What will help me get in for 2009

Scroll to see replies

CookieDough8

Yes but how often is that the case? People rarely are accepted on the basis of ability alone. I have to say that for both my physics and philosophy I did huge amounts of additional work - for philosophy anything I did was additional work as I don't study it at school. Although, during the interviews none of the work that I did for Physics was any use and I was tested on ability alone - the opposite was true for philosophy, literally anything I had ever thought was tested.

After receiving an offer I feel extremely glad that I did all the extra work for philosophy as it clearly paid off, and I am still very happy about all the time I spent on my physics because I really enjoyed it.

Well, I admit that maybe its luck as well, in terms of the interview, because I was lucky all the technical, maths & physics questions were ones that I was able to do. So I guess it is luck tbh, So if your lucky and you work hard and are enthusiatic etc etc. It is likely you will get an offer from Cambridge. But I guess it is all relative to competition.

Reply 21

jjpp

as a historian at cambridge who has read a history book outside of class in his life, i actually still concur to a fair degree. If you are that good, you'll get in. However it's around the margins that doing extra reading etc starts to play in. That's what got me in imo reading a tonne and showing interest in my subject.

I'd have hit a brick wall on a couple of interview questions if I had done no extra reading. I went to the Cambridge History faculty website and got a couple of higher level books which were outside the confines of my A Level course (I started with the period just before my A Level topic and then worked backwards, to understand how things came about - good way to show passion) and also looked at a few historiography books (which were lifesavers in the interview).

Reading lists for most periods/topics are here:

http://www.hist.cam.ac.uk/undergraduate/part1/papers2007-2008.html

And the historiography reading list is here:

http://www.hist.cam.ac.uk/undergraduate/part2/hap_bibliography_07.pdf - Just read a couple from the 'General Reading' at the top. Probably Evans' and one of the newer post-2000 books (not Carr or Elton, they're old).

Reply 22

Jottie

JaxT

All excellent advice BUT don't assume that if you do all that it will guarantee you an offer! I did all of the above in shedloads (starting well before I even thought about applying to Oxford) including attendance at over 20 relevant NAGTY events all over the country and other assorted masterclasses, lectures, university summer schools etc. AND I had done a work experience in a university physics dept. AND I had done an Open University course AND had excellent predicted grades AND a strong PS AND a very good reference AND I read voraciously around the subject......still didn't get me an offer! However, none of it was wasted as I enjoyed every single thing I did and it has increased my knowledge of and passion for physics even more.

mabe_uk

Well my point still holds for the above poster, if he/she was good. he/she would have got in, i didnt do all that lol & i am still an offer holder for 08 entry.

Well, whoopie doo for you!! I'm sorry mabe_uk but that comment makes you sound very flippant, rude and arrogant. :frown:

I think the point JaxT was probably making is that offers from Oxford and Cambridge depend on many factors and not just whether or not you can show passion for your subject.
I hope you are not a typical example of the type of person I'll be meeting in October! :s-smilie:

Reply 23

jonnythemoose

mabe_uk

Well my point still holds for the above poster, if he/she was good. he/she would have got in, i didnt do all that lol & i am still an offer holder for 08 entry.

I think your point is quite insensitive actually. I didn't get in. Am I therefore not good? The word 'suitable' is much more...suitable, I believe.

Reply 24

tomkat27

mabe_uk

Well, basically if your good you will get in, if your not then you probably won't. So you can only try your best.

And you're one of the good ones I see... :wink:

Reply 25

JaxT

mabe_uk

Well, basically if your good you will get in, if your not then you probably won't. So you can only try your best.

Well, I did try my best and I didn't get an offer, so that clearly makes me a complete and total failure and obviously very inferior to you!! :smile:

I should also point out that a few people will have had offers but will subsequently fail to get the grades required so will not get 'in' in the end. :wink:

Reply 26

Donald Duck

Show your interest. I had to do a project for school (EE) which I did very original and with which they seemed very impressed at my interview. Also read around your subject (if possible, get one of the books they require you to read for next year) ans thats what I did :biggrin:

Reply 27

scrubs26

Hey guys, I'm personally arent as acadamically as able as you guys, I've got an offer for Aston Uni for Pharm, but reading this conversation and from the experience I've heard from my friend who applied for Oxford 08 and got rejected, I'll have to ask all of you one thing...Was it worth it in the end?

It appears to me that theres a 'above average' amount of 'stuck up' people and 'arrogant' people studying in Ox/bridge...I dont understand why you guys are so attracted to this place... Is it the prestige? Is it the (oxon) or (Cantab) suffices that come with the degree?

I apologise for my bluntness but this is something I want to understand.

Reply 28

scrubs26

It appears to me that theres a 'above average' amount of 'stuck up' people and 'arrogant' people studying in Ox/bridge...I dont understand why you guys are so attracted to this place... Is it the prestige? Is it the (oxon) or (Cantab) suffices that come with the degree?

