This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- Family making me feel bad
- Do I have a chance at a top 5 uni with bad GCSEs but good alevels?
- Does anyone else relate?
- I achieved AABB for my AS levels- do I have a shot at Oxbridge/ RG unis for law?
- Glasgow or Manchester on teaching quality?
- LNAT 2024 prep
- Guardian/Daily Mail Uni/Times Rankings 2024
- Advice for a Canadian prospective Law student.
- LNAT
- Would these GCSE grades be acceptable to apply for oxbridge?
- how to better my university application
- Is it dumb to give up a LSE full tuition scholarship for Imperial College?
- Oxbridge Gcse's
- Teaching myself an A-Level course from home (Oxbridge Home Learning)
- CS A-level or Computing BTEC
- is arbito really worth it ?? LNAT
- My son says LSE is a top university....but it's ranked low?
- Which universities have the best modern language departments?
- law work experience + oxbridge programmes
- St Andrews vs Oxbridge
The Idiot's Guide to Getting into Oxbridge
Take it from an Oxford student and someone who's been very involved with the interview process. Oxbridge candidates are judged on two criteria and two criteria alone. The tutors let you in if:
1. You are intelligent.
2. They think they would enjoy teaching you.
Point no. 1 is the most important. The intelligence required is not the intelligence of the "i got 10 a stars and 5 a's at a-level" kind; it is a raw, base intelligence rather than a booksmart, swotty, revise-a-lot cleverness. They want people with a spark in them, innate brilliance.
Point number two is less important, but still incredibly useful. At the end of the day the same tutors will be in close personal supervision of you for at least a year; they want to be able to enjoy your company.
The only reason that point 2 is outweighed by point 1 is the "arsehole factor". That is someone who more than fulfils the criterion for intelligence set above, but carries with it an inflated ego and an arrogant, stuck up personality. Having had numerous conversations with tutors regarding candidates, the scenario they most fear is when the said arsehole is being considered. 90% of the time they feel that the superb intellect of the above mentioned a-hole is enough to merit a place.
It is also worth bearing in mind that the tutors already have about 75% of their intake selected before the interviews actually take place, and use them as a kind of "tidying-up" exercise to quality-check.
To hammer home the point, in my interviews, I told one tutor not to sleep that night as I was planning to shoot him as he lay, and turned up to another interview drunk, after less than 3 hours sleep. In my entrance exam i wrote about s&m fetishists.
1. You are intelligent.
2. They think they would enjoy teaching you.
Point no. 1 is the most important. The intelligence required is not the intelligence of the "i got 10 a stars and 5 a's at a-level" kind; it is a raw, base intelligence rather than a booksmart, swotty, revise-a-lot cleverness. They want people with a spark in them, innate brilliance.
Point number two is less important, but still incredibly useful. At the end of the day the same tutors will be in close personal supervision of you for at least a year; they want to be able to enjoy your company.
The only reason that point 2 is outweighed by point 1 is the "arsehole factor". That is someone who more than fulfils the criterion for intelligence set above, but carries with it an inflated ego and an arrogant, stuck up personality. Having had numerous conversations with tutors regarding candidates, the scenario they most fear is when the said arsehole is being considered. 90% of the time they feel that the superb intellect of the above mentioned a-hole is enough to merit a place.
It is also worth bearing in mind that the tutors already have about 75% of their intake selected before the interviews actually take place, and use them as a kind of "tidying-up" exercise to quality-check.
To hammer home the point, in my interviews, I told one tutor not to sleep that night as I was planning to shoot him as he lay, and turned up to another interview drunk, after less than 3 hours sleep. In my entrance exam i wrote about s&m fetishists.
Scroll to see replies
scum
Take it from an Oxford student and someone who's been very involved with the interview process. Oxbridge candidates are judged on two criteria and two criteria alone. The tutors let you in if:
1. You are intelligent.
2. They think they would enjoy teaching you.
Point no. 1 is the most important. The intelligence required is not the intelligence of the "i got 10 a stars and 5 a's at a-level" kind; it is a raw, base intelligence rather than a booksmart, swotty, revise-a-lot cleverness. They want people with a spark in them, innate brilliance.
1. You are intelligent.
2. They think they would enjoy teaching you.
Point no. 1 is the most important. The intelligence required is not the intelligence of the "i got 10 a stars and 5 a's at a-level" kind; it is a raw, base intelligence rather than a booksmart, swotty, revise-a-lot cleverness. They want people with a spark in them, innate brilliance.
Some people on this forum really need to learn this.
scum
It is also worth bearing in mind that the tutors already have about 75% of their intake selected before the interviews actually take place, and use them as a kind of "tidying-up" exercise to quality-check.
That surprises me.
scum
To hammer home the point, in my interviews, I told one tutor not to sleep that night as I was planning to shoot him as he lay, and turned up to another interview drunk, after less than 3 hours sleep. In my entrance exam i wrote about s&m fetishists.
Wow, did you get in?
