective students rack up A*s, particularly in maths and further maths, it's expected they'd have better grades.
meeting the offer is a smaller hurdle to cross than getting an interview, doing well at the interview and then getting an offer from oxford or cambridge (except for courses with high STEP requirements). that's why oxford physics offers are "only" A*AA and law offers are a mere AAA. it's not indicative of the difficulty of the course or the calibre of students entering that course.
besides, imperial inflates a-level offers all the time for computing, chemeng, chemistry etc. just so that people don't insure imperial in favour of oxbridge.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by tanyapotter
meeting the offer is a smaller hurdle to cross than getting an interview, doing well at the interview and then getting an offer from oxford or cambridge (except for courses with high STEP requirements). that's why oxford physics offers are "only" A*AA and law offers are a mere AAA. it's not indicative of the difficulty of the course or the calibre of students entering that course.
besides, imperial inflates a-level offers all the time for computing, chemeng, chemistry etc. just so that people don't insure imperial in favour of oxbridge.
besides, imperial inflates a-level offers all the time for computing, chemeng, chemistry etc. just so that people don't insure imperial in favour of oxbridge.
"Not indicative of the calibre of students entering that course"?
So you're telling me that having a course requiring BBC and one requiring AAA doesn't indicate the difference of calibre of students entering that course?
Furthermore, it's extremely subjective on whether it's harder to meet an offer, or whether it's harder to get an interview, then get an offer. What happens if you get an A*A*A* offer then? That certainly seems harder then merely getting interviewed in the first place?
Your last paragraph is based entirely on opinion and doesn't really make sense. If I got a got an A*A*AA offer from Imperial, but an A*AA offer from Oxford for engineering, I'm just not gonna bother trying to go to imperial when I can go to Oxford with significantly less workload. They give what is typically mentioned, and only over-inflate when it's particulary competitive, like with chemistry last year - not for the sake of insurance or firm.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by GradeA*UnderA
Chemistry is never AAA, that's the minimum, the standard is A*AA and a lot of offer holders actually ended up getting A*A*A offers.
That's not true. The standard offer is A*AA, yes, but a minority still receive AAA offers - I personally know one such person.
Original post by Hydeman
That's not true. The standard offer is A*AA, yes, but a minority still receive AAA offers - I personally know one such person.
Yes, I was generalising, but it's negligible. Its more likely of it being A*A*A than AAA.
Original post by GradeA*UnderA
Yes, I was generalising, but it's negligible. Its more likely of it being A*A*A than AAA.
I thought you were a STEM fanboy. Stop guessing.
Here's some actual stats:
Oxford in 2013 had acceptances with A*A*A or better: 64.3% (1,600 students)
Cambridge in 2013 with A*A*A or better: 83.0% (2,161 students)
(both excluding General Studies and Critical Thinking)
Imperial? You tell me...
In the absence of that info, the entry UCAS points ranking is the best we've got.
(edited 7 years ago)
Going to enlighten you with a classic @ForestShadow post... (original)
The thing is, if you dont get into Oxbridge, your life is effectively over.
Your A-levels lose any worth immediately and you can forget any GCSE grade you may have.
You automatically lose 500 UCAS
points permanently and receive a ban from all unis in the country. 
Also, all employers must routinely check whether you graduated from Oxbridge on your CV
so without that, you will never make even a Tesco checkout post or a dustbin man
Not to mention your credit score goes down 400 points for non-Oxbridge individuals and all your insurance increases by a 40% margin due to 'insufficient education'
Finally, you are lowered in priority in all public services including transport and healthcare meaning you have to wait at the back of the already long queue at the NHS...
Then as soon as you're 18, the government have the right to take your phone, car, house, family, friends and WiFi away until you're stripped down with nothing and deported out of the country with immediate effect.
You are irrevocably, unarguably, irreversible inferior in life in all its ways.
The thing is, if you dont get into Oxbridge, your life is effectively over.
Your A-levels lose any worth immediately and you can forget any GCSE grade you may have.
You automatically lose 500 UCAS
points permanently and receive a ban from all unis in the country. Also, all employers must routinely check whether you graduated from Oxbridge on your CV
so without that, you will never make even a Tesco checkout post or a dustbin manNot to mention your credit score goes down 400 points for non-Oxbridge individuals and all your insurance increases by a 40% margin due to 'insufficient education'
Finally, you are lowered in priority in all public services including transport and healthcare meaning you have to wait at the back of the already long queue at the NHS...
Then as soon as you're 18, the government have the right to take your phone, car, house, family, friends and WiFi away until you're stripped down with nothing and deported out of the country with immediate effect.
You are irrevocably, unarguably, irreversible inferior in life in all its ways.
