How Did Emma Watson DO IT.

Being rich helps. Ask Cameron's front bench.

No doubt you know a lot more about the courses on offer at Cambridge than I do, just something I read...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/harry-potter/5653289/Emma-Watson-to-take-three-year-break-from-acting-after-Harry-Potter.html

'English and Art course'? And yes, even if it is just English she's going to be reading, then her acting credentials would still hold considerable weight in a personal statement or as a topic of conversation in an interview. If she'd been offered a place to study say, Veterinary Medicine, it would be a different story entirely.

No, it cannot buy intelligence, but it can buy you a good education. I went to an average state school in the northeast, where 42% of the school achieved 5 or more A*-C grades at GCSE. There is a public school in Berkshire whose average pupil in 2003 achieved 10 A* grades. To say that the school you go to makes no difference to your intellectual development would imply that the kids sent to every public school in the country just so happen to be 'more intelligent' than the kids going to state schools in the northeast. That's clearly not true. How clever you emerge from the school you went to all depends on how well the school stimulates you intellectually, how much they push and encourage you over the years, and so on. Public schools are paid vast amounts of money by the pupils' parents to make damn sure that their kids are pushed to their limits intellectually, that they achieve their full potential, and that they're kept on the straight and narrow. Not sure whether you've ever set foot in a state school or not, but state schools simply do not provide these things to even nearly the same extent.

If you cannot understand this, you're either a massive thick ****, or, you actually attend a public school.
I got 10 A*'s, and know quite a few people from state schools that did also, but we're the exception rather than the rule. The typical pupil at my school achieved rather disappointing exam results (and my school was by no means a 'bad state school' even on a national level), and this is because the school sucks compared to a public school. If you cannot understand this then I've lost all hope for you.

Well, an English and Art course doesn't exist - at least there's no page about it in the undergraduate courses section of the Cambridge University website, and I've never met anyone studying it.

I don't know whether or not you're been through the Cambridge admissions system, but there is a very common misconception amongst those who are unfamiliar with the system that activities not directly relating to the course being applied for are of considerable importance, when in reality the interest of the admissions staff is almost exclusively in academic potential. Extracurriculars can be useful to demonstrate that a student is capable of time management (doing other things alongside being academically sucessful) but they're not really that interested in what you are when you're not studying.

Note Chumbaniya said activities not directed related to the course. If acting is directly related to the course, it probably did help her then. Also please note that Emma Watson is a special case. For the average joe, even doing things directly related to the course probably does not help TOO much. This depends on the college/DoS. My DoS did not care about my PS, having read it only 5 mins before the interview to use it as a talking point for the interview. This is because he had little ability to check any claim made. Note this may not be true for every college and subject.

Eitherway, Im pretty sure she didnt get in. If she did, then cant wait to see her next year.