Oxford MAT 2013/2014

Scroll to see replies

rejected. a bit disappointed that I can't experience the Oxford life.

Maybe I shouldn't apply at all, as the tutor said in the interview.

Well, guess I'll just move on. Interning at Google this summer and applying for Ph.D in the next 2 years ...

I can't help but sympathise, what the tutor said was pretty unfair.

I got rejected this year as well. I have a feeling my mat score was around 85, and my first interview didn't go very well, so that's probably why.

Probably if I hadn't been asked that logic question, things may have been different.
I don't really know.

I guess they're harsher with gap year applicants.

Oh well, I'm going to be trying to get a masters at Cambridge/Oxford anyhow (if I don't fail at Warwick exams that is, which is perfectly possible)

Posted from TSR Mobile

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 2161

gavinlowe

Original post by Noble.

4 people didn't get an offer with a score of 85+, quite a few more (10-15) didn't get an offer with a score of 80+.

I mentioned on the Oxford thread that one perfectly good reason for this is that a lot of the high-flying mathematicians (including a lot of international applicants) whom get 80+ scores are probably also applying to top-Ivies in the USA. It might be the case that if someone gets an offer from a top-Ivy they might withdraw their application from Oxford either before or after interviews, so they wouldn't get an offer from Oxford (and it'd be logged as a rejection). This probably explains 1 or 2 of the 4 people who were rejected with a score of 85+. There are other possible reasons (for example, international qualifications being sub-par, or even not meeting Oxford's standard, might lead to them being rejected despite a good MAT).

Sometimes it becomes clear in interviews that a candidate is not as good as their MAT score suggests.

Also, the 'rumour' about the 'magic number' on the MAT has always been 90%. Apparently no-one with a 90%+ score has ever been rejected by Oxford themselves, no-one has this year, but I don't know if the rumour is actually true or not.

It's not true in general, although this year nobody with 90%+ was rejected.

Someone with an MAT score of 80%, but with a very low interview score easily overall falls into the hundreds of applicants with a mediocre combined MAT/interview score, so it isn't really shocking that people with 80-85% have been rejected this year, even considering the fact that the 'average' was lower this year (generally the top 10-20% of the scorers on the MAT are affected less by the difficulty of the MAT paper, compared to the average applicant).

Reply 2162

gavinlowe

Original post by hilbert_spaces

Maybe I shouldn't apply at all, as the tutor said in the interview.

I'm sure the tutor didn't mean to imply that. If you were short-listed, then it means that you made a strong application.

Reply 2163

hilbert_spaces

Original post by gavinlowe

I'm sure the tutor didn't mean to imply that. If you were short-listed, then it means that you made a strong application.

I applied as a student studying at another university. The tutor said I should apply to a Masters degree or a second bachelor's degree 2-3 years later instead. Teaching me from the start would be problematic as I have already mastered the material, although I said we can discuss more advanced material in the tutorial.

Otherwise I can't see why I was rejected. A lot of people with 40,50 MAT got in. My MAT was certainly 70+ and I solved all interview problems (around 5 questions).

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 2164

hilbert_spaces

Original post by seohyun

"Maybe I shouldn't apply at all, as the tutor said in the interview."
Did the tutor actually say that?

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk

Nope, he didn't say exactly this. He said I should apply for a masters or a second bachelors degree as he didn't want to teach me first year material again. Well, I did plan to skip the first year lectures though.

Reply 2165

Noble.

Original post by gavinlowe

That's not true. Three candidates with a score of 80+ failed to get a place (considering Maths and CS together). I'm sure there were very good reasons in each case. (I think you're misinterpreting the Maths report, although I agree it isn't very clear; I think the column marked "85" means 81-85, for example.)

Sometimes it becomes clear in interviews that a candidate is not as good as their MAT score suggests.

It's not true in general, although this year nobody with 90%+ was rejected.

Thanks for clarifying Gavin. Yes, the way they've done the graph isn't intuitively clear really.

Reply 2166

fluteflute

Original post by gavinlowe

(I think you're misinterpreting the Maths report, although I agree it isn't very clear; I think the column marked "85" means 81-85, for example.)

