Any one doing archi/ going to St John/ come from Australia?
College: St John's
Subject: Architecture
Conditions: Overall 40, HL 766, achieved in 2014 Nov Exam

Reply 644

maya_fooks

Original post by cerlohee

Yes! Won't let me post it here but it's called "queens' college cambridge undergraduate offer holders 2015" :smile:

Sorry I think you've mentioned but I can't remember what you've applied for??

Posted from TSR Mobile

Great

and I ve apllied for PBS (psychology and beheavioural science), What did you apply for?

Reply 645

maya_fooks

Original post by Esther Negbenose

Me at Corpus! :smile:

Its great to find someone else! Its such a small course! :smile:

Reply 646

Zero to Hero

Well finally a Cambridge offer and I know I should be really happy. But I’m not. The problem is that the offer is much more difficult than I was expecting, not just because the grades were higher than the Handbook indicated but because it was specified what the A*s had to be in.

But looking on TSR I am not alone. Some people have been given the typical offer as stated in the handbook for a subject while others have been given higher offers and some where specific grades are asked for specific subjects which makes it much more difficult to achieve.
I know Cambridge can ask whoever, whatever they like but Cambridge go to great lengths to demonstrate how fair the entry system is e.g they say the pooling system is designed to mean that people of equally high ability get offers irrespective of the college applied to. Yet if they then ask some people to achieve higher academic qualifications than others to do the same course at the same college, how can that be fair and ensure that similarly cleaver people get places?

Over the last few days I have been feeling more upset about this. First, the Handbook makes out that a A*A* A is typical for Sciences and A*AA typical for Arts. But this is misleading. You only have to look at the offers on TSR to see that they are MINIMUMS not typical offers and that some people get much much tougher offers for the same place than others.

Cambridge go to great lengths to explain what they look at in deciding to give an offer yet don’t even mention the likelihood of very different offers for the same subject let alone justifying it or explaining WHY some people are given offers lower than others. I am left wondering if they ask for a more difficult offer because some people go to Private school?, or are internationals?, or they didn’t like them but looked good on paper? or because one person wanted them and another didn’t so the compromise was a high offer. I just don’t know because I have NEVER seen anything where Cambridge has explained why it gives lower offers to some and not others.

The other issue I have is the way some offers are structured to be harder to achieve than the headline offer at first appears. Not only my experience , but I have noticed from the offers on TSR a tendency for Cambridge to specify say two A*s but where one is say Physics and the other Further Maths. Because everyone taking FM takes core Maths, to specify a A* in FM but not core Maths is really an offer of three A*s not two because nobody gets an A* in FM and not core Maths , and they know it (I think it is underhand). By specifying which grades are required in which subjects is a way of raising the offer difficulty without it looking like it.

I just cannot understand how a system that purports to be transparent and attempts to give places to the best people can justify giving out lower offers to some and not others.

If you are in this position, I would love to know how you feel about it. Even those with low offers where specific grades are not attached , I would be interested how you feel about being given a place with the need for lower academic qualifications (apart from very lucky).

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 647

username1632185

I know how you feel. After being pooled for NatSci and re interviewed, my son has been given four stars to achieve. This is way above what even that particular college say on their website that they could offer, and definitely the highest offer I've seen on TSR. No way of finding out why either, and I don't want him killing himself to achieve these grades when he has four other top class offers. Certainly taken the shine off, what should have been, a great result.

Reply 648

Thorsas

Original post by Zero to Hero

My offer is A*A*A*, but to be fair my college Magdalene seem to have given quite a few of those to NatScis and Meds.

I think I can still hit the offer but I have to admit if it was A*A*A I'd be near 100% sure and it would be nicer. When I first got it I thought it might be something like, they liked me, but thought I didn't work hard enough (which I believe is true ;P) and wanted to push me if I wanted in. But it seems they gave that offer to quite a few. I think Cambridge justify this since a high percentage of applicants meeting their offers get 3 A* anyway as far as I remember. Perhaps also I thought it could be because my relevant UMS average (93%) is a bit on the low side vs other offer holders - but then, not that far on the low side after all.

