Applying again after a rejection?

I think I might step in and issue a subtle correction as this rumour seems to be doing the rounds. Nothing guarantees an interview. There are criteria (such as A*A*A* post-A level or 93% in best 3/3 most relevant which require candidates to be pooled, but there is no requirement that these candidates must be interviewed before this. It is extremely unlikely that such candidates would be made an offer without having been interviewed.

We aim to interview all candidates who have a realistic chance of admission but there are circumstances in which candidates who meet compulsory pool criteria may not be invited for interview.

In fairness to jneill it was the Christ's admissions tutor last year who implied that because you had to be pooled with those criteria you would have to be interviewed so that the information was complete.

I think I might step in and issue a subtle correction as this rumour seems to be doing the rounds. Nothing guarantees an interview. There are criteria (such as A*A*A* post-A level or 93% in best 3/3 most relevant which require candidates to be pooled, but there is no requirement that these candidates must be interviewed before this. It is extremely unlikely that such candidates would be made an offer without having been interviewed.

We aim to interview all candidates who have a realistic chance of admission but there are circumstances in which candidates who meet compulsory pool criteria may not be invited for interview.

Can I ask, in a typical year how many applicants across the university qualify for compulsory pooling? And how many are not called for interview?

Posted from TSR Mobile

Yep, I didn't start the "rumour" but may unwittingly have helped spread it ... - and thanks for clarifying

I also asked the Fitz SLO to clarify this in their thread a couple of days ago.

Posted from TSR Mobile

I've dug out some numbers. Last year 21 applicants were pooled as compulsory pools on the basis of UMS (and with no further interest from Peterhouse) and 6 of these were made offers. A further 39 applicants were 'discretionary' pools and of these 27 were made offers (including offers made by Peterhouse after comparison with other candidates).

Last year at Peterhouse 14% of applicants weren't invited for interview.
45% of those deselected weren't taking A levels. Of those who were, the average best 3 score of these candidates was 82.7% with a range from 91.6 - 67.2, all were in the bottom 3/5 of the gathered field in their subject, the majority (c. 70%) in the bottom 20%.

Thanks. So of the 21 pooled (by Peterhouse) as compulsory pools on the basis of UMS, how many were not called for interview?

None. It is rare that a candidate who would meet the thresholds for compulsory pooling (CP) wouldn't be invited for interview, but it is possible. It is also just as true to say that candidates just below the CP threshold would also be very likely to be invited for interview.

A further note of warning - the thresholds and criteria for CP change year-on-year and are issued once all applications are in. TSR users and prospective applicants should in no way view the CP thresholds as a target to be met before considering applying.