Correlation between performance in UKMT and performance in TMUA/STEP?

i am also a year 11 who did it today, how did you overall find it?

I'm in Year 11 but I'm still curious as I want to apply to Cambridge and Imperial in the future for CS.

I did the IMC today and I'll probably get a bronze maybe even a silver but I don't even understand how to get a gold like some people and I've only got to this stage with so much prep but I doubt any of them have even touched a past IMC paper.

I was wondering if there's any correlation between performance in UKMT and, in the future, performance in TMUA or STEP or that's solely based on performance in class at A-Level. Also wondering if being on track for a grade 9 means anything as well for any of these.

I'm in Year 11 but I'm still curious as I want to apply to Cambridge and Imperial in the future for CS.

I did the IMC today and I'll probably get a bronze maybe even a silver but I don't even understand how to get a gold like some people and I've only got to this stage with so much prep but I doubt any of them have even touched a past IMC paper.

I was wondering if there's any correlation between performance in UKMT and, in the future, performance in TMUA or STEP or that's solely based on performance in class at A-Level. Also wondering if being on track for a grade 9 means anything as well for any of these.

Btw, I am currently in year 13 applying for Computer Science at university. I applied to Cambridge, Imperial, Edinburgh, Manchester and Durham. I have offers from Imperial, Edinburgh and Manchester (Cambridge rejection and still waiting on Durham even though I applied about 4 months ago) so I think that I more than enough qualify to answer this for you.

Ok so I am quite good at the UKMT and I have a friend who isn't as good (I am getting high golds and qualifying for the Olympiads while my friend is getting silvers). We both have pretty much the same academic profile in terms of grades (he got 1 grade 7 and 1 grade 8 whereas I got 2 grades 8s but in both cases, they were in irrelevant courses). My friend would do loads of preparation whereas I would have to be told that today was the day of the challenge and that I am already late (it's happened literally every year I've done it lol). The UKMT, I think especially in the initial first round, does more justice to pattern recognition and a bit of problem solving than anything else so it's hard to compare this to an admissions test where there is lots of hardcore Maths involved.

I would say that at Maths, in general, my friend doesn't seem to have any problems with grasping concepts, whereas for myself, it takes me a bit longer so he generally performs better than me on tests. However, when it came to TMUA, I actually found that I was doing better than him by quite a margin. I was doing decently in the Maths section and I was doing well in the logic paper as well. So take what you will from that. However, when it came to the actual thing, my friend performed a bit better than he was doing in practice and I actually ended up doing worse but that was down to my own stupid mistake related to looking at the wrong timing and then pacing myself accordingly. It meant that I didn't get my answers down for half of the paper on my answer sheet even though I had all of my answers with workings out on my question paper. This significantly impacted my mark, which otherwise I'm sure would have very much been in offer territory.

So Imperial also does a pre-interview admissions test as part of the application process and I would say that UKMT is a very good source of preparation but the questions will be harder than this in the actual thing. You only sit the STEP when you receive your offer and you sit the paper in the summer of year 13. Now, most people get their STEP condition with STEP II but there have been conditions in the past for STEP III and higher grades in STEP II so it's very much performance-based.

There is some correlation with the TMUA from the UKMT but there is way more Maths involved in TMUA so I guess that a correlation doesn't really exist. I would say that for the second paper, being good at the UKMT definitely helps (particularly looking at the binary logic questions in UKMT) because it is all logic based. However, for the first paper, if your Maths isn't up to scratch, you will fail miserably. Additionally, TMUA is MCQ like UKMT so I would say that there is also that in common with the two.

With the STEP, there is absolutely no correlation. It's the hardest Maths admissions test in the country and I have to get a grade 2 in the easiest paper that they offer as part of my Imperial offer, which I'm already feeling the pinch with. It's EXTREMELY, and I mean EXTREMELY, difficult. You have to do Further Maths to know what to do, or self-learn it, because it tests Further Maths and normal Maths but the questions are so far beyond A level due to the questions being extremely abstracted to contain minimal details. The STEP is very much proof-based and you have to show your workings to obtain the marks.

Being on track for a grade 9 means absolutely zilch. I mean there were people who were predicted to achieve all 9s at GCSEs in my year and yet when it came to the actual thing, they didn't get a single 9. Predictions at GCSE genuinely mean nothing. You just have to put in the hard work and get the best possible set of results you can get. I believe that at one point, my predictions were in the region of a 7.8 average for my 10 subjects and yet when it came to the actual thing, I got 8 grade 9s and 2 grade 8s so it's vastly different.

