Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Section Leader
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Section Leader
    Clearing and Applications Advisor
    (Original post by User1014865)
    University of Essex, BSc Biochemistry, 2.1 (67%)

    Because Essex isn't the best uni, would Cambridge expect a First?
    You should also join this thread for potential or actual postgrad applicants to Cambridge
    http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show....php?t=4207500
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Just a note, as previously mentioned, I was an Essex student and my requirements stated that I needed a 2.1. It didn't specify 67% etc.

    I do think this is dependent on the course you are applying for though.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jneill)
    Average offer rate across all preceeding universities prior to applying for a Cambridge masters is 36%. For Essex specifically it's 24%, so a bit lower but by no means insurmountable...

    Sussex (non RG) has an Offer rate of 40%

    Raw FOI
    https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/reque...applications_2

    Spreadsheet
    http://bit.ly/CambridgeMastersCrozierData

    Edit: just to add TSR's own view of the question:
    http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/wiki...or_postgrad.3F
    "The admissions tutors will be able to pick out the best students wherever you did your undergraduate studies."
    Sussex and Essex are decent uni's though. I can't view the spreadsheet right now, but what's the rate for Cardiff Metropolitan? Or similar level unis.
    • Section Leader
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Section Leader
    Clearing and Applications Advisor
    (Original post by Twinpeaks)
    Sussex and Essex are decent uni's though. I can't view the spreadsheet right now, but what's the rate for Cardiff Metropolitan?
    OP was asking about Essex.

    Cardiff Met had no applicants in the 4 years in the FOI.
    However London Met had 39 applicants with a 13% offer rate.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jneill)
    OP was asking about Essex.

    Cardiff Met had no applicants in the 4 years in the FOI.
    However London Met had 39 applicants with a 13% offer rate.

    That is completely irrelevant. I was purely responding to your post that "the university doesn't matter". Essex uni doesn't enter this. I've already stated on here that Essex is a good university.

    And do you think that that 13% were typically representative of the London Met population? Or do you think they have something to offer above and beyond, that made them particularly stand out? Be careful in how you interpret stats.


    By saying that "the university does not matter", you are saying that if two applicants had the exact same experience, same results, same undergraduate course, but with one coming from London Met, and one from UCL, that if one is chosen over the other, then that is completely random?
    • Section Leader
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Section Leader
    Clearing and Applications Advisor
    (Original post by Twinpeaks)
    That is completely irrelevant. I was purely responding to your post that "the university doesn't matter". Essex uni doesn't enter this. I've already stated on here that Essex is a good university.

    And do you think that that 13% were typically representative of the London Met population? Or do you think they have something to offer above and beyond, that made them particularly stand out? Be careful in how you interpret stats.


    By saying that "the university does not matter", you are saying that if two applicants had the exact same experience, same results, same undergraduate course, but with one coming from London Met, and one from UCL, that if one is chosen over the other, then that is completely random?
    Are you saying that if two good students with exact same course, marks etc the one from UCL would get the offer vs the London Met student? Why? Why wouldn't both get the offer?

    Where's your evidence the UCL student would get preference?

    You are perpetuating the similar myth that undergrad applicants have to be from prestigious schools to succeed at Oxbridge. It's rubbish...
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jneill)
    Are you saying that if two good students with exact same course, marks etc the one would get the offer vs the Londn Met student? Why? Why wouldn't both get the offer?

    Where's your evidence the UCL student would get preference?

    You are perpetuating the similar myth that undergrads have to be from prestigious schools to succeed at Oxbridge. It's rubbish...
    Hypothetically if only one could receive an offer.

    I'm afraid that is not true The stats speak for themselves! And again, not just prestigious schools, but schools which aren't bottom of the ranks.

    My evidence would simply be the acceptance rate for the UCL applicants compared with the London Met applicants, which are more than double :rofl:
    • Section Leader
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Section Leader
    Clearing and Applications Advisor
    (Original post by Twinpeaks)
    Hypothetically if only one could receive an offer.

    I'm afraid that is not true The stats speak for themselves! And again, not just prestigious schools, but schools which aren't bottom of the ranks.

    My evidence would simply be the acceptance rate for the UCL applicants compared with the London Met applicants, which are more than double :rofl:
    Hypothetically doesn't happen. A good student will get an offer.

    It's quite possible the LondonMet applicants, as a group, where of lower quality, but that should not prevent (or more importantly discourage) a "good" LondonMet student from applying.

    In exactly the same way that good applicants from "poorer" schools should be encouraged to apply for undergrad.

    Don't perpetuate the myths.

