Applying for AAA subject with AAA 'in the bag' - good or bad?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by Noble.
Because there will be exceptional candidates who just didn't perform as well in their A-Levels (or AS Levels if we're talking about predicted grades). This is why I said an "initial" disadvantage. Also I'd be more than willing to bet on that the vast majority of those 9.8% accepted with AAA are arts students, where differentiating between an A and A* in the exam is incredibly subjective.
Yes, I would agree with all of this. But wouldn't that tend to support Answer 2? I mean, if arts admission tutors know that 'differentiating between an A and A* in the exam is incredibly subjective', when they see this candidate with 'only' AAA achieved, wouldn't they be far more likely to believe the aptitude test score, where there is one? In fact, wasn't this both the reason why AAA is still accepted for these subjects and the reason why Oxford takes so much trouble over its aptitude tests - they don't trust the A/A* boundary for 'incredibly subjective' papers?
Original post by shoshin
That's right, but the thread is specifically concerned with those subjects that still require AAA and no higher.
But the 90% / 10% stat is for the whole university including A*AA and A*A*A subjects, so the proportion of students getting onto an AAA course with AAA will be quite a bit higher than 10%.
Original post by shoshin
Yes, I would agree with all of this. But wouldn't that tend to support Answer 2? I mean, if arts admission tutors know that 'differentiating between an A and A* in the exam is incredibly subjective', when they see this candidate with 'only' AAA achieved, wouldn't they be far more likely to believe the aptitude test score, where there is one? In fact, wasn't this both the reason why AAA is still accepted for these subjects and the reason why Oxford takes so much trouble over its aptitude tests - they don't trust the A/A* boundary for 'incredibly subjective' papers?
Yes, and I agree to an extent. They absolutely would rely more on their aptitude test than A/A* for arts subjects, but then again assuming this person is doing three arts subjects, they haven't achieved an A* in any of them. So there's potentially six entirely different examiners that looked at their A2 papers and didn't assess any of them as A* material; personally, I would pay attention to situations like that. Of course, what's probably happened to a lot of them is they've got an A* in one A2 unit, but the other they got a low A, so they didn't end up with an A* - and it's in these situations that I think A/A* differentiating is a waste of time (for arts subjects only).
Original post by shoshin
Yes, I would agree with all of this. But wouldn't that tend to support Answer 2? I mean, if arts admission tutors know that 'differentiating between an A and A* in the exam is incredibly subjective', when they see this candidate with 'only' AAA achieved, wouldn't they be far more likely to believe the aptitude test score, where there is one? In fact, wasn't this both the reason why AAA is still accepted for these subjects and the reason why Oxford takes so much trouble over its aptitude tests - they don't trust the A/A* boundary for 'incredibly subjective' papers?
It is not merely subjective, the mark scheme now discourages independent thought of the kind Oxford expects.
Original post by nulli tertius
But the 90% / 10% stat is for the whole university including A*AA and A*A*A subjects, so the proportion of students getting onto an AAA course with AAA will be quite a bit higher than 10%.
That's a lovely point and one that didn't come up in the thread that digressed, so I was hoping someone would mention it here.
Indeed, for all that the 90/10 stats show, the 10% could be almost entirely comprised of applicants who applied with AAA already in the bag and are actually deemed 'dead certs' by admissions tutors as a result.
Not claiming this is true of course! But trying to illustrate, as you may be, that admission tutors do not necessarily start from these raw Summer stats when comparing an achieved AAA candidate with a predicted A*AA+ rival the previous December.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- i don’t know what to do
- What if my predicted grades are lower than what I will achieve?
- Unexpected predicted grades. Should I take a gap year
- What Unis should I apply to for dentistry
- dentistry HELP!
- predicted grades
- glasgow university common law
- Do I need maths for architecture?
- Chances of getting into King’s College London? - GCSE RESULTS DAY
- need help about as grades
- How realistic are my choices (so far)?
- Applying to Universities not matching the entry requirements.
- Will Universities still accept me if I am 1 UCAS point below?
- What if I'm doing 4 A Levels but the actual offer from universities only require 3?
- Do i have a chance with my grades?
- Veterinary Science: A levels?
- chemical engineering
- sticky situation of my predicted grades and aspiration
- Too risky uni choices?
- Keele undergraduate medicine A100 offer holders - 2024 entry
Latest
Trending
Last reply 10 hours ago
Weidenfeld Hoffmann Trust (WHT) Scholarship Notification (2024-2025)Last reply 2 days ago
Oxbridge applicants for modern languages - 2025 entry (applying in 2024)Last reply 1 week ago
Will I get into Oxford with my GCSE results? - EngineeringLast reply 3 weeks ago
will 5 a levels give me a better chance at getting into oxford?Trending
Last reply 10 hours ago
Weidenfeld Hoffmann Trust (WHT) Scholarship Notification (2024-2025)Last reply 2 days ago
Oxbridge applicants for modern languages - 2025 entry (applying in 2024)Last reply 1 week ago
Will I get into Oxford with my GCSE results? - EngineeringLast reply 3 weeks ago
will 5 a levels give me a better chance at getting into oxford?
