These Oxbridge courses are a joke...

He just said "Oxbridge", but that's quite interesting. Do you know why that would be? Humanities vs sciences?

Is this definitely so? Do you have a link to such research? I thought Oxford preferred not to use UMSs, and instead use aptitude tests, because there are a great many applicants without UMS marks (as they're not in the A-level system).

Okay I shall restate.

My Head of Sixth form showed me this personal statement/ interviews for Oxbridge helping course I should apply for, ran by Oxbridge. ...

I just do not understand why GCSE's are a necessary criteria to apply, not just a strongly considered factor - seems a bit stupid tbh. The question is why.

Firstly, he meant Oxford because he was specifically talking about an admissions course offered by the university.

And no, definitely not. The whole "Oxford for Humanities, Cambridge for Sciences" thing is already petty enough for research (which is what it's talking about) and absolutely irrelevant for undergraduate degrees. Why do you think Oxford would implement its entire admissions system in such a way that it only benefits its humanities students? It has nothing to do with that, it's just because each university has done their own research and Oxford's data says that admissions tests + GCSEs + interviews work best and Cambridge's data says AS UMS + interview work best.

Actually, I have just found some data. If you compare the correlation coefficients between Oxford and Cambridge in this data, you'll see that there seems to be a stronger correlation between GCSEs and degree performance at Oxford than at Cambridge, if I'm interpreting this correctly.

There's a reason that so many stupid people end up at Oxford and Cambridge, so clearly both admissions teams have faults...

"ran by Oxbridge"... do you mean Oxbridge Applications? If so, they are a private, profit-making company completely unaffiliated to either Oxford or Cambridge. And a lot of their "advice" is allegedly dodgy...

So basically don't bother applying? Ah cheers.

I've not heard that before and whilst I can't find a link to any publicly available data from Oxford, I'd be very surprised if they were sticking to GCSEs as a factor if there wasn't evidence to suggest that it's a good predictor of degree performance but as you say, aptitude tests are generally a lot more important in the Oxford admissions process and they are definitely better at predicting degree outcome than GCSEs. There is non-Oxford data that GCSEs are a statistically stronger predictor of your chance of getting a 2:1 or above at university but this isn't Oxford-specific and the difference is very low.

Actually, I have just found some data. If you compare the correlation coefficients between Oxford and Cambridge in this data, you'll see that there seems to be a stronger correlation between GCSEs and degree performance at Oxford than at Cambridge, if I'm interpreting this correctly.

You're welcome. You will get better advice from real ATs and experienced students and helpers on TSR than by attending an "Oxbridge Applications" event.

For the avoidance of confusion, you should still apply to Cambridge or Oxford. Just not to "Oxbridge Applications".

Posted from TSR Mobile

Haha thank you so much!

My Head of Sixth form was telling me to apply, yet he ended it with "[Only person to get into Cambridge last couple years] didn't apply for it so it's your choice" hahah xD The Sixth Form teams at State schools are always completely useless, like nobody from my school told me I needed >90% UMS, that was only me being on TSR that lead to me knowing that xD I had a FM teacher telling me all I needed was a B to have a chance for Cambridge - Which I luckily knew better than at the time. But things like this really need to be considered more because had I just "enjoyed" this year and relaxed instead of researching online, I would've been praised for being one of the best, but ended up with a couple low A's and a couple B's - Like what happened to some of my friends. A lot of students underachieve their potential at State schools, yet at Grammar Schools that hardly ever happens.

It is not your teacher's responsibility to tell you what you need to get into any university. In the internet age the information is all out there (and before that you would have ordered prospectuses). This is YOUR future so YOU need to research it. I didn't expect my teachers to know the grades required for my choices so why do you? Your teachers can tell you whether they think you will get a certain grade and what you need to do to achieve it but they do not know the details of every university.

Well you sound like a complete douche.

Seriously, if you actually read my post fully you'd realise I did research it myself, but when teachers give conflicting, reassuring and easier goals for you to hit in order to be successful against than some random internet student forum, some people may be inclined to trust their teachers ffs.