    Edit: tagging threeportdrift for their view... (The contention being that "prestige" of the undergrad university is an "important" consideration when Cambridge is giving offers for postgrad courses.)
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jneill)
    Hypothetically doesn't happen. A good student will get an offer.

    It's quite possible the LondonMet applicants, as a group, where of lower quality, but that should not prevent (or more importantly discourage) a "good" LondonMet student from applying.

    In exactly the same way that good applicants from "poorer" schools should be encouraged to apply for undergrad.

    Don't perpetuate the myths.
    It's not the same as your poorer schools example at all, due to standardisation. An A-level from a poor school is the same as an A-level from a top school in terms of standards.

    However the standards and expectations of universities vary in accordance with the quality of the institution. There is no standardisation.

    Exam boards at universities review quality of work in accordance with universities of comparable quality. I.e a degree at a prestigious uni is harder than a degree at a low uni. A degree at Cambridge would be a lot more academically challenging than a degree at London Met.

    I'm sorry but you're talking rubbish. You are tying to push an agenda that is completely wrong, for whatever personal reason. I am not perpetuating a myth, I'm stating sheer fact. I know for a fact that a degree course at Cambridge would have required more work than my own degree course at Cardiff University. And similarly I know that my course was more academically challenging than the same course at London Met.

    Stop being PC or creating biases for your own self serving purpose, and accept the truth!

    And why do you think another TSR poster has any value to me? So petty.
    I can show you emails from my University Proffessor who has a PhD from Cambridge University which basically supports my view. I'll take his opinion above someone like you any day. You know nothing. Who are you to tell me what is and is not the case?
    • Section Leader
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Section Leader
    Clearing and Applications Advisor
    (Original post by Twinpeaks)
    It's not the same as your poorer schools example at all, due to standardisation. An A-level from a poor school is the same as an A-level from a top school in terms of standards.

    However the standards and expectations of universities vary in accordance with the quality of the institution. There is no standardisation.

    Exam boards at universities review quality of work in accordance with universities of comparable quality. I.e a degree at a prestigious uni is harder than a degree at a low uni. A degree at Cambridge would be a lot more academically challenging than a degree at London Met.

    I'm sorry but you're talking rubbish. You are tying to push an agenda that is completely wrong, for whatever personal reason. I am not perpetuating a myth, I'm stating sheer fact. I know for a fact that a degree course at Cambridge would have required more work than my own degree course at Cardiff University. And similarly I know that my course was more academically challenging than the same course at London Met.

    Stop being PC or creating biases for your own self serving purpose, and accept the truth!
    If that was a fact why does LondonMet have 12% not 0%.

    Why do you want to talk down students from your own uni vs RGs? It's just bizarre? Do you regret not going to an RG? Why not apply to Cambridge for postgrad? If you are a good student from CardiffMet then give it a shot.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jneill)
    If that was a fact why does LondonMet have 12% not 0%.

    Why do you want to talk down students from your own uni vs RGs? It's just bizarre? Do you regret not going to an RG? Why not apply to Cambridge for postgrad? If you are a good student from CardiffMet then give it a shot.
    I'm not from Cardiff Met, I'm from Cardiff Uni. I'm not wanting to talk down my uni, but I just recognise that whilst my uni is harder than other universities, equally my course at Cambridge will have been a lot more challenging than at Cardiff.

    I just know it.
    • Section Leader
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Section Leader
    Clearing and Applications Advisor
    (Original post by Twinpeaks)
    I'm not from Cardiff Met, I'm from Cardiff Uni. I'm not wanting to talk down my uni, but I just recognise that whilst my uni is harder than other universities, equally my course at Cambridge will have been a lot more challenging than at Cardiff.

    I just know it.
    The other factor is it's relatively much easier to get a Cambridge postgrad offer than undergrad.

    So, again, don't discourage applicants from "less good" universities. If they are good enough they will get an offer. In your hypothetical situation (let's say they had Firsts) both would get the offer... I just know it.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jneill)
    The other factor is it's relatively much easier to get a Cambridge postgrad offer than undergrad.

    So, again, don't discourage applicants from "less good" universities. If they are good enough they will get an offer. In your hypothetical situation (let's say they had Firsts) both would get the offer... I just know it.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I just disagree I don't know anyone who's ever gone to Cambridge from Cardiff. I didn't get a First but I had a near miss (69% :emo: ) and I wouldn't even bother applying there tbh. I know it'd be pointless me even trying.