Also, as a sidenote, if you are getting only a Bronze/Silver certificate in the UKMT, you will need to improve your Maths A LOT to be in with a decent chance. They won't use it as a major metric but you must show that you have a high level of proficiency in Maths given how mathematical the courses are and I think that UKMT is a great way of demonstrating this. Let's assume that you have done decent enough to secure an interview. The Maths involved in these interviews will be insanely difficult and crazy. They always use wild scenarios, just random scenarios, to test your knowledge and ensure that it's not something you've come across before. Therefore, in order to be able to perform in such a high pressure environment, you need to be able to do Maths to a high standard and understand the concepts before applying them to crazy and wild cases.

Btw, I am currently in year 13 applying for Computer Science at university. I applied to Cambridge, Imperial, Edinburgh, Manchester and Durham. I have offers from Imperial, Edinburgh and Manchester (Cambridge rejection and still waiting on Durham even though I applied about 4 months ago) so I think that I more than enough qualify to answer this for you.

Ok so I am quite good at the UKMT and I have a friend who isn't as good (I am getting high golds and qualifying for the Olympiads while my friend is getting silvers). We both have pretty much the same academic profile in terms of grades (he got 1 grade 7 and 1 grade 8 whereas I got 2 grades 8s but in both cases, they were in irrelevant courses). My friend would do loads of preparation whereas I would have to be told that today was the day of the challenge and that I am already late (it's happened literally every year I've done it lol). The UKMT, I think especially in the initial first round, does more justice to pattern recognition and a bit of problem solving than anything else so it's hard to compare this to an admissions test where there is lots of hardcore Maths involved.

I would say that at Maths, in general, my friend doesn't seem to have any problems with grasping concepts, whereas for myself, it takes me a bit longer so he generally performs better than me on tests. However, when it came to TMUA, I actually found that I was doing better than him by quite a margin. I was doing decently in the Maths section and I was doing well in the logic paper as well. So take what you will from that. However, when it came to the actual thing, my friend performed a bit better than he was doing in practice and I actually ended up doing worse but that was down to my own stupid mistake related to looking at the wrong timing and then pacing myself accordingly. It meant that I didn't get my answers down for half of the paper on my answer sheet even though I had all of my answers with workings out on my question paper. This significantly impacted my mark, which otherwise I'm sure would have very much been in offer territory.

So Imperial also does a pre-interview admissions test as part of the application process and I would say that UKMT is a very good source of preparation but the questions will be harder than this in the actual thing. You only sit the STEP when you receive your offer and you sit the paper in the summer of year 13. Now, most people get their STEP condition with STEP II but there have been conditions in the past for STEP III and higher grades in STEP II so it's very much performance-based.

There is some correlation with the TMUA from the UKMT but there is way more Maths involved in TMUA so I guess that a correlation doesn't really exist. I would say that for the second paper, being good at the UKMT definitely helps (particularly looking at the binary logic questions in UKMT) because it is all logic based. However, for the first paper, if your Maths isn't up to scratch, you will fail miserably. Additionally, TMUA is MCQ like UKMT so I would say that there is also that in common with the two.

With the STEP, there is absolutely no correlation. It's the hardest Maths admissions test in the country and I have to get a grade 2 in the easiest paper that they offer as part of my Imperial offer, which I'm already feeling the pinch with. It's EXTREMELY, and I mean EXTREMELY, difficult. You have to do Further Maths to know what to do, or self-learn it, because it tests Further Maths and normal Maths but the questions are so far beyond A level due to the questions being extremely abstracted to contain minimal details. The STEP is very much proof-based and you have to show your workings to obtain the marks.

Being on track for a grade 9 means absolutely zilch. I mean there were people who were predicted to achieve all 9s at GCSEs in my year and yet when it came to the actual thing, they didn't get a single 9. Predictions at GCSE genuinely mean nothing. You just have to put in the hard work and get the best possible set of results you can get. I believe that at one point, my predictions were in the region of a 7.8 average for my 10 subjects and yet when it came to the actual thing, I got 8 grade 9s and 2 grade 8s so it's vastly different.

Also, as a sidenote, if you are getting only a Bronze/Silver certificate in the UKMT, you will need to improve your Maths A LOT to be in with a decent chance. They won't use it as a major metric but you must show that you have a high level of proficiency in Maths given how mathematical the courses are and I think that UKMT is a great way of demonstrating this. Let's assume that you have done decent enough to secure an interview. The Maths involved in these interviews will be insanely difficult and crazy. They always use wild scenarios, just random scenarios, to test your knowledge and ensure that it's not something you've come across before. Therefore, in order to be able to perform in such a high pressure environment, you need to be able to do Maths to a high standard and understand the concepts before applying them to crazy and wild cases.

I would say that the Kangaroo is similar to the TMUA and the Olympiad is similar to the STEP to some extent but the Olympiad is definitely easier than the STEP. No valid comparison can be made to the STEP.