Original post by Noble.

Thanks for clarifying Gavin. Yes, the way they've done the graph isn't intuitively clear really.

Agreed!

Reply 2167

Noble.

Original post by hilbert_spaces

Really sorry you got rejected, it's pretty obvious you would've been good enough to do maths here. Having said that, I do see where the tutor is coming from, you wouldn't have got as much out of it as someone else starting from scratch, and your very good MAT score may have not been looked at in such a good light on account of the fact you're a current undergrad.

Reply 2168

hilbert_spaces

Original post by NewtonsApple

Well failing to solve one logic question shouldn't make that big a difference as you also have other interview problems.

I guess you are right. The tutors are harsher with gap year applicants. Haha I also disappointed my friends at Oxford. They expected me to do a startup with them.

Well, we have no choice but to move on. I have to worry about my GPA again haha. TBH, I really don't like the education system in which students have 1-4 exams every week.

Reply 2169

Blutooth

Original post by Noble.

I know, it's ridiculous isn't it. These tutors who say they don't want to teach someone who has done a first year somewhere else are just being hypocritical. It's not because they don't think the student will get as much out of it as someone who hasn't done university but rather that they disagree with candidates jumping from one uni to another. Yet, when you consider the no. of people who change course while at Oxford and the fact that Oxford should have its sole commitment to bringing in excellent candidates then you realise these tutors are seriously in the wrong. They are completely stupid and acting with prejudice. They should not be allowed to make such decisions because Oxford's sole commitment is to accept the best candidates. Period.

Reply 2170

hilbert_spaces

Original post by Noble.

I applied for computer science, but I planned to go to maths lectures and engage in research in first year and then come back to computer science courses in second year.

I completely understand what you said although I don't really agree students starting from the scratch can get more out of it. Some students in US take advanced maths courses such as measure theory etc. in their first year. I think what the students finally learn is more important. Apparently I can learn a lot by engaging in research and going to lectures, like the maths courses or advanced cs courses, that can benefit me.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 2171

gavinlowe

Original post by hilbert_spaces

I applied as a student studying at another university. The tutor said I should apply to a Masters degree or a second bachelor's degree 2-3 years later instead.

Ah, I see. That does make quite a big difference. It does mean that you would get less out of the degree than other students, and that a Master's degree would suit you better.

Teaching me from the start would be problematic as I have already mastered the material, although I said we can discuss more advanced material in the tutorial.

That's easier said than done, as nearly all tutorials involve more than one student: it's unlikely that your tutorial partner would want to spend much of the tutorial discussing more advanced material.

Otherwise I can't see why I was rejected. A lot of people with 40,50 MAT got in. My MAT was certainly 70+ and I solved all interview problems (around 5 questions).

Reply 2172

pringle123

what graph/PDF is this please? i looked back in the thread a bit but couldn't find anything :/

Reply 2173

NewtonsApple

Original post by hilbert_spaces

Arr lol, while Oxford interviews were very enjoyable (apart from the logic question!), I preferred the Trinity maths interviews if I'm honest, much more challenging and interesting. I guess I can only expect to be rejected by Oxford, since Warwick and Oxford are in a similar league, after choosing to not re-apply to Cambridge. I sent an email to the Oxford maths department regarding whether or not I should apply, and this was their response:

"
The gap year policy is much the same as deferred entry, in that we would expect applicants to be undertaking structured activity and developing their mathematical knowledge. You would be welcome to apply in the next admission round but you will have to start again in the first year and therefore need to consider if the financial implication of an extra year at University, repeating much the same work, will be of any benefit to you when you are already studying at a highly regarded university. All applicants are teated the same and the admission cirteria, if you did decide to apply, would be A*A*A at A Level. You would need to sit the MAT test in November and if you score well enough would be invited to interview. "

From the email it seems they don't have any issues with gap year applicants studying at Warwick for the gap year, and given I was happy with the financial and academic implications, I'm not sure why I was rejected.

