The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

Reply 20
One of them even mentions his Grade A in General Studies... :s-smilie:
Reply 21
Angelil
One of them even mentions his Grade A in General Studies... :s-smilie:

He must be very proud of it.:biggrin:
it's interesting to see the diversity of work experience and qualifications. i remember pendragon (or whatever his name is) arguing like anything about the golden triangle and oxbridge dominance. this picture tells a different story.
Angelil... I've noticed you are going to Oxford soon. Well done!
Did they ask for a CV or ask for your A-level grades?
Reply 24
someone_somewhere
Angelil... I've noticed you are going to Oxford soon. Well done!
Did they ask for a CV or ask for your A-level grades?

Thank you :smile:
They ask for a lot more than a CV, lol. The application form is not too long in itself but you need to include references, a personal statement, proof of funding and examples of written work. And yes, they do ask for A-Level and GCSE grades (certainly A-Levels...not sure about GCSE now that I think of it), but not a full CV.
Reply 25
Angelil
Thank you :smile:
And yes, they do ask for A-Level and GCSE grades (certainly A-Levels...not sure about GCSE now that I think of it), but not a full CV.


They didn't ask me for A-level or GCSE results when I applied for the MSt. All they cared about was my degree. It clearly varies a lot.
i do find it very wierd that gcses and alevels are asked for. having studied at gcse, alevel, undergraduate degree, postgrad certificate, european certificate, masters and phd level, i can honestly say that school qualifications are dreadful. i say this as a qualified teacher also. i agree with the americans that come to our country and slate our qualifications - very passive and uncritical. it's not until university that the world changes and a critical gaze is required to pass various courses. why on earth an oxbridge scholar would reference school-level qualifications is beyond me. absolute bull****.
Reply 27
the_alba: Hmm, strange that. I might look online later and see if the application form for my course is still there as a PDF.
They definitely DO NOT ask for A level grades, and the form is standardised across courses, so I have no idea what Angelil is speaking about.

Regarding All Souls fellows putting A levels on their CV, it's cretinous at the best of times. Unless you got AAAAAAAAAA at A level, putting them on upon acceptance of your All Souls fellowship is utterly pointless. It's obviously done for the purposes of showing a clean, flawless academic record.
None of the MA/MSc application forms that I've come across have asked for anything before undergraduate degree. No mention of A Levels, let alone GCSEs. :s-smilie:
Reply 30
Hmmm, funny :s-smilie: I swear I had to put my A Levels on at least one form. Maybe it was York or UCL then.
There is a little bit of an anti A-level bias from some people in this thread (mainly from those who didn't really achieve at that level) but whatever people here think of them, they are a generally respected qualfication and there is no reason why they shouldn't be included in some form on a CV. Maybe these Oxford professors want to distinguish themselves by showing their consistent excellence from school onwards, instead of those who were middling students at school through second year of university.
Reply 32
mastersapplicant
There is a little bit of an anti A-level bias from some people in this thread (mainly from those who didn't really achieve at that level) but whatever people here think of them, they are a generally respected qualfication and there is no reason why they shouldn't be included in some form on a CV. Maybe these Oxford professors want to distinguish themselves by showing their consistent excellence from school onwards, instead of those who were middling students at school through second year of university.


So doing well at A-level means someone is a brilliant scholar? The reason most postgrad application forms aren't interested in an applicant's A-levels is that by the time they have reached postgraduate level, A-levels fail to indicate to admissions tutors whether the applicant has the critical faculty, not to mention the writing and researching skills, required for Master's and PhD courses. Only the applicant's performance at degree level will tell them this. Indeed, many people who do badly at A-level do so because they have already surpassed the level of thinking required for the exams, and are no longer willing to jump through examiners' hoops - they have acquired an intellectual originality that, while valued at degree level, is largely penalised by A-level examiners, as it doesn't fit in with their marking scemes. A-levels are an extremely shoddy measure of critical intelligence and originality. They are a respected qualification, yes, but are gradually losing the reputation they once enjoyed. They have no bargaining value in the marketplace of academia, whether you think they should or not.
the_alba
So doing well at A-level means someone is a brilliant scholar? The reason most postgrad application forms aren't interested in an applicant's A-levels is that by the time they have reached postgraduate level, A-levels fail to indicate to admissions tutors whether the applicant has the critical faculty, not to mention the writing and researching skills, required for Master's and PhD courses. Only the applicant's performance at degree level will tell them this. Indeed, many people who do badly at A-level do so because they have already surpassed the level of thinking required for the exams, and are no longer willing to jump through examiners' hoops - they have acquired an intellectual originality that, while valued at degree level, is largely penalised by A-level examiners, as it doesn't fit in with their marking scemes. A-levels are an extremely shoddy measure of critical intelligence and originality. They are a respected qualification, yes, but are gradually losing the reputation they once enjoyed. They have no bargaining value in the marketplace of academia, whether you think they should or not.