You're living inside an ignorant bubble clearly, I had a Maths teacher that actually got herself into Cambridge 5-10 years ago and I trusted her answers, why is that a crime? Jesus Christ you defo woke up on the wrong side of the bed.

If an applicant is ill-informed, you cannot put 100% of the blame on them, and I have seen this 1st hand so don't try your "I achieved/did this so why can't everyone else" reply.

If you cannot look at the website of a university you want to go to and read their requirements it is your fault if you apply when you do not meet those requirements. You are nearly an adult (if you are not already). You have to take responsibility. When you get to university no-one's going to hold your hand.

http://www.undergraduate.study.cam.ac.uk/courses/mathematics

Finding that page took me LITERALLY less than 30 seconds.

You never addressed my question: what's different between Oxford courses and Cambridge courses that one would be predicted best by GSCEs and one by AS UMS?

Well you sound like a complete douche.

Seriously, if you actually read my post fully you'd realise I did research it myself, but when teachers give conflicting, reassuring and easier goals for you to hit in order to be successful against than some random internet student forum, some people may be inclined to trust their teachers ffs.

You're living inside an ignorant bubble clearly, I had a Maths teacher that actually got herself into Cambridge 5-10 years ago and I trusted her answers, why is that a crime? Jesus Christ you defo woke up on the wrong side of the bed.

If an applicant is ill-informed, you cannot put 100% of the blame on them, and I have seen this 1st hand so don't try your "I achieved/did this so why can't everyone else" reply.

Well you sound like a complete douche.

Seriously, if you actually read my post fully you'd realise I did research it myself, but when teachers give conflicting, reassuring and easier goals for you to hit in order to be successful against than some random internet student forum, some people may be inclined to trust their teachers ffs.

You're living inside an ignorant bubble clearly, I had a Maths teacher that actually got herself into Cambridge 5-10 years ago and I trusted her answers, why is that a crime? Jesus Christ you defo woke up on the wrong side of the bed.

If an applicant is ill-informed, you cannot put 100% of the blame on them, and I have seen this 1st hand so don't try your "I achieved/did this so why can't everyone else" reply.

Actually, I have just found some data. If you compare the correlation coefficients between Oxford and Cambridge in this data, you'll see that there seems to be a stronger correlation between GCSEs and degree performance at Oxford than at Cambridge, if I'm interpreting this correctly.

Just a couple of points:

1) GCSE results correlate with attainment at degree level, hence they use it as a measure of ability.
2) Oxford contextualises you're results
3) GCSEs are combine with your aptitude test score to select the top 70% ish of applicants for interview, after that your interview and aptitude test performance matters most.
4) I got 2 A*s at GCSE and I'm a second year student at Oxford

Colourtheory is 100% correct - UNIQ at Oxford said exactly the same thing. ComputerMaths, perhaps you should stop comparing yourself to other candidates - Oxbridge does not mind 'bad' GCSE grades, as long as other parts of your application are great. There is no number of A*s that they expect. You know this..

I should mention though, upon having contacted Oxford's admission team - that the average number of A*s at GCSE is 6. Since you are so good at maths, you should be able to see that there will be candidates with 0, AND there will be candidates with 12. I do not know the case of Cambridge - ask them!

And anyway, who wants to apply to these 'courses' of which you speak - if we are talking about the same thing, they cost a lot of money, and academics at UNIQ summer school said that they do not even get it right. Apparently, they like to visualise 'perfect' interviews, personal statements etc; most of the time, they're following a simplistic formula which isn't the ultimate gateway into Oxbridge.

If "AS results put me in a position to apply competitively to any University I choose", then why don't you? I understand the point of your thread - but it means that you assume that Oxbridge look at GCSE grades to great extent, when deciding between candidates to interview. This is simply not the case, since 'worse' performance does not automatically stop you from being able to be interviewed - as long as you are an overall good candidate.

To finish off, when I emailed one of the admissions officers, they said: "the process is really not black and white."