Time to create a real alternative to Oxbridge?

Original post by LutherVan

Considering Oxford normally offers places to roughly 3200 applicants per year, and the conversion to enrollment is about 98%, that means only about 64-70 people per year reject Oxford.

It can be safely assumed of these 64-70, a large majority of them are likely to be people that have been offered places at top US universities like Harvard, Yale, MIT etc and many would also likely be international applicants who applied to schools in the UK and USA.

No, it cannot be safely assumed this! Where are you basing that on? You have no evidence for that AT ALL.

Original post by LutherVan

So lets speculate conservatively that roughly 40 of Oxford decliners are of this profile. That leaves a 24-30 (on a very conservative estimate considering it is rare to hear, it could be as low as 5-10) that are UK applicants that rejected an Oxford offer. Now somehow, despite that rarity, you happen to know almost all these people by some coincidence?

Those stats are completely made up and you have no evidence for them at all, how did you manage to safely assume that 40/64 decliners go to the US?

Have you never considered that actually some people don't meet the offer, ie. don't do as well in their A2 exams as they'd have hoped and therefore don't get the place? My guess (although I am definitely not claiming this to be a "safe assumption") is that nearly every one of these 64 failed to meet the very high grades asked for by Oxford. It is very rare for someone to actually reject Oxford by choice.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 322

Noble.

17

Original post by Gaiaphage

No, it cannot be safely assumed this! Where are you basing that on? You have no evidence for that AT ALL.

Those stats are completely made up and you have no evidence for them at all, how did you manage to safely assume that 40/64 decliners go to the US?

Have you never considered that actually some people don't meet the offer, ie. don't do as well in their A2 exams as they'd have hoped and therefore don't get the place? My guess (although I am definitely not claiming this to be a "safe assumption") is that nearly every one of these 64 failed to meet the very high grades asked for by Oxford. It is very rare for someone to actually reject Oxford by choice.

I think he's actually referring to how many people turn down an Oxford offer, which is a miniscule number every year (and, he is right that the vast majority of people who turn down an offer are international students).

Reply 323

Original post by Noble.

I think he's actually referring to how many people turn down an Oxford offer, which is a miniscule number every year (and, he is right that the vast majority of people who turn down an offer are international students).

Actually he's not - this is where he's made the false assumption:

Original post by LutherVan

Considering Oxford normally offers places to roughly 3200 applicants per year, and the conversion to enrollment is about 98%, that means only about 64-70 people per year reject Oxford.

Just because you don't take the place does not mean you rejected it. A large number of people who do not take the place probably did not make the grades; of the people who actually rejected the place, yes a large number are international students but again the majority of non-uptakes are probably due to grades.

Reply 324

Noble.

17

Original post by Gaiaphage

Actually he's not - this is where he's made the false assumption:

Just because you don't take the place does not mean you rejected it. A large number of people who do not take the place probably did not make the grades; of the people who actually rejected the place, yes a large number are international students but again the majority of non-uptakes are probably due to grades.

Sorry, I know that's not what he said, I'm saying that's what he meant. If you look at the rest of his post, he's obviously arguing the fact that it's more than unlikely for McMurdo to know so many people who rejected Oxford for another university. The point he's made still stands, as you point out, it's rare for someone to turn down Oxford, he's just incorrectly phrased it in terms of who ends up at Oxford as opposed to those who accept an Oxford offer - but the sentiment of what he's pointing out stands.

Reply 325

Original post by Noble.

Actually, I take it back; the majority of offer holders who reject it aren't international students, they're UK students. It's about two-thirds UK students and one-third non-UK.

Hmm interesting - my first thoughts were to agree with you and say it's mostly international. Where did you find these stats?

Reply 326

Noble.

17

Original post by Gaiaphage

Hmm interesting - my first thoughts were to agree with you and say it's mostly international. Where did you find these stats?

Nevermind, I've just realised I was looking at people who end up on the course, not the proportion that accept/reject the offer - which obviously is going to include those who miss their offers.

I worked in the department responsible for doing Oxford's statistics over the summer and was told that very, very few UK students who receive an offer turn it down for another university (but I don't actually have access to that data).

Reply 327

LutherVan

2

Original post by Gaiaphage

No, it cannot be safely assumed this! Where are you basing that on? You have no evidence for that AT ALL.

Those stats are completely made up and you have no evidence for them at all, how did you manage to safely assume that 40/64 decliners go to the US?

Have you never considered that actually some people don't meet the offer, ie. don't do as well in their A2 exams as they'd have hoped and therefore don't get the place? My guess (although I am definitely not claiming this to be a "safe assumption") is that nearly every one of these 64 failed to meet the very high grades asked for by Oxford. It is very rare for someone to actually reject Oxford by choice.

I clearly stated it is an assumption, so how come you are requesting evidence for an assumption?

Does that even make sense? Evidence for assumptions?

So you are assuming there are no set of people in the world that reject Oxford for Harvard or likes?

There are no posh UK kids that prefer to study in the US and apply to Oxbridge and US top unis?

Reply 328

Original post by Noble.

Nevermind, I've just realised I was looking at people who end up on the course, not the proportion that accept/reject the offer - which obviously is going to include those who miss their offers.

I worked in the department responsible for doing Oxford's statistics over the summer and was told that very, very few UK students who receive an offer turn it down for another university (but I don't actually have access to that data).

I think you can see some evidence of this.

