This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Applying to do medicine Cambridge - worth the risk?

!MEna

I think 'extremely well' is a bit of an exaggeration don't you think? My A* percentile is rounded up to 56% having only done 9 GCSEs and according to the BMAT stats and information, if I didn't have a single A*, I'd need to be in the top 2% of those doing the BMAT - which would require me to do 'extremely well' in that sense. I'd say I'd need to be about in the top 20% of those taking the BMAT this year realistically - and that's demanding itself which is why I see where you are coming from. You have been very helpful actually because the argument that Cambridge do interview almost everyone but also reject almost everyone is actually very true.
Thanks to those of you have been kind enough to respond and offer some advice so far.

Lets start from something we know to be true and all agree on - namely that for medical schools excluding Southampton, no places are given out without interview.

-> It then follows that you need an interview to be considered further then the first glance. The object of the first step thus becomes getting the interview.

-> Cambridge interview nigh on 90%

-> Oxford interviews 450/1000ish give or take every year - of those, it creams off the best of the BMAT bunch (effectively)

Now, it is true that Cambridge look at UMS - however as long as you have solid As - they won't throw your application in the bin - of course, it is to your advantage that you have 90% across the board, but it won't **** you over if you don't..

Considering you can't control the questions you get in either - (assuming you get one!)

I would say Cambridge is the better bet wrt getting your foot in the door for an interview.

And just to put things in perspective - with 100% GCSEs at A* - people have gotten interviews at 17.5-19 (Which in itself is already a very good score). For the top 20% you'd be looking at somewhere around 21-23. - 22ish is no easy feat.

Therefore, Cambridge. (besides, its nicer then Oxford :cool:

). QED

Reply 21

*The One

1

!MEna

I think 'extremely well' is a bit of an exaggeration don't you think? My A* percentile is rounded up to 56% having only done 9 GCSEs and according to the BMAT stats and information, if I didn't have a single A*, I'd need to be in the top 2% of those doing the BMAT - which would require me to do 'extremely well' in that sense. I'd say I'd need to be about in the top 20% of those taking the BMAT this year realistically - and that's demanding itself which is why I see where you are coming from. You have been very helpful actually because the argument that Cambridge do interview almost everyone but also reject almost everyone is actually very true.

Thanks to those of you have been kind enough to respond and offer some advice so far.

Yeah I suppose that 'extremely' is a bit over the top, but like you say getting in the top 20% would still require a great effort. I suspect the majority of people who eventually get in do not get within that quantile, afterall it requires you to be consistently and significantly above average in every section of the BAMT.

It's probably fair to claim that both Oxford and Cambridge are equally tough to get into, ignore my bias but I'd say Oxford all the way!! I don't know how far this is true but apparently Cambridge is more prestigious for medicine (how the hell!?). It also has a bigger medical school - which is why I like to pretend it's easier to get into to make myself feel better. :smile:

Reply 22

Wangers

16

*The One

Yeah I suppose that 'extremely' is a bit over the top, but like you say getting in the top 20% would still require a great effort. I suspect the majority of people who eventually get in do not get within that quantile, afterall it requires you to be consistently and significantly above average in every section of the BAMT.

It's probably fair to claim that both Oxford and Cambridge are equally tough to get into, ignore my bias but I'd say Oxford all the way!! I don't know how far this is true but apparently Cambridge is more prestigious for medicine (how the hell!?). It also has a bigger medical school - which is why I like to pretend it's easier to get into to make myself feel better. :smile:

Oh **** off. Outside the UK most people will only know places like SGUL and Barts (or they know it as QM). You tell an american you go to UCL and they think its UCLA etc etc. (this is specificlly for med btw) the London greats are more internationally recognised for their course then the Oxbridge courses regardles of the name.

Reply 23

petzneo

15

tbh there are sooo many things to consider, your GCSE's, BMAT, PS and then the interview if they decide they like you.

A good example is a friend of mine who got 9A* and an A in his GCSEs, 6 high A's in his AS (Bio, Phys, Maths, Chem, History and Citzenship), has been predicted 4 A's in his A level, got a good BMAT score, I think it was really high in the last section, had an interview at Cambridge and got rejected. Apparently, they showed him a snorkle and asked him what it was and why would you use it, and I don't think he was really expecting such a question

So even if you get the grades, there are so many areas where you can go wrong. I suggest you get those As in your AS and consider then if you want to apply, its a waste of time wondering now...

GOOD LUCK!!

Reply 24

7589200

18

i honestly think oxford is harder to get in to and I go to cambridge...

seriously, cambridge is easier DEFO

Reply 25

Ribulose Bisphosphate

2

I agree with Vazzy B - it's really hard to get into Oxford for Medicine (but it's quite easy to get into Oxford for like English because there are 700+ places). For medicine there are only 150!!! :eek:

GOOD LUCK!

