The Big &quot;Are My Grades Good Enough for Cambridge?&quot; Thread (Mk1)

wiio

I think for many people who do large amounts of revision for A-levels, the latter 70% of their time is spent turning a good grade into an outrageous one by sheer thoroughness.

The negative flip-side of this is that genuine creative flair can be beaten out of a candidate by too-regimented a revision schedule (in arts, anyway). What might once have got them 100% might then be flattened into an unfortunate 80% or below. It happens.

Reply 42

Toffee

1

first year and second year natsci aren't THAT much harder than A-level. It helps to have worked hard at A-Level - you will be in a much better position than those who have dossed their way through Years 12 + 13. Work ethic in NatSci counts for at least as much as natural ability (although separating the two becomes more difficult)...

I worked much harder at A-Level than I have at Cambridge (I think - I may be wrong though), but I'm now on for a double First. So, don't worry if you've had to work hard - it means almost nothing.

Reply 43

Kyle_S-C

12

~charmaine~

Hi. I just finished my AS and would love to apply to the physical Nat Sci course. I am really confident to get the 3A in my Physics, Chemistry and Maths A-levels (with good UMS) but I put a lot of hard work and effort into it. Do you think I would struggle with the workload if I do get into Cambridge? For current Nat Sci students, how did you find your A-levels? Did you put a lot of work into it or did you find it very easy? Did you get good UMS score with very little effort?

Thanks in advance.

I think if you apply yourself well you'll avoid making the mistake which makes first year natsci hard, which is falling behind in your first term and never really catching up. First year physical natsci is a fair bit harder than A-level, but the teaching and support you get (particularly from supervisions) is much better. I'm pretty sure there's rather little correlation between UMS scores and final degree ranking, so don't worry about that.

I'd definitely consider doing further maths AS or A2 if you can get it, since it will just give you an advantage from the outset, since the first term's maths is pretty much further maths A2.

I'm yet another one of those people who found A-levels easy but then I buggered up one of my modules this year because I didn't learn well enough throughout the year (second year physics is hard). :frown:

Work ethic is a definite advantage though, so go for it. :smile:

Reply 44

Supermerp

Toffee

first year and second year natsci aren't THAT much harder than A-level.

Whether or not it is harder I think Physics and Maths can feel quite a lot harder, especially in the first year. The difference in the style of question to what you're used to in Physics can make it a bit of a shock when you come in the first year to the extent that they're now worrying about this and trying to work out how to make it less shocking (although I don't think there's that much they can do and most people seem to cope anyway).

The first term of Maths in the first year felt so much like drinking from a firehose that I thought all subsequent terms, including the second year felt easier. But then I only did half further maths (which is why I might have found first term a bit more difficult) and I enjoyed the 2nd year quite a bit.

To answer the OP's question: for Physics and Maths it's probably true that I got AAA with little effort. I mean, I did all/most of the homework and some revision for it so it's not like I put no effort in at all but it's not really comparable to what I had to do as a Natsci (which is a lot of work). But my UMS was less than 99.8% average or whatever people here say you need (at the time, it didn't really occur to me that 'only' getting 82% in S1 was anything to get upset about. I still don't think it is, either). Chemistry and Sociology caused me more problems.

I don't think 87% is significantly below 90% but bear in mind that different colleges are different, other colleges will probably not require really high UMS marks so if your heart isn't set on St. John's (please tell me it isn't) then you might consider applying to a different college.

Reply 45

wiio

7

epitome

The negative flip-side of this is that genuine creative flair can be beaten out of a candidate by too-regimented a revision schedule (in arts, anyway). What might once have got them 100% might then be flattened into an unfortunate 80% or below. It happens.

Really? I only do sciences and a language, so I wouldn't know, but I thought that most arts exams consisted of boxticking, rather than rewarding artistic skill? I could believe that someone could become a worse writer through excessive revision, but I'd expect their exam performance to improve unless they were misdirecting their revision.

Reply 46

wiio

Really? I only do sciences and a language, so I wouldn't know, but I thought that most arts exams consisted of boxticking, rather than rewarding artistic skill? I could believe that someone could become a worse writer through excessive revision, but I'd expect their exam performance to improve unless they were misdirecting their revision.

Obviously this varies from person to person. But the essence of the detriment of too much revision/the wrong type of revision is twofold: (1) Boredom, (2) Formulaism.
Whilst there is much ticky-boxing at A Level (and it's a complete waste of time...), it is still perfectly possible to ignore all 'Assessment Objectives' yet still get top marks. By 'ignore' I don't mean leave them out entirely -- rather, that the AOs attempt, in their useless way, to make formulaic what should be natural (quotations; critics; alternative viewpoints; decent argument; awareness of intertextuality; accurate facts, etc.). This formulaism is completely unnecessary if a student is lucky/bright (not necessarily the same thing) enough to realise what makes a good critical response to texts/events/ideas. If a perfectly-bright-enough student gets a neurosis about the AOs (as many do, given the incessant teaching of them), and consciously tries to fit these things in artificially, it is very probable that their responses become plodding, forced, and no longer a genuine product of that student's thoughts. They begin to get scared about allowing their own personality and opinions into their essays, and cling more and more to the AOs. In its most extreme form, what you then get is an essay in which each paragraph epitomises one of the AOs. This essay fulfils the AO requirement, but is more often than not a rubbish piece of writing and criticism.