    I don't want to discourage the OP though, he sent me a personal message and he has a cracking CV and I therefore think he stands a solid chance.
    • Section Leader
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Section Leader
    Clearing and Applications Advisor
    (Original post by Twinpeaks)
    I just disagree I don't know anyone who's ever gone to Cambridge from Cardiff. I didn't get a First but I had a near miss (69% :emo: ) and I wouldn't even bother applying there tbh. I know it'd be pointless me even trying.

    I don't want to discourage the OP though, he sent me a personal message and he has a cracking CV and I therefore think he stands a solid chance.
    Cardiff Uni has a 31% Cambridge masters offer rate.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jneill)
    Are you saying that if two good students with exact same course, marks etc the one from UCL would get the offer vs the London Met student? Why? Why wouldn't both get the offer?

    Where's your evidence the UCL student would get preference?

    You are perpetuating the similar myth that undergrad applicants have to be from prestigious schools to succeed at Oxbridge. It's rubbish...
    Standard of marks /grades, degree classes varies a LOT from one university to another.
    A first from Oxbridge or top RG uni is very different from that of less prestigious uni.
    Just as one example, the master's my daughter did at a uni in London was very competitive course and they usually accept students who got a first from top universities (according to their admission office) even their website says only 2.1 is required. My daughter only had a high-2.1 when she contacted them to find info about the requirement but was told it should be fine as she's from Cambridge.

    I'm not saying same thing applies to all pg courses at all universities, but one thing I can say with certainty is a degree class front one university is not always same as the same class from another uni. And people who assess application know that. Degree classification is not like public exams like A-levels. They are not standardised across universities. because there's no standardisation of course contents/quality like national exam system like A-levels.
    I've heard of some people who dropped out of top RG uni (including Oxbridge) because they were struggling academically and transferred to lower- ranking (sorry I hate this term but can't think of better one atm) uni and easily became one of the top dogs in their year group.
    • Community Assistant
    • CV Helper
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    CV Helper
    (Original post by Twinpeaks)
    Hypothetically if only one could receive an offer.

    I'm afraid that is not true The stats speak for themselves! And again, not just prestigious schools, but schools which aren't bottom of the ranks.

    My evidence would simply be the acceptance rate for the UCL applicants compared with the London Met applicants, which are more than double :rofl:
    (Original post by jneill)
    Hypothetically doesn't happen. A good student will get an offer.

    It's quite possible the LondonMet applicants, as a group, where of lower quality, but that should not prevent (or more importantly discourage) a "good" LondonMet student from applying.

    In exactly the same way that good applicants from "poorer" schools should be encouraged to apply for undergrad.

    Don't perpetuate the myths.

    Edit: tagging threeportdrift for their view... (The contention being that "prestige" of the undergrad university is an "important" consideration when Cambridge is giving offers for postgrad courses.)
    In my experience (which is as a mature student doing a Masters and subsequently (unintentionally) a PhD at Cambridge, and remaining close to the College system in particular...

    Cambridge is ruthless and very focussed on academic excellence. The reason more people get into postgrad degrees from RG and 'prestigious' universities is that, it is the majority case that academic excellence starts early and is retained, so bright GCSE students get good A levels and get into the most academically strong universities and are therefore more competitive in terms of quality and number in the applicant pool to Cambridge.

    However, I come back to my first point, they are ruthless about finding academic excellence and they understand that there are late bloomers, people with professional experience, and a whole series of unique journeys in life, and they are prepared to look at them all. So if you have genuinely aced a high first at an otherwise completely unspectacular university, then your application will be looked at just as seriously as the first from UCL. Like undergrad applications, they take great care to look at PG applications holistically.

    Then you have to look at the nature of the course. So some courses, such as the Economics and Judge courses lend themselves to armfuls of Oxbridge, LSE, Ivy League high performers, and so the courses are jammed with them. They have all the advantages of outstanding academics, endless reference points to make a strong research proposal, references from international reputed academics and the background of institutions that deliver successful candidates (something often overlooked). That simply does make you a stronger candidate that someone from a Uni with a research proposal that is OK, but not sophisticated, good references from a Professor of only national impact, and when the Uni has no established history of successful candidates.

    Cambridge have to have some determinants of academic excellence, and the success of your previous institution in offering successful candidates is a factor. As an example, I applied for a Masters with BDE at A level, a 2.2 in an irrelevant subject and no academic history for over 15 years. However, I had relevant professional expertise, and specifically was being sponsored by my employer with a record of never having had a sponsored student fail in over 40 years.

