The Student Room Group

oxford uni requirements

why are there no 3 year courses for physics and chemistry and why is physics only A*AA not A*A*A like in chemistry.
Original post by patrick_horro
why are there no 3 year courses for physics and chemistry and why is physics only A*AA not A*A*A like in chemistry.


The chemistry course at Oxford has had a year long research based element for nearly 100 years, and it's an extremely effective way of giving students a taste of research, something which oxford wants to do, it's looking for the next generation of academics! That's why it maintains the four year masters and not a three year bachelors degree (i imagine similarly for physics)

The grade requirements for chemistry have risen to A*A*A relatively recently, this is more or less to keep them in line with the Natural Sciences course at Cambridge, for whatever reason the Physics department have decided not to raise the grade requirement (yet). In reality a very large proportion of Physics and Chemistry students at Oxford will achieve A level grades well above the entry requirement!
Reply 2
Original post by MexicanKeith
The chemistry course at Oxford has had a year long research based element for nearly 100 years, and it's an extremely effective way of giving students a taste of research, something which oxford wants to do, it's looking for the next generation of academics! That's why it maintains the four year masters and not a three year bachelors degree (i imagine similarly for physics)

The grade requirements for chemistry have risen to A*A*A relatively recently, this is more or less to keep them in line with the Natural Sciences course at Cambridge, for whatever reason the Physics department have decided not to raise the grade requirement (yet). In reality a very large proportion of Physics and Chemistry students at Oxford will achieve A level grades well above the entry requirement!


cheers for replying,do you know why physics stopped doing 3 year courses? Also, maths at oxford says you need A*A*A in Maths,F.Maths and whatever. but i also saw that if you don't take further maths like myself, they accept A*AA, with A* in normal maths. Is this true?
Original post by patrick_horro
cheers for replying,do you know why physics stopped doing 3 year courses? Also, maths at oxford says you need A*A*A in Maths,F.Maths and whatever. but i also saw that if you don't take further maths like myself, they accept A*AA, with A* in normal maths. Is this true?


Can't speak for the physics course, but I imagine they decided that to get the best physicists who could go on to do PhD or DPhil the four year masters was better.

I think realistically you'd be quite lucky to get a maths offer without further maths, not because they'd discriminate against you, but because you would have a lot less maths knowledge than you peers at interview. The oxford maths website says the standard offer is A*AA with A* in maths if you aren't doing further maths. But getting an offer in these circumstances would be tough.
Reply 4
Original post by patrick_horro
cheers for replying,do you know why physics stopped doing 3 year courses? Also, maths at oxford says you need A*A*A in Maths,F.Maths and whatever. but i also saw that if you don't take further maths like myself, they accept A*AA, with A* in normal maths. Is this true?


The university's admissions pages will be fully up-to-date with the grade requirements for the upcoming admissions cycle.

If you are considering applying for maths without further maths, the tutors may be interested to know why you haven't taken FM; it might cast doubt on your dedication to maths, as there are avenues to pursue FM even if your school doesn't offer it (e.g. through the FMSP). The maths admissions test is only based on content that you'll have covered in your A level maths lessons and a good score on that would, I'd imagine, put you in a strong position whether you are taking FM or not.

Differently from MexicanKeith's point about having less knowledge than your peers, I suspect you've spent less time "thinking mathematically" (a nebulous idea, I accept) than other applicants. If you're a very strong applicant, this won't harm your chances at all but if you're only a good applicant, the odds may be stacked against you.
Reply 5
Original post by MexicanKeith
Can't speak for the physics course, but I imagine they decided that to get the best physicists who could go on to do PhD or DPhil the four year masters was better.

I think realistically you'd be quite lucky to get a maths offer without further maths, not because they'd discriminate against you, but because you would have a lot less maths knowledge than you peers at interview. The oxford maths website says the standard offer is A*AA with A* in maths if you aren't doing further maths. But getting an offer in these circumstances would be tough.


I also saw the A*AA requirements hence why I was interested, (surprised it was lower than standard ones) surely applicants without further maths would need to get like A*A*A* in all subjects to make up for it. Not complaining though lol
Reply 6
Original post by patrick_horro
cheers for replying,do you know why physics stopped doing 3 year courses? Also, maths at oxford says you need A*A*A in Maths,F.Maths and whatever. but i also saw that if you don't take further maths like myself, they accept A*AA, with A* in normal maths. Is this true?


They do still do the 3-year BA but everyone applies initially for the MPhys - see
http://www2.physics.ox.ac.uk/study-here/undergraduates/the-courses.

I guess that's designed to make it clear that there is no difference in the selection process between the two degrees.
Reply 7
thank you very much been looking for an answer for ages, cheers
Original post by astro67
They do still do the 3-year BA but everyone applies initially for the MPhys - see
http://www2.physics.ox.ac.uk/study-here/undergraduates/the-courses.

I guess that's designed to make it clear that there is no difference in the selection process between the two degrees.

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending