Now I've made my offer, will I be academically OK at Cambridge (Compared to others)?

It depends what you mean by comparing yourself with others.

I certainly think there is a need for it in some ways.

He got a first

ok then, but i really do not see a point in doing so. i understand what you mean by being able to get a job etc by getting a better grade, if that is what you call how they mark degrees!, but really if you need a 2.1 then you should do it for yourself, i still dont see a need for comparison.

I didn't actually call it a better grade. You puzzle me.

I'll give you an example:
I observe the other people in my supervision groups and compare myself to them, and I also swap essays etc. with friends (not for plagiarism!) and compare their essays on a topic/in general with mine. I also look at other peoples' lab writeups and techniques.

This can:
a) Act as a progress check. Phew, I'm about the same standard as most of the others in my college - I'm probably doing about the right amount of work (for me) to keep my head above water. Even though I feel like I'm finding everything impossibly difficult, it's obvious that a lot of other people I know are as well - we're in the same position, more or less, and I know I'm not actually about to fail.

Since the exams are marked by you being in competition with the others (rather than criterion referencing) it's more important for you to know how you're doing relative to everyone else than it is, for example, with A-levels (criterion-referenced)

b) Let me pick up on their strengths and weaknesses compared to my own. Hmm, so-and-so always does this annoying thing in her essays. Oops, I do that too, to a greater or lesser degree. I better stop doing that.

Or... So-and-so always seems so well prepared for supervisions, much more than me. I would probably benefit if I tried to be as well prepared as she is. I'm going to spend longer reading through stuff in advance now.

Comparing yourself to others in petty ways (She got 2% more than me on that essay! OH EM GEE!) is not the same.

We had a discussion a while ago on TSR about which subjects in Cambridge employed relative marking. I know the first two years of Natsci does and all of compsci and, if my memory serves me correctly, a current law student indicated that it was also relatively marked. That means you are in very real competition and comparison with the other students. You may not feel the need to compare, but others will.

A.

Everyone I know goes through a phase of feeling inferior, whether it be in their first term or in the middle of 2nd year (when I really hit mine). But you're not. It's just odd being average when you're used to flying high.

ok now i understand you - thanks!

so why are the exams marked in comparison to others'?

I didn't actually call it a better grade. You puzzle me.

I'll give you an example:
I observe the other people in my supervision groups and compare myself to them, and I also swap essays etc. with friends (not for plagiarism!) and compare their essays on a topic/in general with mine. I also look at other peoples' lab writeups and techniques.

This can:
a) Act as a progress check. Phew, I'm about the same standard as most of the others in my college - I'm probably doing about the right amount of work (for me) to keep my head above water. Even though I feel like I'm finding everything impossibly difficult, it's obvious that a lot of other people I know are as well - we're in the same position, more or less, and I know I'm not actually about to fail.

Since the exams are marked by you being in competition with the others (rather than criterion referencing) it's more important for you to know how you're doing relative to everyone else than it is, for example, with A-levels (criterion-referenced)

b) Let me pick up on their strengths and weaknesses compared to my own. Hmm, so-and-so always does this annoying thing in her essays. Oops, I do that too, to a greater or lesser degree. I better stop doing that.

Or... So-and-so always seems so well prepared for supervisions, much more than me. I would probably benefit if I tried to be as well prepared as she is. I'm going to spend longer reading through stuff in advance now.

Comparing yourself to others in petty ways (She got 2% more than me on that essay! OH EM GEE!) is not the same.

I'll apologize in advance in case this pisses anyone off, but ive made my offer for history at jesus fairly comfortably and was feeling pretty proud of myself, but the other day an obese friend of mine (who got DDDC and is going to northampton, despite being fairly intelligent) said with obvious relish, 'haha, you're going to go from being at the top of our school (an average-ish non-selective liverpool comp) to academically weaker than most other people at cambridge. Now you'll know how I felt!' I realise the whopper was probably just trying to wind me up, but does anyone who goes there/is going think that i will actually be at a significant disadvantage compared to other students who have been to better schools? I got AAAAa in History, Politics, Spanish and general studies and English AS and got over 95% of the UMS marks available in each subject overall, but I realise that there are other people who will have done more subjects etc. Also, due to adolescent laziness my GCSEs were 4A*s, 3As and 2Bs (I know they're pretty good but in Cambridge terms only average). Will most other people be significantly stronger than me academically? (I realise that a conclusive answer cannot be drawn from this limited info, but your thoughts would help).

Cheers, I know i'm an insecure bastard. sorry. I just want to enjoy my time and not feel stupid.