Outstanding post. Well said, Alba.
University of London asks for A-level results judging by the MA application forms that I've got

Nice post Alba btw -totally agree, especially for subjects like History and English. I spoke my mind in one of my modules, got a D or an E for it. For another module, I jumped through all the hoops and the syllabus requirements and got an A. The system is flawed, well and truly flawed.
the_alba
So doing well at A-level means someone is a brilliant scholar? The reason most postgrad application forms aren't interested in an applicant's A-levels is that by the time they have reached postgraduate level, A-levels fail to indicate to admissions tutors whether the applicant has the critical faculty, not to mention writing and researching skills, required for Masters and PhD courses. Only the applicant's performance at degree level will tell them this. A-levels are an extremely shoddy measure of critical intelligence and originality. They are a respected qualification, yes, but are gradually losing the reputation they once enjoyed. They have no bargaining value in the marketplace of academia, whether you think they should or not.


I'm not talking specifically about access to postgrad courses (obviously a degree would be the better indicator), just that A- levels are still an intellectually rigorous exam and do indeed help develop and refine one's critical skills, sifting out the very cream of the crop each year. They shouldn't be considered completely irrelevant as they give some insight into an individuals academic background. Learning doesn't begin and end at university.
vickytoria77
I spoke my mind in one of my modules, got a D or an E for it. For another module, I jumped through all the hoops and the syllabus requirements and got an A. The system is flawed, well and truly flawed.


Exactly.
vickytoria77
University of London asks for A-level results judging by the MA application forms that I've got

Nice post Alba btw -totally agree, especially for subjects like History and English. I spoke my mind in one of my modules, got a D or an E for it. For another module, I jumped through all the hoops and the syllabus requirements and got an A. The system is flawed, well and truly flawed.

The A-level system is transparent and the requirements are easily available, unlike university. The system provides structure within which you can develop an excellent set of skills. You got the D/E because at that point you hadn't learnt the discipline to achieve, once you had done that, you were on your way. It's not as though you don't know why you achieved such different grades.
just that A- levels are still an intellectually rigorous exam and do indeed help develop and refine one's critical skills,


PAH - utter utter crap! You don't need critical skills to be do well at A-level, you just need to know what's on the syllabus, what the objectives are and what 10 key points they're looking for.

Even for History, with source based questions, there's no element of critical evaluation; instead it's write exactly what the examiner wants to read. In no way did my A-level History help me with my first year at university. Infact, my head of department said that the first year is to get students out of the "A-level way of working".

As long as you write the key points and fufill the objectives of the mark scheme, you'll do well. I found it was the same for Geography and having a teacher who was also an examiner, helped even more. "Write x, y and z for that question as that will mean you've done objective AE part 5". How does that help a 17yr old develop their own writing and arguements? Or getting them to think laterally? It doesn't.

A-levels bored me stiff because I couldn't do what I wanted to do, think what I wanted to think and write what I wanted to write. Then of course, when you get to university and it really is up to what you think and care about, you've not developed the writing skills and the ability to argue consistently which you need in order to gain the higher marks.

My GCSE History paper required more of me than my A-level ones - think that says it all personally. Far more critical analysis over the sources for a start, which IMHO play a bloody important part if you're wanting to go on and do a History degree.
vickytoria77

A-levels bored me stiff because I couldn't do what I wanted to do, think what I wanted to think and write what I wanted to write.


But this gives discipline and instils a good work ethic.

Latest

Trending

Trending