I agree with you though, I'm not overly annoyed, but I think 2 A* vs 3 A* is a bit of an arbitrary boundary and if you attain either of those you've got a pretty damn good understanding of what you're doing, so I don't see why they would bother with the offer. Added to that, at least on the CCEA Board I take, exams in the past ~2 years have had a perceivable step up in difficulty vs earlier exams because the specification has been around since 2008 and they're under pressure to force differentiation at the top. I seem to remember when they introduced A* grades that oxbridge assured people that exactly this - ludicrous offers where academic boundaries blur - wouldn't happen. They have.

I'm flattered for the offer and will try to meet it all the same, but I don't really understand their thinking in asking me to get what really will come down to an additional 5-15 marks than I might've got had I been able to "shift focus" for just 2 A*. Maybe Cambridge are trying to prod the exam boards to make things even harder at the top.

Reply 649

Goods

Original post by Tangletoo

I know lots of people who applied and didn't get offers who got 4 A*'s, my brother included. I was pooled last year. If cambridge are unsure about an applicant they'll of course they'll give them a harder offer to make sure that they are what they want, equally they give low offers to applicants they really want. Anyway it's not like having 4A*'s is a-typical for a NatSci and the workload required to do so is significantly less that what he'll get when he starts.

Reply 650

BrainDrain

Original post by Tangletoo

This does seem very unfair and almost impossible to achieve, and I agree it must feel like giving with one hand and taking away with the other. Surely after all the hurdles guys go through to even be considered for a place, once these are met it should be a level playing field for all. I does surprise me also that offers often stipulate obtaining A*grades in subjects that are irrelevant to what is applied for, but that's Cambridge I guess...... I wish your son all the best wherever he goes to university

Reply 651

username1632185

Original post by Goods

True. I take your point.

I think their words were something along the line of, 'This is easily within your capabilities, so don't worry about it,' and they did offer there and then at re interview, I just don't want it to act as a psychological barrier for him. Of course, it will probably do the opposite, knowing his competitive personality.

Reply 652

colourthesunset

Hello! Offer from Newnham to read English!! A*AA x

Reply 653

Zero to Hero

Original post by Tangletoo

The issue to me isn't about whether it is achievable, it is that not everyone is being asked to achieve it. It is about fairness and transparency.

Reply 654

Zero to Hero

Original post by Goods

Surely they would believe that someone they are "sure" about was more likely to achieve higher grades than those they are "not sure " about.
If everyone was set the same academic hurdle then the best able would cross it and those who weren't would not.

What is the logic of raising the bar for those they believe are the less able and lowering it for the most able , if that is what you believe they do.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 655

IesIicules

Original post by JamesJL

College: Corpus Christi
Subject: English
Conditions: A*AA

Any other Corpus offer holders? Also, if you have an offer from any of the central colleges - you'll be near me :smile:

Did your offer appear on track yet?

Reply 656

Doones

Original post by Zero to Hero

xxx

And some colleges seem to be worse than others. Apparently Catz is asking A*A*A for Sciences despite their website stating:

"At present the typical conditional offer for applicants to Cambridge courses in science is A*A*A, and for arts and humanities subjects A*AA. However, the St Catharine's 'typical' A-level offer for candidates who apply in autumn 2014 will be A*AA in all subjects"

http://www.caths.cam.ac.uk/home/?m=page&id=208

Reply 657

Goods

Original post by Zero to Hero

The fact of the matter is the bar as already arbitrarily low, nearly everyone doing science exceeds their offer and i'd guess the same is true for a large proportion of arts applicants.

They only want applicants who are very able/teachable. Your marks show how able you are your interviews how teachable. If your marks were high but interviews slightly below par it seems only sensible to give a high offer as a check and balance on confirming that you are able to achieve high academic results as you many not get as much out of supervisions. If you come off as thinking in a way that makes you more teachable then they can give you an easier offer as they already believe you would do well in the supervision environment.