Spoiler
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by jneill
I thought you were a STEM fanboy. Stop guessing.
Here's some actual stats:
Oxford in 2013 had acceptances with A*A*A or better: 64.3%
Cambridge in 2013 with A*A*A or better: 83.0%
(both excluding General Studies and Critical Thinking)
Imperial? You tell me...
In the absence of that info, the entry UCAS points ranking is the best we've got.
Here's some actual stats:
Oxford in 2013 had acceptances with A*A*A or better: 64.3%
Cambridge in 2013 with A*A*A or better: 83.0%
(both excluding General Studies and Critical Thinking)
Imperial? You tell me...
In the absence of that info, the entry UCAS points ranking is the best we've got.
What we've got isn't very good. I'd wager, if anyone can find out, that Imperial's A*A*A statistic is higher than Oxford's. There's got to be a freedom of information request or something.
Also, STEM>Humanities for employment, prestige and literally everything else.
Is anyone else surprised about how much better Cambridge is than Oxford? Usually in general public, Oxford's seen as better.
Edit: Imperial's UCAS point total is higher than stated in the previous post
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/administration-and-support-services/planning/public/statistics-guides/Imperial-College-Statistics-Guide-2014-2015.pdf
(edited 7 years ago)
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- how much do oxbridge care about gcses
- Self doubt and failure complex.
- Should you talk about your EPQ in your personal statement?
- What's it like to be a community mental health nurse?
- How to deal with being rejected from Oxbridge with a sibling studying there?
- Should I take a gap year for mental health?
- Feeling overwhelmed at final year of uni
- Magdalen College School, Oxford
- Confused about university
- anyone studying with oxbridge home learning or have done?
- Correlation between UKMT Maths challenge and being able to do Maths at Uni
- How can someone at Warwick look down on me?
- History degree to become an investment banker?
- Happiness cannot be made.
- Is mental health a contextual reason for bad gcses when applying to oxbridge?
- gcse results med/dentistry
- Completely fed up
- TW for SA/rape - Does anyone else feel physically uncomfortable when aroused?
- is Durham good for politics/philosophy?
- How to get over not applying to Oxbridge.
Latest
Last reply 1 minute ago
Official London School of Economics and Political Science 2024 Applicant ThreadLast reply 1 minute ago
JK Rowling in ‘arrest me’ challenge over hate crime lawLast reply 1 minute ago
LSE International Social and Public Policy and Economics (LLK1) 2024 ThreadLast reply 4 minutes ago
Official University of Edinburgh Applicant Thread for 2024Last reply 4 minutes ago
Official: University of Bristol A100 2024 Entry ApplicantsLast reply 6 minutes ago
Official University of Warwick Offer Holders Thread for 2024 entryLast reply 6 minutes ago
Official University of Bath Offer Holders Thread for 2024 entryLast reply 7 minutes ago
Official UCL Offer Holders Thread for 2024 entryLast reply 8 minutes ago
Degree Apprenticeship at Accenture (assessment centre)Last reply 11 minutes ago
My friend keeps telling me they feel dumb in a way that makes me feel dumberLast reply 11 minutes ago
Official University of Edinburgh Offer Holders Thread for 2024 entryTrending
Last reply 50 minutes ago
Official University Offer Holder thread list (2024 entry)Last reply 3 days ago
TSR Decisions Drop In 2024 - open any time - help choosing university offersLast reply 4 days ago
Can I drop out of college once I have an unconditional uni offer?Last reply 5 days ago
I've been rejected by UoN Law School but given an alternative offerLast reply 1 week ago
2024 applicants: what's your main concern around starting uni?Last reply 1 week ago
UCAS Applications + Uni Applicant Thread Directory for 2024 **Official Thread**Last reply 1 week ago
Study now at Exeter or wait one year to study at KCL or Bristol?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Deciding between universities - Exeter vs WarwickLast reply 2 weeks ago
Not heard back from some unis after applying in early December, should I be worried?Trending
Last reply 50 minutes ago
Official University Offer Holder thread list (2024 entry)Last reply 3 days ago
TSR Decisions Drop In 2024 - open any time - help choosing university offersLast reply 4 days ago
Can I drop out of college once I have an unconditional uni offer?Last reply 5 days ago
I've been rejected by UoN Law School but given an alternative offerLast reply 1 week ago
2024 applicants: what's your main concern around starting uni?Last reply 1 week ago
UCAS Applications + Uni Applicant Thread Directory for 2024 **Official Thread**Last reply 1 week ago
Study now at Exeter or wait one year to study at KCL or Bristol?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Deciding between universities - Exeter vs WarwickLast reply 2 weeks ago
Not heard back from some unis after applying in early December, should I be worried?
