This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Eco vs. EM - Cambridge values top GCSE/AS grades more than Oxford...?

Ye just to pick up on the point made on this thread:

http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=515634

Do cambridge value top GCSE/AS grade more than Oxford.
I know this is a huge generalisation, not helped by the complication that Cambridge demands individual AS unit scores (isthat UMS?), and Oxford does not, and Oxford has more tests before interview whereas Cambridge does not (have as much), and I know there will a whole host of people to bring evidence to the contrary, but sticking with the generalisation, is it true that top grades mean more at Cambridge?

From sources dotted around TSR, I keep getting the impression that good GCSE grades just get you the interview at Oxford, and from then on, its an even playing field, but at Cambridge, the grades themselves might act as a deciding factor after interview....?

I mean, could an admission tutor at Oxford say, "Yes, he/she had a good interview, good aptitude test, so he/she is through"

and a Cambridge admission tutor say (for the same person), "Yes, good interview, good aptitude test, but not so good GCSE result, so no, rejection".......

Its ridiculously hard to juxtapose the two becuase it could never happen in reality, but you know what I mean.....?

Comments?

Reply 1

Good bloke

19

holla_at_ya

Ye Cambridge demands individual AS unit scores (isthat UMS?), and Oxford does not,

Sigh. Cambridge demands individual modular UMS marks for all papers taken, whether passed or failed, re-sat or not. Some Oxford colleges, for some subjects, do something similar. All universities ask for your module grades, but UCAS made the mistake of making it optional to do so. All of this is quite likely to change on a year-by-year basis and is irrelevant to how individual admission tutors arrive at their decisions (which is largely unknown by anyone except that admissions tutor).

Reply 2

thetoothfairy

OP

ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
lol
oh ok, now i get it!
How do we find out about the changes? I mean, I would like to know how its working before I actually do it....?

Reply 3

Jibzy

15

indeed i have come to believe this as well.....
cambridge appear to value the grades more. a 10a* candidate is more likely to get in to cambridge and in most cases, less likely to even get an interview at oxford, whereas a 1a* candidate may not stand a chance at cambridge, but has a good chance of performing well at the interview and getting in!

this is what i have observed, im not saying it's a fact. this loads of people i know got into oxford with 2a*'s or 4a*'s......and those cases, the interview was more important, and the PPE test as well.
i know loads of people who could serve as an example of this. sometimes i think someone should do the statistics, you'd be shocked to see what you would find......

We may never know.

I get the impression that Oxford are more stringent about who they invite for interview. I got 6 A*s and 4 As at GCSE, 3 As and 1 B at AS, and predicted AAA and didn't get an interview. This is the same for many people at my school.

Reply 6

Jibzy

15

tomoli

I get the impression that Oxford are more stringent about who they invite for interview. I got 6 A*s and 4 As at GCSE, 3 As and 1 B at AS, and predicted AAA and didn't get an interview. This is the same for many people at my school.

yep. it begs the question: what could this imply???????

i mean are cambridge just place to much emphasis on the string of a*'s and are oxford more realistic about the whole thing.....?

Reply 7

tomoli

2

Perhaps Oxford use the type of person (their personality) as more of a factor than Cambridge who place more emphasis on pure academic acheivement?

Reply 8

Eyes Wide Shut

Pretty much everyone with realistic chances gets an interview at Cambridge, while only the top 50% (which is obviously decided by your personal statement, testimonial, GCSEs, A-levels, etc) or so get one in Oxford.

I believe if you can impress them at the interview, the GCSEs and A-levels become less important, and considering that you might not even get an interview at Oxford due to bad GCSEs, Cambridge would be placing less emphasis.

I don't know about Oxford, but some colleges in Cambridge also ask you to write essays on topics they choose, which gives them something else to consider, and thus makes the grades less important.

I received an unconditional offer from Cambridge with 3A*s and 7As at GCSEs, and without further maths/a 4th a level, so obviously they are not that strict about the grades - but I guess it also depends a lot on the college.

Reply 9

The Solitary Reaper

9

Now I don't think that makes sense because Oxford deselect so many more before interview. Surely that would sit better with the opposite being true?

Reply 10

ukstudent2011

I got 3 A*s, 1A, 4Bs and 1 C. An Oxford admissions tutor sent a letter to my school saying that anyone with my grades won't even be considered for an interview. I applied to Cambridge and got an interview and an offer, which I don't believe would have happened had I applied to Oxford. So while Oxford may have a reputation of giving more weight to the interview, I don't feel I'd have been given the chance to show what I could do in the first place.

It's probably also worth mentioning that the interview must be fairly important as I was taken out of the pool ahead of many people with stronger grades. Although as my first batch of interviews were a bit of a disaster, the whole thing is a bit of a mystery to me.

Reply 11

HCD

16

The more competitive subjects at Oxford have aptitude tests.

Reply 12

tomoli

2

LJoll

It's probably also worth mentioning that the interview must be fairly important as I was taken out of the pool ahead of many people with stronger grades. Although as my first batch of interviews were a bit of a disaster, the whole thing is a bit of a mystery to me.

Who are not the first person to say that, for sure.

Reply 13

Galatea

11

I think you could get the impression that Cambridge values top GCSE/AS grades more because of the intercollege pool system; students with absolutely outstanding grades are rarely straight out rejected, but are put through the pool first. For example there was someone on the Oxford thread who was rejected with 15 A*s at GCSE, and 6 As at As. I doubt this person would have been straight out rejected from cambridge, at least not without being pooled or reinterviewed first.

But if someone is pooled with a very poor interview score, I imagine it is unlikely they'll be made an offer by another college, at least not without another interview, and I've heard people on this forum say the pool is sometimes merely a quaint formality, to stop outstanding students (or rather, their teachers and parents) kicking up a fuss if they're rejected (i.e the Laura Spence case with Oxford), so in reality, cambridge don't have any different position to Oxford with regards to grades.

Eco vs. EM - Cambridge values top GCSE/AS grades more than Oxford...?

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you