The Big "Are My Grades Good Enough for Cambridge?" Thread

Should I even bother applying with AAAB? I'm not sure about average UMS percentages, but I don't think it's very high. Anyone?

What course and what subjects? You average your best three for humanities and relevant three for sciences. If it comes out under 85% your chances are very low unless you have special circumstances.

I got all As in my AS,

Physics = 90%
Maths = 87%
Chem = 80%
Computing = 80%

Average = 84.25

This is pretty low right...

I wanna do Engineering.

Any realistic chance?

Hi guys,

I am looking to apply for economics at Cambridge, here are my grades:
A* in A level Maths (C1-97, C2-96, C3-100, C4-95, FP1-97, M1-93, D1-84)
A in AS level Geography
B in AS level Economics (It was a very low B think it was 71 average)

Any realistic chance of getting into Cambridge with these grades? I am planning on retaking both economics modules in January. I am taking Further Maths A level this year and will probably get an A

Also, one last thing: Considering that my UMS marks in Physics and Maths are very high (98% average) and that I'm really not keen on doing a PAT at Oxford, would you think that I'd be better off applying for Cambridge's NatSci course as opposed to Physics at Oxford, when I have no Chemistry/Biology qualifications? I'll be doing Further Maths next year as well, if that helps.

Cheers

Hey y'all,

A friend of mine is considering applying for Medicine, but she seems quite pessimistic about her chances, so I'd like a second opinion 'cause I definitely believe she's smart enough.

GCSE: 9A* 3A

AS:
Maths - 96%
Welsh - 94%
Biology - 91%
Chemistry - 89%

She also has an A* in A-Level French. Do you think it's worth an application for her?

Also, one last thing: Considering that my UMS marks in Physics and Maths are very high (98% average) and that I'm really not keen on doing a PAT at Oxford, would you think that I'd be better off applying for Cambridge's NatSci course as opposed to Physics at Oxford, when I have no Chemistry/Biology qualifications? I'll be doing Further Maths next year as well, if that helps.

Cheers

(average is like 48/100, normally interview boundary is around 70)

You would at the very least have a decent chance of getting in for natsci. However it is worth noting that you would have pretty limited choices in the first year (I would read highly desirable as you pretty much need it). If you feel like you could do STEP you could consider applying for maths with physics with the intention of changing to physics in the second year. This is a big risk as only a very small number of people feel confident of getting the step grades they need, (and a lot of very good mathematicians miss their offer) but they tend to be more lenient with mw/physics applicants who intend to switch


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

Thanks

Would I be able to cope with first year NatSci without Chemistry qualifications? Do lectures for, say, Earth Sciences/Materials Sciences accommodate for students like myself? The Maths w/ Physics route isn't one I'm intending to go down though really; I have no confidence in my mathematical skills for some reason, so the STEP would probably kill me even more severely than Oxford's PAT. Also also, would low marks in my other two AS subjects (French and History - 87% and 82% respectively, albeit I'm dropping History and my French mark underwhelmed me) inhibit my chances of admission?

This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

Why are you always on your iPhone/iPad? Do you not have a computer?

She will get an interview with those grades. From there it's up to her.

The same goes for you. The average UMS of applicants does tend to be higher for Maths and Science applicants, so 98% isn't that unusual at all in NatSci. Your UMS puts you in a good position, but most of the decision will be down to the interview. I may be a bit wary of applying for NatSci without Chemistry (do you have chemistry?) Because a lot of applicants will have chemistry; and chemistry is required for so many first year options.

The average PAT score is surprisingly low though (average is like 48/100, normally interview boundary is around 70), and if you're top ~40% then you'll get an interview. The Oxford admissions proceedure is pretty much PAT + interview alone. The Cambridge admissions is perhaps more broad in some ways, but in the end I think they are more similar than they are different. I recommend picking the course that you'd rather do.

Thank you

Have you got a source for those PAT scores? I've read that the average is indeed around 50, but I've also read that ~56 is generally good for an interview. I'm very uneasy about having my application boil down to purely one aptitude test though

?

Look at the link below and look at the reports on that page...they contain things like means, who got interviews etc.

http://www2.physics.ox.ac.uk/study-here/undergraduates/physics-aptitude-test-pat/pat-past-papers


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

Thank you

Have you got a source for those PAT scores? I've read that the average is indeed around 50, but I've also read that ~56 is generally good for an interview. I'm very uneasy about having my application boil down to purely one aptitude test though

As for her; I'd think that she'll do well at the BMAT and the interview (she is mature and academically very well-rounded). I don't mean to come across as a pest; you've already said she's good for an interview, after all - but considering Cambridge interviews a high percentage of candidates, that doesn't narrow things down hugely. With a better-than-average BMAT and interview, would she be good for an offer, would you think?

Muchos gracias