    So yes, the stats will show a much higher proportion of PG places go to students applying from world class institutions. But it that absolutely doesn't mean that you don't stand any chance if you come from some academic backwater or another unique route, but stand head and shoulders above the average and can hold your own in the academic environment of Cambridge.
    • Section Leader
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Section Leader
    Clearing and Applications Advisor
    (Original post by threeportdrift)
    In my experience (which is as a mature student doing a Masters and subsequently (unintentionally) a PhD at Cambridge, and remaining close to the College system in particular...

    Cambridge is ruthless and very focussed on academic excellence. The reason more people get into postgrad degrees from RG and 'prestigious' universities is that, it is the majority case that academic excellence starts early and is retained, so bright GCSE students get good A levels and get into the most academically strong universities and are therefore more competitive in terms of quality and number in the applicant pool to Cambridge.

    However, I come back to my first point, they are ruthless about finding academic excellence and they understand that there are late bloomers, people with professional experience, and a whole series of unique journeys in life, and they are prepared to look at them all. So if you have genuinely aced a high first at an otherwise completely unspectacular university, then your application will be looked at just as seriously as the first from UCL. Like undergrad applications, they take great care to look at PG applications holistically.

    Then you have to look at the nature of the course. So some courses, such as the Economics and Judge courses lend themselves to armfuls of Oxbridge, LSE, Ivy League high performers, and so the courses are jammed with them. They have all the advantages of outstanding academics, endless reference points to make a strong research proposal, references from international reputed academics and the background of institutions that deliver successful candidates (something often overlooked). That simply does make you a stronger candidate that someone from a Uni with a research proposal that is OK, but not sophisticated, good references from a Professor of only national impact, and when the Uni has no established history of successful candidates.

    Cambridge have to have some determinants of academic excellence, and the success of your previous institution in offering successful candidates is a factor. As an example, I applied for a Masters with BDE at A level, a 2.2 in an irrelevant subject and no academic history for over 15 years. However, I had relevant professional expertise, and specifically was being sponsored by my employer with a record of never having had a sponsored student fail in over 40 years.

    So yes, the stats will show a much higher proportion of PG places go to students applying from world class institutions. But it that absolutely doesn't mean that you don't stand any chance if you come from some academic backwater or another unique route, but stand head and shoulders above the average and can hold your own in the academic environment of Cambridge.
    Thanks for the very useful insight

    Much appreciated.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by threeportdrift)
    In my experience (which is as a mature student doing a Masters and subsequently (unintentionally) a PhD at Cambridge, and remaining close to the College system in particular...

    Cambridge is ruthless and very focussed on academic excellence. The reason more people get into postgrad degrees from RG and 'prestigious' universities is that, it is the majority case that academic excellence starts early and is retained, so bright GCSE students get good A levels and get into the most academically strong universities and are therefore more competitive in terms of quality and number in the applicant pool to Cambridge.

    However, I come back to my first point, they are ruthless about finding academic excellence and they understand that there are late bloomers, people with professional experience, and a whole series of unique journeys in life, and they are prepared to look at them all. So if you have genuinely aced a high first at an otherwise completely unspectacular university, then your application will be looked at just as seriously as the first from UCL. Like undergrad applications, they take great care to look at PG applications holistically.

    Then you have to look at the nature of the course. So some courses, such as the Economics and Judge courses lend themselves to armfuls of Oxbridge, LSE, Ivy League high performers, and so the courses are jammed with them. They have all the advantages of outstanding academics, endless reference points to make a strong research proposal, references from international reputed academics and the background of institutions that deliver successful candidates (something often overlooked). That simply does make you a stronger candidate that someone from a Uni with a research proposal that is OK, but not sophisticated, good references from a Professor of only national impact, and when the Uni has no established history of successful candidates.

    Cambridge have to have some determinants of academic excellence, and the success of your previous institution in offering successful candidates is a factor. As an example, I applied for a Masters with BDE at A level, a 2.2 in an irrelevant subject and no academic history for over 15 years. However, I had relevant professional expertise, and specifically was being sponsored by my employer with a record of never having had a sponsored student fail in over 40 years.

    So yes, the stats will show a much higher proportion of PG places go to students applying from world class institutions. But it that absolutely doesn't mean that you don't stand any chance if you come from some academic backwater or another unique route, but stand head and shoulders above the average and can hold your own in the academic environment of Cambridge.
    Excellent post. Thank you for sharing your insight.
    PRSOM.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jneill)
    Thanks for the very useful insight

    Much appreciated.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    One day we really have to stop posting almost identical posts simultaneously............
    • Section Leader
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Section Leader
    Clearing and Applications Advisor
    (Original post by vincrows)
    One day we really have to stop posting almost identical posts simultaneously............
    That will be a sad day

    Posted from TSR Mobile
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.