Really?? Olympiad requires massive leaps in intuition and is along no set syllabus but instead the whim of the setters... I feel STEP is probably easier as the questions are guided to nurture you to a position to answer 'the big one' at the end (on good questions at least) while Olympiad questions just dive in at the deep end and you better be able to get to the answer by intuition if you want any marks.

Btw, I am currently in year 13 applying for Computer Science at university. I applied to Cambridge, Imperial, Edinburgh, Manchester and Durham. I have offers from Imperial, Edinburgh and Manchester (Cambridge rejection and still waiting on Durham even though I applied about 4 months ago) so I think that I more than enough qualify to answer this for you.

Ok so I am quite good at the UKMT and I have a friend who isn't as good (I am getting high golds and qualifying for the Olympiads while my friend is getting silvers). We both have pretty much the same academic profile in terms of grades (he got 1 grade 7 and 1 grade 8 whereas I got 2 grades 8s but in both cases, they were in irrelevant courses). My friend would do loads of preparation whereas I would have to be told that today was the day of the challenge and that I am already late (it's happened literally every year I've done it lol). The UKMT, I think especially in the initial first round, does more justice to pattern recognition and a bit of problem solving than anything else so it's hard to compare this to an admissions test where there is lots of hardcore Maths involved.

I would say that at Maths, in general, my friend doesn't seem to have any problems with grasping concepts, whereas for myself, it takes me a bit longer so he generally performs better than me on tests. However, when it came to TMUA, I actually found that I was doing better than him by quite a margin. I was doing decently in the Maths section and I was doing well in the logic paper as well. So take what you will from that. However, when it came to the actual thing, my friend performed a bit better than he was doing in practice and I actually ended up doing worse but that was down to my own stupid mistake related to looking at the wrong timing and then pacing myself accordingly. It meant that I didn't get my answers down for half of the paper on my answer sheet even though I had all of my answers with workings out on my question paper. This significantly impacted my mark, which otherwise I'm sure would have very much been in offer territory.

So Imperial also does a pre-interview admissions test as part of the application process and I would say that UKMT is a very good source of preparation but the questions will be harder than this in the actual thing. You only sit the STEP when you receive your offer and you sit the paper in the summer of year 13. Now, most people get their STEP condition with STEP II but there have been conditions in the past for STEP III and higher grades in STEP II so it's very much performance-based.

There is some correlation with the TMUA from the UKMT but there is way more Maths involved in TMUA so I guess that a correlation doesn't really exist. I would say that for the second paper, being good at the UKMT definitely helps (particularly looking at the binary logic questions in UKMT) because it is all logic based. However, for the first paper, if your Maths isn't up to scratch, you will fail miserably. Additionally, TMUA is MCQ like UKMT so I would say that there is also that in common with the two.

With the STEP, there is absolutely no correlation. It's the hardest Maths admissions test in the country and I have to get a grade 2 in the easiest paper that they offer as part of my Imperial offer, which I'm already feeling the pinch with. It's EXTREMELY, and I mean EXTREMELY, difficult. You have to do Further Maths to know what to do, or self-learn it, because it tests Further Maths and normal Maths but the questions are so far beyond A level due to the questions being extremely abstracted to contain minimal details. The STEP is very much proof-based and you have to show your workings to obtain the marks.

Being on track for a grade 9 means absolutely zilch. I mean there were people who were predicted to achieve all 9s at GCSEs in my year and yet when it came to the actual thing, they didn't get a single 9. Predictions at GCSE genuinely mean nothing. You just have to put in the hard work and get the best possible set of results you can get. I believe that at one point, my predictions were in the region of a 7.8 average for my 10 subjects and yet when it came to the actual thing, I got 8 grade 9s and 2 grade 8s so it's vastly different.

Also, as a sidenote, if you are getting only a Bronze/Silver certificate in the UKMT, you will need to improve your Maths A LOT to be in with a decent chance. They won't use it as a major metric but you must show that you have a high level of proficiency in Maths given how mathematical the courses are and I think that UKMT is a great way of demonstrating this. Let's assume that you have done decent enough to secure an interview. The Maths involved in these interviews will be insanely difficult and crazy. They always use wild scenarios, just random scenarios, to test your knowledge and ensure that it's not something you've come across before. Therefore, in order to be able to perform in such a high pressure environment, you need to be able to do Maths to a high standard and understand the concepts before applying them to crazy and wild cases.

Update: I got a silver certificate

I would say that the Kangaroo is similar to the TMUA and the Olympiad is similar to the STEP to some extent but the Olympiad is definitely easier than the STEP. No valid comparison can be made to the STEP.

What TMUA score would you say would give someone a high chance of getting an offer from Cambridge and Imperial?