Cambridge University to introduce written admissions tests

If this isn't making sense, it's because I'm being particularly bad at making my point today, you're not missing anything profound!

Again, agreed. I am surprised that CAT was so blunt about the problem, because it identifies a fundamental flaw in the admissions process. Unless AT's are (implicitly) allowing for such bias, how can you select the best students for offer?

They, and the DoS, do allow for those differences.

Posted from TSR Mobile

If that's the case then differences caused by interviewer bias shouldn't be material, hence the analysis can be applied? Also, for the pool to work effectively, cross-college scores should be consistent. Hence, theoretically, this wouldn't impact any such study?

But the stats wouldn't compensate for it would they...? So in one set of cases it might look like 8s are a good indicator, whereas in another set it might be 7s...

Well how do they AT's compensate if they don't adjust the interview scores?

I guess by making the offer or rejection as necessary. There's no specific interview score needed. The interview is just one more set of data for them to consider, it doesn't necessarily make or break a given application.

Posted from TSR Mobile

I'm going to stop derailing the thread. I think we're all basically on the same page; it would be interesting to see how interview performance correlates with degree results, but appreciate that might be hard to determine

I guess by making the offer or rejection as necessary. There's no specific interview score needed. The interview is just one more set of data for them to consider, it doesn't necessarily make or break a given application.

Posted from TSR Mobile

But if the interview score was the prime reason for (a) rejecting an applicant or (b) accepting an applicant would you say it's reliable despite the absence of scientific evidence?

(I'm guessing here that there is an absence of scientific evidence).

There's rarely a single prime reason, they consider everything.

Anyway, ask an AT, not me

You are still doing it. "They consider everything".

Are they gods who do not have to conform to evidence-based reasoning?

Also, I don't know what an AT is.

One important point.
They are NOT doing interview to use it as an indicator for future performance (=Tripos) but BECAUSE it can shed a different light on an applicant in a way other aspects of application (like exam grades, PS/SAQ, reference, etc.) cannot do.

By meeting applicants face-to-face and probing them by interview, they are trying to find if they have ability to 'think' (rather than just being good at remembering what they were taught and at exam techniques), if they have flexibility of mind to accept and absorb new/different ideas on which they can build their own understandings/ideas, if they can engage and benefit from their unique style of teaching = supervisions.

http://www.undergraduate.study.cam.ac.uk/applying/interviews/what-do-interviews-involve

http://www.schools-online.co.uk/linlithgowacadem/applying_for_university/cambridge%20interviews.pdf

AFAIK A-level grades is the only piece of application aspect Cambridge has been saying they have found quite good correlation to future Tripos performance. But just using it will only tell them that they are 'good at exams.'
Interview score is another piece of jigsaw puzzle, along with other aspects of application, which helps the admission people to build a more complete picture of each candidate's genuine ability to 'think' and to see if they can benefit from studying at Cambridge.

If you Google, there're lots of articles with quotations by Oxbridge dons on their interview and what they're trying to find out from it....and you can understand it is NOT a correlation to future Tripos performance they're trying to deduct from interview performance. In a very simple term, they are trying to see how your brain works.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/universityeducation/10998008/Perfect-performance-unnecessary-in-Cambridge-interview.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/universityeducation/student-life/10380653/Oxford-interviews-Difficult-questions-explained.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/9550464/A-survivors-guide-to-the-Oxbridge-interview.html

Occurring at the same time but not causally related.

I know what coincidental means...
I was asking what factors you think were coincidental.

Why does the unavailabity of UMS mean interviews are not fit for purpose?.

If anything they become more important, not less. .

It doesn't and that's not what I said



Yes. Exactly right.

So what if interviews were unreliable in a significant number of cases? Well we do scientific research to show that they are a good indicator. We document our research and we publish it and everyone has confidence that nepotism and privilege are a thing of the past at Oxbridge.

So what if interviews were unreliable in a significant number of cases? Well we do scientific research to show that they are a good indicator. We document our research and we publish it and everyone has confidence that nepotism and privilege are a thing of the past at Oxbridge.

I agree in principle, but just to add: can you name me a university, college, school, employer or indeed institution of any kind which actually does this? Not that that should ever inhibit innovation but just saying: it would be pretty revolutionary.

Admissions Tutor.

They use evidence based reasoning hence the use of UMS, GCSE, TSA, etc. And now with the addition of these tests. They don't afaik use interviews to perform that function.

Also I'm sure this has been linked before but I'll link it again so you can see the evidence based methods they use:
http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/news/special/20110406/multiple-regression-study.pdf
(there are other papers too, but that one is a good start).

And to reiterate, this thread wasn't created about interviews - it is about the tests. If you want to continue to question Cambridge's use of interviews ask them in the Cambridge CAO (Central Admissions Office) thread
http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=3830287

But interviews are a make-or-break part of the selection process.