Oxford MAT 2013/2014

Original post by bluebell_flames

Oh, I see

I applied there because I'm considering a career in something financial, but I'm definitely more of a pure mathematician :frown:

And personally, I disliked (about UCL):
- the vibe from students as a whole - they seemed weirdly unwelcoming, etc (but then again, I went there the day after the Oxford open day, so that may have caused some bias :tongue:

)
- the maths building - ugly inside and out, quite awkward/uncomfortable
- the fact that they don't seem to really HAVE a maths department. The guy who gave the maths talk said that the department had been growing over the last few years and they were now... 4 of them :/ (they said 'us' so it was ambiguous whether they meant lecturers or professors or something else, but that just seemed like such a joke)
- the location (not London as a whole, but that specific area)

I know that some of these may seem quite petty/weird, but I guess the vibe you get at open days is pretty subjective. But I just really disliked it...

Oh and FYI one of my friends went to visit their accommodation (more than one of the sites) and said it was prison-like and the worse student accommodation she had ever seen. Not sure if current UCL students would agree with that, but that's what she said...

Hmm, interesting points there. Would be interesting to hear a student's perspective on the matter (considering there's a high chance I'll go there!).

Reply 603

Original post by IceKidd

not really a grade. but how many marks u accumulated, going thru the markscheme

Ah, well, mostly everything, in that case. :smile:

Reply 604

31541

Original post by Noble.

Problem is, you can't really do high level applied maths without decent knowledge of analysis (and algebra). Generally the more advanced the maths gets the line separating pure and applied gets incredibly blurred. If you look at the second year Differential Equation course at Oxford (which generally isn't taught until third year at most top universities) a large chunk of it is just analysis (in fact, the first 25% of the course is arguably entirely analysis) and throughout it has a heavy analysis feel.

Interesting. Do you have much to say about the maths that would be taught at LSE?

Reply 605

Noble.

17

Original post by CD315

Interesting. Do you have much to say about the maths that would be taught at LSE?

Nope, I haven't looked at it to be honest. Although I will say this, no matter what mathematician you become you cannot forgo a varied education in both applied and pure. Not least because you need a firm grasp of the basics of pure to do applied later on, but also because realistically you don't know what maths you're good at until you've done it. So if you're going to get a restricted education, you could be missing out on a true passion within maths - which would be a real shame. Also, even as a first year undergraduate your opinions on what you prefer will wildly change, and what you prefer at the end of first year may not necessarily be what you prefer in second year.

As much as I dislike the idea of leaning towards either pure or applied, I have far more genius moments with pure maths (and am generally much better with it) so I have to fight the urge to say I'm a pure mathematician (although by the end of A-Levels, having done all the mechanics modules, I was convinced I was an applied mathematician :lol:

)

Reply 606

Original post by IceKidd

not really a grade. but how many marks u accumulated, going thru the markscheme

Yeah, just finished going through the model answers. No problems with problems 1, 2, 4, and 5. Problem 3 - I did part (i) a little differently, and only the sin(x) < x bit is beyond question; so I should probably count 2/4 for this part. The next parts of the question were okay, though. So, 98 [-whatever I would have lost for unsatisfactory explanation, poor presentation, etc.] for MAT 2010. :smile:

This paper did seem more tedious than the other two, I must say. Took me almost an hour and a half to do the longer sections, and I wasn't trying to be cautious or anything.

Reply 607

Mike_Ross

5

Jesus Christ, people are getting 80 and 90? I'm sitting here struggling to get over 65 lmao. There go my chances at Oxford.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 608

username638250

7

So glad I'm not applying to one of the academic powerhouse colleges.
:wink:

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 609

Hey, I'm no threat to any of you, really! (IceKidd certainly is, though. :biggrin:

)
I'm an international applicant aiming for the Reach Scholarship, so the probability of me going to Oxford, err, tends to zero. :tongue:

Reply 610

31541

I hope these 80s and 90s aren't too common amongst Imperial applicants :lol:

Reply 611

IceKidd

Original post by yl95

So glad I'm not applying to one of the academic powerhouse colleges.
:wink:

Posted from TSR Mobile

Which ones are they?

Reply 612

username638250

7

Original post by IceKidd

Which ones are they?

Merton would be one of them!

Also, Balliol, Magdalen and New but I'm not sure how much that holds true. Noble would know better than me!

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 613

IceKidd

Original post by yl95

Merton would be one of them!

Also, Balliol, Magdalen and New but I'm not sure how much that holds true. Noble would know better than me!

Posted from TSR Mobile

yh i heard merton was like best for maths so i wanted to try there!

Reply 614

dutchmaths

Original post by IceKidd

yh i heard merton was like best for maths so i wanted to try there!

Don't the second interview & open offer systems ensure that all applicants have an equal chance? If you look at the statistics Merton applicants actually have a higher overall acceptance rate than most other colleges, which is probably because its position in the Norrington table etc wards off some mediocre applicants. Just my conjecture here. Also I applied for Maths at Merton and am now hoping I'm not going to regret it :tongue:

Reply 615

IceKidd

Original post by dutchmaths

Don't the second interview & open offer systems ensure that all applicants have an equal chance? If you look at the statistics Merton applicants actually have a higher overall acceptance rate than most other colleges, which is probably because its position in the Norrington table etc wards off some mediocre applicants. Just my conjecture here. Also I applied for Maths at Merton and am now hoping I'm not going to regret it :tongue:

Yh you have an essentially equal chance of getting into oxford. both oxford and cambridge do a very good job at that, and thats what counts. but it is harder to get into these colleges because theyre academic powerhouses and typically more of the best want to apply there so that college is obviously going to choose the best, whilst those still good enough for oxford get pooled into other colleges like from their 2nd interview (or even an open offer)

Reply 616

Hey, how is St John's for math? I didn't research much before applying, to be honest.

Reply 617

bluebell_flames

Original post by souktik

Hey, how is St John's for math? I didn't research much before applying, to be honest.

Most people I've spoken to seem to say that Merton and St John's are the two best for maths (no idea whether that's actually true though...)

Reply 618

jadoreétudier

Does anyone want to do the 1999 and or 2002 papers?

I posted yesterday but fear my post has been lost in the conversation.

:smile:

Reply 619