I haven't met one stuck up or arrogant person since I got here, it's a complete stereotype. My experience so far has been pretty much perfect in every way, I couldn't hope for a better university experience. It has nothing to do with the prestige or post-nominal suffixes.

Reply 29

Speedbird2008

scrubs26

Yer, that is a stereotype to be fair. I don't think it is right to say that everyone is arrogant there... of course, there will be people with "perfect" records, and think they're wonderful, but I know a few people who go there and love it, and the people.

Also, it is a bad thing not to strive for academic brilliance, and to say "why would you want to go there" is, I think, annoying... It is like saying to MUFC "why do you want to win the Champions League?"

Also, it is the holy grail of academia, which appeals to a lot of people, and success is not something to be condemned, even if it does seem that way with "non-competitive sports days" and the like.

:smile:

Reply 30

seanthebean50

i like how allthe offer-holders are talking as though it was probably the soundest system in the world that let confirmed geniuses like them in... i.e., if you are brilliant like me, you'll get in...

this is patently not the case!

my friend who is literally the cleverest person I know and might still post on TSR still didnt get in...all this based on one %%%%%%%%ed up interview?!

Reply 31

Lidka

scrubs26

'Stuck up' is a difficult term to talk about, seeing as it could mean rude for all number of reasons. My experience so far has been yes, there are a couple of arrogant people here - usually people who've been top of their school and have been taught to think well of themselves. But I don't think that that is an Oxbridge phenomenon. I'm pretty sure that most good unis will contain some individuals who think they're "it". The idea of Oxbridge and Cambridge being filled with snobs and toffs is not, I am happy to say, true. A lot of people are eager to think that, though - normally the same people who are eager to equate any private school student with an Etonian. Inverted snobbery is dangerous.

What attracted me to this place? The course, the pretty city, the libraries, mainly. The idea of not being viewed as 'the geek' any more was nice, as was having tutors who genuinely listen to your ideas. I liked the sound of the small classes and of the collegiate system. I didn't give a damn about how my degree sounds to other people, I just wanted to go somewhere where it looked easy to be happy academically.

Was it worth it? I think so. That's not to say I think Cambridge is perfect, or that it would be the same for everyone who applied. But for me, it's a good place to be. :smile:

Reply 32

The West Wing

There's a near-perfect correlation between grades and success. Get good grades, and concentrate as much of your effort as possible on doing so. Everything else is largely irrelevant if you don't have the academic background.

Reply 33

Lidka

seanthebean50

It's not based on one interview. It's based on your personal statement, your grades, written work, tests and two (rarely fewer) interviews. Yes, being clever helps, and that is partly what Oxford and Cambridge look for when you apply... but they also want to know if you can succeed in the Oxbridge environment. I'm not saying the system is fallible, because it is, and I daresay that some of the offer holders on here just scraped their way in, just as some of the rejectees didn't quite make it. But the system as a whole is a thorough one, and much more searching than what other universities subject you to.

I'm sorry for your friend. The cleverest person I know was rejected as well, and is now doing fine at another good university. It's not the end of the world if you don't get in, or if you miss your offer. There's a whole world out there that does fine without an Oxford or Cambridge degree, remember. :smile:

Reply 34

Eternal Student

Clearly, reading around your subject is important. However, I found that at interview (many years ago, mind you), they were also looking for evidence that you could think "outside the box", which is a very hard thing to teach. I think that might explain why some people with extremely high grades and motivation might not get through the interview process.

Remember that they are going to interview far more people than they have places for, and almost all of the applicants are going to have outstanding academic records. So the chances are that if they have the choice between two applicants with 'perfect' grades, they'll pick the one they'd most like to spend the next 3 years in tutorials with: people who are able to challenge the accepted norms, think independently, and just be more interesting to teach.

Reply 35

jjpp

scrubs26

I didn't go to uni hoping everyone would be really down to earth and humble. There are people who are stuck up and arrogant wherever you go in life and you can't base where you go to uni on some preconceived notion of, 'well i'm bound to get on with the people there' when you have no idea. I wanted to do the best degree for my course at the best place, be stretched and have a good chance of getting the career I want, Cambridge ticks all those boxes.

Reply 36

Mayfly

seanthebean50

I know plenty of brilliant people at Oxford who didn't get into LSE.

I note LSE is rarely called upon to justify itself for not letting in these people.

Honestly, Oxford and Cambridge are just other universities. They aren't infallible, and it shouldn't count against them that they aren't. Yes it's a shame that all these lovely people won't be here, but it's also a shame that someone I know with perfect grades didn't even get an interview for medicine at Dundee whilst someone else with a C got in.

You are never guaranteed a place at any university, nor are you entitled to one.

(LSE reject here, btw :p: