Because you don't cash in, does that place you at a disadvantage?
Not at all, as you can still announce them on your Personal Statement or Reference (reference is the best bet - it gets in the way of the PS).
And it's all down to the predicted grades.
Not at all, as you can still announce them on your Personal Statement or Reference (reference is the best bet - it gets in the way of the PS).
And it's all down to the predicted grades.
Because you don't cash in, does that place you at a disadvantage?
Do I detect a hint of sarcasm?
Well, the comment wasn't written in a serious spirit. Honestly, I have read a lot, because I love it, but I don't know if I would consider myself "well-read". I just thought it was a silly question- "how well-read are you?" Firstly, one cannot define "well-read" so easily; secondly, one shouldn't be comparing oneself against th other applicants like that, but concentrating on one's own reading; thirdly, I would hope that everybody on this thread has read a lot in comparison to the norm for their peer group. Surely that's why we want to do english? Not simply because we enjoy our lessons in school, but because we love exploring te subject beyond the classroom and find immense pleasure in reading and thinking about literature. Thus rather than counting up "How many books we have read which would be studied in supervisions/ tutorials, we should simply read for pleasure, rather than in order to improve our Oxbridge chances (although I admit that the latter is highly necessary) The asker of such a question suggests to me, although i admit this is possiby unfounded, a slight insecurity about how "well-read" he is; I would ask that if you don't read widely outside the classroom, why do you want to do english in the first place? The subject is truly nothing like the A level syllabus suggests (I believe).
I mean in the grades area, the predicteds are more important than undeclared AS results, GCSEs or anything else.
hmm, what is your basis for such a statement? I would have still thought GCSEs were paramount; they form part of your body of results and, as most applicants ARE predicted three As, possibly the GCSEs can further inform the wider picture of a candidate's academic ability ( although I don't believe GCSEs are AT ALL tests of academic ability or reflective of the brightest pupils). None of us knows what an admissions tutor places first on his/ her priority list; the chances are it is dependent on college too.
hmm, what is your basis for such a statement? I would have still thought GCSEs were paramount; they form part of your body of results and, as most applicants ARE predicted three As, possibly the GCSEs can further inform the wider picture of a candidate's academic ability ( although I don't believe GCSEs are AT ALL tests of academic ability or reflective of the brightest pupils). None of us knows what an admissions tutor places first on his/ her priority list; the chances are it is dependent on college too.
Brasenose told us they don't care much about GCSEs or AS levels.
Well, the comment wasn't written in a serious spirit. Honestly, I have read a lot, because I love it, but I don't know if I would consider myself "well-read". I just thought it was a silly question- "how well-read are you?" Firstly, one cannot define "well-read" so easily; secondly, one shouldn't be comparing oneself against th other applicants like that, but concentrating on one's own reading; thirdly, I would hope that everybody on this thread has read a lot in comparison to the norm for their peer group. Surely that's why we want to do english? Not simply because we enjoy our lessons in school, but because we love exploring te subject beyond the classroom and find immense pleasure in reading and thinking about literature. Thus rather than counting up "How many books we have read which would be studied in supervisions/ tutorials, we should simply read for pleasure, rather than in order to improve our Oxbridge chances (although I admit that the latter is highly necessary) The asker of such a question suggests to me, although i admit this is possiby unfounded, a slight insecurity about how "well-read" he is; I would ask that if you don't read widely outside the classroom, why do you want to do english in the first place? The subject is truly nothing like the A level syllabus suggests (I believe).
I have no idea whether the amount I have read outside my A Level syllabus is quite up to par with other candidates, that's why I asked the question. In my opinion I've read a huge amount too, however my opinion doesn't really matter, it's the facts that do. I have no idea what a lot is, seeing as I have nothing to compare it to, so that question was just my attempt to gauge that. I don't see any harm in that. How can I not compare myself to other candidates? Surely that's the nature of university applications, trying to get the best for yourself against the competition? Heh, if you don't want to answer the question I can't force you anyway.
I was told that in the year prior to it, applicants should aim to read one 'serious' book a week outside of school courses.
Anyone looking at Jesus, Oxford?
I mean in the grades area, the predicteds are more important than undeclared AS results, GCSEs or anything else.
That's wrong FOr Oxbridge everyone is predicted 3 As (well, I guess more this year) otherwise they wouldn't be applying. I'd say it is the PS and ultimately the interview that is most important.
That's wrong FOr Oxbridge everyone is predicted 3 As (well, I guess more this year) otherwise they wouldn't be applying. I'd say it is the PS and ultimately the interview that is most important.
I mean out of the three grade areas.
Sorry for confusion.
But yes, interview. Yikes.
I'm doubting my intelligence for Oxford.
That's wrong FOr Oxbridge everyone is predicted 3 As (well, I guess more this year) otherwise they wouldn't be applying. I'd say it is the PS and ultimately the interview that is most important.
I seriously doubt that the PS is that important. Not important enough to have the accolade of being ranked alongside the interview, anyway. I would guess (though none of us can really know what the dons take into account) that the interview is the most important factor, possibly a written test at interview if the college does one, and an overall impression of grades and, for Cambridge, module scores.
I think GCSEs are important; at the cambridge open day I went to the admissions tutor said he looked for at least 7 a*s. But they are not the clinching factor and their relative importance depends on the college in question. But as they make up part of your examinayion history they are bound to hold worth.
I seriously doubt that the PS is that important. Not important enough to have the accolade of being ranked alongside the interview, anyway. I would guess (though none of us can really know what the dons take into account) that the interview is the most important factor, possibly a written test at interview if the college does one, and an overall impression of grades and, for Cambridge, module scores.
I think GCSEs are important; at the cambridge open day I went to the admissions tutor said he looked for at least 7 a*s. But they are not the clinching factor and their relative importance depends on the college in question. But as they make up part of your examinayion history they are bound to hold worth.
Well the PS is pretty important because it will be a deciding factor in whether or not they interview, and will also be a starting point for your interview (the texts you mention etc). And I'd say GCSEs aren't that important- a few people in this years cycle got interviews without 7 A*s... far from it, from what I remember
University course discussion for English.
Useful Resources:
Re: Oxbridge English Applicants 2010
FOr Oxbridge everyone is predicted 3 As (well, I guess more this year) otherwise they wouldn't be applying. I'd say it is the PS and ultimately the interview that is most important.