I guess it may be because of what you mentioned about the tutors opinion being different. Anyhow I would be interested to hear what the admission feedback will be. Maybe they simply didn't find me 'teachable' or good at logic questions! Overall not too sure.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 2174

fluteflute

Original post by pringle123

what graph/PDF is this please? i looked back in the thread a bit but couldn't find anything :/

https://www.maths.ox.ac.uk/system/files/attachments/Mathsgroup_feedback_2013.pdf

Reply 2175

SherlockHolmes

Original post by Noble.

Did you get an offer from Oxford? :smile:

Unfortunately not :frown:

I was happy to receive an interview let alone an offer to be honest. My firm choice is now Imperial, so I'm not too disappointed.

Reply 2176

Noble.

Original post by NewtonsApple

Arr lol, while Oxford interviews were very enjoyable (apart from the logic question!), I preferred the Trinity maths interviews if I'm honest, much more of a challenge. I guess I can only expect to be rejected by with Oxford, since Warwick and Oxford are in the same league, after choosing to not re-apply to Cambridge. I sent an email to the Oxford maths department regarding whether or not I should apply, and this was their response:

"
The gap year policy is much the same as deferred entry, in that we would expect applicants to be undertaking structured activity and developing their mathematical knowledge. You would be welcome to apply in the next admission round but you will have to start again in the first year and therefore need to consider if the financial implication of an extra year at University, repeating much the same work, will be of any benefit to you when you are already studying at a highly regarded university. All applicants are teated the same and the admission cirteria, if you did decide to apply, would be A*A*A at A Level. You would need to sit the MAT test in November and if you score well enough would be invited to interview. "

From the email it seems they don't have any issues with gap year applicants studying at Warwick for the gap year, and given I was happy with the financial and academic implications, I'm not sure why I was rejected.

I guess it may be because of what you mentioned about the tutors opinion being different. Anyhow I would be interested to hear what the admission feedback will be. Maybe they simply didn't find me 'teachable' or good at logic questions, something like that; overall not too sure.

Slightly unfair to compare Oxford's interview process to that used by Trinity, Cambridge - given that Trinity's interviews are noticeably harder than other college interviews in Cambridge (and even their pre-interview test is easily more challenging than STEP).

I do find it surprising both you and hilbert_spaces were rejected, you both seemed to be exceptional applicants. I think at least part of the issue is that if you're already an undergrad studying maths, they're clearly going to expect a higher performance in the MAT (considering they already expect a higher performance for gap year students who aren't undergrads). I'm purely speculating here, but it might be that they'd expect a score of 80+ from a Warwick 1st year undergrad, even though this seems a bit silly considering you're not very far into the degree when you take the MAT. They might also expect a better interview performance, or realise that you'd probably sail through a standard post-AS interview and they try and give you more difficult problems. Either way, a big issue with it does seem to be standardisation. Clearly, compared to other applicants, you did very well on the MAT - but once they take into consideration the expected higher score on the MAT, and perhaps a more difficult interview (or expected high score on the interview) it makes it difficult for people in your situation to get an offer without pretty much doing incredibly well on both the MAT and in the interviews.

Reply 2177

Noble.

Original post by SherlockHolmes

Unfortunately not :frown:

I was happy to receive an interview let alone an offer to be honest. My firm choice is now Imperial, so I'm not too disappointed.

Sorry to hear that.

I'm glad you had the chance to have an interview though, the whole interview process is quite interesting and somewhat beneficial regardless of whether you get an offer or not. A lot of the 'typical' graduate jobs for mathematicians (Trading, IB, GCHQ) have rather intense interview processes that the Oxbridge interview procedure does a good job of 'preparing' you for.

Reply 2178

alexmufc1995

Original post by fluteflute

https://www.maths.ox.ac.uk/system/files/attachments/Mathsgroup_feedback_2013.pdf

Greg, I got in at Pembroke!!! Your Math/Phil applicant has come good in the end :wink:

Thanks for being so nice and welcoming during the interview period; it really helped to calm my nerves before the onslaught.

Good luck with the rest of this year, hopefully I'll see you around sometime :smile:

Reply 2179

fluteflute