Better, then, that students make themselves aware of what makes a convincing critical response (usefully though limitedly enshrined in the AOs), and then just go for it in their own way. Don't try to force critics in just because AO4 (or whatever) tells you they have to be there -- rather, genuinely engage with critics throughout the course, and they will turn up in your writing by happy accident.

The other thing is boredom. Too many students, faced by the threat of not fulfilling all AOs, attempt to guess the questions that're going to come up, and then learn the 'right' AO stuff for this. Sometimes this works, but it rarely produces genuinely interesting responses. The examiners want to see genuine engagement with the terms presented in the question; but many very bright students, having revised and revised and revised, are too blinded by their 'knowledge' or too nervous in the exam to actually read the question properly. They then often 'dump' an essay or only tenuously-related facts/quotations, instead of thinking and carefully deploying the choicest of materials.
The student gets bored by revising the same stuff over and over again, and the examiner gets to read quite a dull (but fully box-ticking) essay.
The student could well still get an A, but it may very well be nowhere near as high as if they'd given themselves/been given a bit more freedom.

Better, I think, with the very bright, to think of 'revision' as at least partly 'vision'. Read new stuff, perhaps not obviously related or on the reading lists. Obviously you need to know the basics (the set texts, the key dates or whatever is the basis of your subject), but after that it's worth having a bit of fun. Anyone that's really bored of revision, but who has a good grasp of their subject and enjoys doing it (when not revising) would do themselves a lot of good by reading something completely different, and in a non-revisey way, the day or two before their exams. You'd be surprised how often that last-minute (ish), and apparently not directly useful stimulus actually makes an appearance in the exams, and provides an interesting, unexpected and genuinely enjoyable way into a question. (Enjoyable both for the student and examiner). So long as the basic 'what makes a thorough and convincing critical response?' question is secure in the student, there's no reason why a bit of imagination and risk shouldn't lead them to higher marks.

Jeez, that was long. Sorry!

Reply 47

DFranklin

18

Toffee

I worked much harder at A-Level than I have at Cambridge (I think - I may be wrong though), but I'm now on for a double First.I also worked harder for my A-levels than for the Tripos, by quite a big margin if you include preparing for the S-levels. I know I worried a lot more about getting two S-level distinctions that I ever did about getting a first. (Although Maths is odd in that the top 20 or so will be in the "I'd still get a first if I didn't turn up for a paper" category, so you don't really need to worry).

Reply 48

wiio

7

Wow, thanks for honouring me with such an immense and thorough response

Reply 49

wiio

Wow, thanks for honouring me with such an immense and thorough response

More burden than honour, perhaps. :wink:

Reply 50

Hi,

I am predicted AAA in economics, maths, business. I'm pretty sure I'll get it. I also did spanish but I got my exams moved to next year because I dropped it for 3months and missed a lot of stuff that I couldn't quite catch up. I self studied AS Accounting and got 90% in unit 1 but justdidn't bother teaching myself the other 2 modules until 2 days before my exams. I think I will get a U and an E, leaving me with a D or possibly a C overall. I'm going to be applying with AAAC or AAAD which isn't good obviously. My marks in my other subjects should be roughly 90%, maths slightly higher maybe. What are my chances of getting in? For economics by the way. I wondered what you think my chances are and also if anyone has been given an offer at Cambridge with anything less than AAAA. Thanks.

Reply 51

alex_hk90

19

You'll have a better idea when you actually get your AS results.
If you get AAA then it's definitely worth applying. :smile:

As for subjects, Further Maths would have been useful and another traditional subject (maybe an essay-based one like History).
Perhaps you could do AS Further Maths next year?

Reply 52

I'm asking for this to be moved to the 'Are my grades good enough?' sticky in the main Oxbridge page. :smile:

Reply 53

alex_hk90

You'll have a better idea when you actually get your AS results.
If you get AAA then it's definitely worth applying. :smile:

As for subjects, Further Maths would have been useful and another traditional subject (maybe an essay-based one like History).
Perhaps you could do AS Further Maths next year?

Yes well the lady I had an interview with upon starting college said I had picked a good combination of subjects for this degree. I trusted her and she was wrong. I've actually now left college and I have started learning A2 Economics, I have learned all the information for C3, C4 and S1 to A standard and I am going to start learning Further maths very soon. I want to do Unit 4 economics and C3, C4, S1, M1, FP1, and S2 this January. So I will have A level maths, f. maths and economics next year. But I wonder if Cambridge will have faith in me?

Reply 54

epitome

I'm asking for this to be moved to the 'Are my grades good enough?' sticky in the main Oxbridge page. :smile:

If I knew what you were talking about maybe I would thank you haha. What do you mean?

Reply 55

Belkin

If I knew what you were talking about maybe I would thank you haha. What do you mean?

*grins* Sorry. There's a thread in the main Oxbridge bit (http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=573746), where people post these sorts of questions. We try to stick them all in there because otherwise this whole forum gets very clogged up with similar questions (and it gets both messy and annoying). I've asked the mods to move this thread there, but - if they agree - it'll take them a while to respond. So if this one gets a 'moved' sign next to it, don't worry, that's all that's happened! :smile:

Reply 56