What motivated you to do that?
kildare
Doesn't that go against everything you said previously?
no. because they can tell from what you yourself have written in your personal statement, and what your referee has written about you largely what you are like. They can then see you in the flesh to back this up, hence the "tidying-up" exercise.
You must realise that presented with a portfolio of 30 or so people to read through in mid october, 2 months before interviews, it is only human for tutors to express preferences.
In my personal statement i remember i put that when i grew up i wanted to be a dole scrounger, and that my ideal hobby was hibernation.
scum
no. because they can tell from what you yourself have written in your personal statement, and what your referee has written about you largely what you are like. They can then see you in the flesh to back this up, hence the "tidying-up" exercise.
You must realise that presented with a portfolio of 30 or so people to read through in mid october, 2 months before interviews, it is only human for tutors to express preferences.
In my personal statement i remember i put that when i grew up i wanted to be a dole scrounger, and that my ideal hobby was hibernation.
You must realise that presented with a portfolio of 30 or so people to read through in mid october, 2 months before interviews, it is only human for tutors to express preferences.
In my personal statement i remember i put that when i grew up i wanted to be a dole scrounger, and that my ideal hobby was hibernation.
*Name, subject and college of 'scum' censored*
Spark is the word!
I've had this theory for a while. Some people just do have that spark, and that's when you can get this big mental connection, where you are just zinging off one another's ideas. It's a rare thing... I've met 3 people in my life who've had it. All three are now at Oxbridge. On the other hand, I know a couple of people who are also at Oxbridge who don't have it, but work really hard and are naturally good at remembering things. So I guess it helps, but it's not necessary as such.
I've had this theory for a while. Some people just do have that spark, and that's when you can get this big mental connection, where you are just zinging off one another's ideas. It's a rare thing... I've met 3 people in my life who've had it. All three are now at Oxbridge. On the other hand, I know a couple of people who are also at Oxbridge who don't have it, but work really hard and are naturally good at remembering things. So I guess it helps, but it's not necessary as such.
scum
To hammer home the point, in my interviews, I told one tutor not to sleep that night as I was planning to shoot him as he lay, and turned up to another interview drunk, after less than 3 hours sleep. In my entrance exam i wrote about s&m fetishists.
To hammer home the point, in my interviews, I told one tutor not to sleep that night as I was planning to shoot him as he lay, and turned up to another interview drunk, after less than 3 hours sleep. In my entrance exam i wrote about s&m fetishists.
Isn't that just a contrived attempt to be quirky and different? It hardly demonstrates innate brilliance or suitability for a course, just idiocy.
emzie
why have the course/college scums at been censored?
I figured out who it was but then he told me to take his name off! He's not fibbing about S&M, dole queue etc, I'll fish out his statement for his Oxford form shortly...
scum
no. because they can tell from what you yourself have written in your personal statement, and what your referee has written about you largely what you are like. They can then see you in the flesh to back this up, hence the "tidying-up" exercise.
I'm not sure I believe this: most people intelligent enough and zestful enough to apply to Oxbridge will have a pretty good personal statement, and also how can they tell how much help you've had with it? And with regards to the teacher's reference, the admissions tutor of an Oxford college told me in person that he thought they were often fairly meaningless and they went much more on interview and written work/tests etc.
I certainly agree with the quirkiness thing. Of all the people who I met at interview the ones who got in tended to be the ones who I remembered as having a bit of personality rather than the rich-kids-in-suits brigade.
x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x
x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x
hildabeast
I certainly agree with the quirkiness thing. Of all the people who I met at interview the ones who got in tended to be the ones who I remembered as having a bit of personality rather than the rich-kids-in-suits brigade.
x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x
x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x
oxbridge dont care about references, they know that half the time they r made up by teachers from skools where they want as many as posible to go to oxbridge.
the interviewers make their own, real judgement when they see u.
Related discussions
- Family making me feel bad
- Do I have a chance at a top 5 uni with bad GCSEs but good alevels?
- Does anyone else relate?
- I achieved AABB for my AS levels- do I have a shot at Oxbridge/ RG unis for law?
- Glasgow or Manchester on teaching quality?
- LNAT 2024 prep
- Guardian/Daily Mail Uni/Times Rankings 2024
- Advice for a Canadian prospective Law student.
- LNAT
- Would these GCSE grades be acceptable to apply for oxbridge?
- how to better my university application
- Is it dumb to give up a LSE full tuition scholarship for Imperial College?
- Oxbridge Gcse's
- Teaching myself an A-Level course from home (Oxbridge Home Learning)
- CS A-level or Computing BTEC
- is arbito really worth it ?? LNAT
- My son says LSE is a top university....but it's ranked low?
- Which universities have the best modern language departments?
- law work experience + oxbridge programmes
- St Andrews vs Oxbridge
Latest
Trending
Last reply 3 weeks ago
Russell Group universities are actually very good. We should stop dismissing them.Last reply 1 month ago
HELP - How much extra reading is actually needed for oxbridge/RU/ top unis?Last reply 2 months ago
Recognition of UK Universities in Germany - Anabin Database Inquiry