Reply 26

Elles

17

Ribulose Bisphosphate

it's really hard to get into Oxford for Medicine (but it's quite easy to get into Oxford for like English because there are 700+ places). For medicine there are only 150!!! :eek:

Where did you get that idea from..?
English Language & Literature - average intake 275 & Medicine - average intake 150.

Although there definitely tends to be more medicine applicants per place - 14.5% v. 22.5% successful applicants in the last 3 years.

Reply 27

*The One

1

Wangers

Oh **** off. Outside the UK most people will only know places like SGUL and Barts (or they know it as QM). You tell an american you go to UCL and they think its UCLA etc etc. (this is specificlly for med btw) the London greats are more internationally recognised for their course then the Oxbridge courses regardles of the name.

How about, why don't you **** off? Was that necessary, idiot. Hahaha I don't think the average American has a clue about UK universities. However what most would have heard of is Oxford and Cambridge since they do have international prestige whether you like it or not, whether it's justified or not is another matter. Personally I think all the top medical schools are just as good, it doesn't make anyone a 'better' doctor just because they had the luck of getting into the 'best' med schools, so chill out. :smile:

Reply 28

Wangers

16

*The One

How about, why don't you **** off? Was that necessary, idiot. Hahaha I don't think the average American has a clue about UK universities. However what most would have heard of is Oxford and Cambridge since they do have international prestige whether you like it or not, whether it's justified or not is another matter. Personally I think all the top medical schools are just as good, it doesn't make anyone a 'better' doctor just because they had the luck of getting into the 'best' med schools, so chill out. :smile:

you idiot, thats precisely my point. Theres a difference between being known and being prestigious. Are Oxford and Cambridge known - Yes. For their Med courses? No.

I never said they make better doctors! I know they're different courses, its people like you that are too close minded not to realise this.

cool it guys :smile:

Wangers

you idiot, thats precisely my point. Theres a difference between being known and being prestigious. Are Oxford and Cambridge known - Yes. For their Med courses? No.

I never said they make better doctors! I know they're different courses, its people like you that are too close minded not to realise this.

No actually the truth is you have no point. Your original post was so convoluted it's no wonder you're having trouble expressing yourself. At no point have I said they make better doctors, neither do I believe that's the case. It's bizarre you've chosen to claim the direct opposite of what I said in my previous post.

Generally I'd say if something is prestigious it is acknowledged by a wide variety of people and so is therefore well known. I didn't say they are known for their med courses in particular. They are known for being excellent in general. I was just saying that because the unis are prestigious receiving any degree from the uni is likely to be looked upon in a different light.

There is nothing too controversial about this view and certainly nothing insulting about me stating what I accept is only my opinion.

On the other hand, I will not be sworn at by someone who is so arrogant as to believe that the best response to a differing view point, is to first tell the person to F-off. Then to say words to the effect of 'actually these are the facts because I said so', despite having no basis whatsoever in making those claims. I guess it's easy to behave like that in a virtual world!! I'd appreciate it in future if you began your sentences other than with four letter expletives, and ended them with some sort of point, as opposed to a series of petty and random claims.

Reply 31

i'm no superman

OP

15

Well I went to the meeting and it was very insightful. I've decided I'm not going to apply to Cambridge (or Oxford for that matter). The fantasy of getting a place there overshadowed the reason why I want to do medicine in the first place. I was told today that 5A*s at GCSE level is the 'minimum' an applicant there should ideally have and even with that, you'd need to work your way up greatly, both academically and extra-ciricularly (if that's such a term) and 'fight' against those with a higher percentile of A*s. I was also informed about the vigorous exam procedures and the traditional style of teaching which put me off greatly. I'm quite intrigued by PBL, though I'm bazzled as to why a lot of students don't like the style of learning.

I've made my mind up on three universities - UCL, KCL, St Georges.

That leaves me with one more choice for medicine and a back-up alternative which will most likely be biomedicine. I realise that my choices so far are all based in London so my fourth medicine choice will be outside of London. I've ruled out Cardiff, Birmingham, and Nottingham due to their A* cut-off requirements.

Reply 32

bright star

1

if you like the idea of pbl why aren't you choosing pbl universities??

Reply 33

i'm no superman

OP

15

bright star

if you like the idea of pbl why aren't you choosing pbl universities??

That's a valid point indeed but I'm hoping to be closer to home which is why I've centralised my choices in London so far. I may decide to change St Georges and choose two from Manchester, University of East Anglia Medical School, Hull-York, Keele, and Peninsula but I'm looking at each prospectus in time.

Reply 34

bright star

1

barts is very pbl. that's in london, i just thought it was odd that it was the only one you hadn't chosen.

Applying to do medicine Cambridge - worth the risk?

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you