In 2013 6.77% of UK offerees do not turn up for one reason or another. 21.38% of non-EU offerees do not turn up. 7.98% of UK state sector applicants do not turn up whilst only 6.05% of private sector applicants are no shows along with 8.22% of other (mostly mature) applicants.

The no show rate amongst unconditional offerees is 5.09% worldwide. They must necessarily be refuseniks. After the UK the largest group of unconditional offers is made to Americans. The Americans will make that 5.09% much higher than it would otherwise be. That can be seen from the fact that the no show rate amongst offers conditional on US SATS or APs is as high as 45.95%.

I think the UK figures indicate that it is more likely that the no shows are people who miss their grades rather than refuseniks. Mature students are unlikely to apply abroad given that US elite colleges are not designed for mature applicants and mature applicants are likely to understand the nature of Oxford before applying. If one assumes that independent school applicants are the more sophisticated applicants, if the UK no shows were mostly refuseniks you would expect the independent school figures to be in the lead.

I think many of the "lots of people who turn down Oxbridge" are people invited by their schools to apply but who turn down the opportunity to do so. The one thing we know is that whilst more applicants are rejected than offered places no VIth former who doesn't apply has ever been rejected by Oxford. The person who doesn't apply was always going to get in.

Posted from TSR Mobile

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 329

Nuvertion

6

Original post by LutherVan

What you need to do is either keep quiet or defend your assertions as I challenged and requested.

Not be making tons of statements that have no relevance to defending the stupid assertions you made.

Man you're dumb but thanks for bumping this thread so much (benefiting me), I've been using you like a tool this entire time!

Reply 330

Marie.Gabrielle

I think it has to do with prestige. If you create more Uni's similar to those, then the appeal would be lost. You will never be able to replace oxford/Cambridge - their history and heritage is so firmly built into England as prestigious institutes that trying to create dual ones simply wouldn't work. There are high standards there for a reason.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 331

Original post by nulli tertius

The no show rate amongst unconditional offerees is 5.09% worldwide. They must necessarily be refuseniks.

Just a thought - nearly all (if not all) unconditional offers are only unconditional if you firm it, does this include people who put an unconditional offer as insurance then missed the grades?

Reply 332

Original post by LutherVan

Does that even make sense? Evidence for assumptions?

Yes

Reply 333

Original post by Gaiaphage

Just a thought - nearly all (if not all) unconditional offers are only unconditional if you firm it, does this include people who put an unconditional offer as insurance then missed the grades?

I think you are getting confused.

In recent years some universities have been making unconditional offers to pre-A level candidates. Some of these (Birmingham for example) have only been unconditional if accepted firmly. Others (Leicester) make them regardless of whether they are accepted as firm or insurance.

Oxford last made true unconditional offers to pre-A level candidates in 1985. In that year entrance scholarships and exhibitions were abolished. Until then, scholars and exhibitioners did not have to satisfy matriculation requirements and so could be given unconditional offers. Others, such as myself, were given EE conditional offers which continued for some years afterwards but have now ceased.

The only unconditional offers Oxford now makes to UK students are to post-A level candidates. Those applicants will also have unconditional offers from other universities. You don't get an insurance choice behind a firmly accepted unconditional offer.

Accordingly the only circumstance in which a UK student could have an unconditional Oxford offer as an insurance is if he or she was resitting A levels. A candidate with AAA A levels who was resitting could be offered A*AA to read law at UCL which they firmly accept but have an unconditional from Oxford.

In reality it is unlikely that UCL would make such a conditional offer. They would take the candidate with AAA or reject her entirely.

It is more likely really to occur when the resitting is done for someone applying for a slightly different course and getting a missing A level up to scratch. An example might be someone applying for PPE at Oxford and economics elsewhere with say A*AA grades in the bag but taking A level maths in a 3rd VIth form year. Oxford might make an unconditional offer with LSE making an offer conditional on A* maths.

Oxford does make unconditional offers to some Americans who have not completed high school but these are usually people who already have the grades to get unconditional offers from other UK universities.

Accordingly it would be incredibly rare for anyone to have Oxford as an unconditional insurance.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 334

Original post by nulli tertius

X

Fair enough, I thought your other post was about UK unis in general and not just Oxford.

About the last post though - Leicester also give unconditionals for firm only as two people in my year have them. I have not heard of a single unconditional this year that is also unconditional if put as the insurance offer - they decided to make that feature universal this year.

Reply 335

Original post by Gaiaphage

Fair enough, I thought your other post was about UK unis in general and not just Oxford.

About the last post though - Leicester also give unconditionals for firm only as two people in my year have them. I have not heard of a single unconditional this year that is also unconditional if put as the insurance offer - they decided to make that feature universal this year.

Doesn't say that here and certainly wasn't the case last year.

http://www2.le.ac.uk/study/ugp/applying/unconditional

Reply 336

Original post by nulli tertius

Doesn't say that here and certainly wasn't the case last year.

http://www2.le.ac.uk/study/ugp/applying/unconditional

It says this is the trial year so of course it wasn't the case last year

Reply 337

Original post by Gaiaphage

It says this is the trial year so of course it wasn't the case last year

You have missed the sentence I was trying to draw your attention to

An unconditional offer does not require you to select Leicester as your firm choice – although obviously we hope that you will!

Reply 338

Original post by nulli tertius

You have missed the sentence I was trying to draw your attention to

Yes I saw that which is why I didn't disagree; I'm not sure why they say that as they have given offers that suggest otherwise but I can't argue with the Uni's website itself.

Reply 339