Applying to Uni for 2024? Find your Uni here and chat with others! >>

This thread is closed

Damn the whole system!

I probably sound like an envious, churlish, graceless and ebittered fool but I am really losing faith in the whole university system (especially the OxBridge system). I mean I keep reading of people who get 100 A*s, 10As at A level, speak 15 languages and have written books on obscure subjects and still get rejected WITHOUT interview! I am just so sick of how arbitrary and random this whole system seems. What chance do we mere mortals have in this case (and I just want to get into a half decent university, I am not even thinking of oxbridge, but i have singled them out because they seem to be the pinnacle of this rotten system)? Also I think the idea that so much hinges on the strength of your AS grades is absurd. Exams are not a marker of intelligence, and they severely disadvantage those on harder exam boards, those at worse schools, those with worse teachers, and those who for whatever reason simply trip up in the single hour that 'tests' a years' worth of learning (they will tell you all manner of claptrap that "we just want to see how teachable you are, your AS grades are not the only thing we use", when in truth they have probably chucked out your application based entirely on your grades, before evevn reading your references and statement). I mean it's like the system is designed to make you fall. The idea for instance that we can only apply in autumn means that with what seems like a lottery, you only have one chance a year of getting into university. I am just so sick of reading of people who really seemed to at least deserve a chance (even if they do not get an offer) being cast out for reasons that seem as mysterious to me as the arcane rituals of the OxBridge colleges. So out of interest, just who does/did get in?

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

Socrates

I completely agree.

*Is still bitter about his LSE rejection*

(Welcome back, btw... :biggrin:

)

Reply 2

RichE

Chiron

I mean I keep reading of people who get 100 A*s, 10As at A level, speak 15 languages and have written books on obscure subjects and still get rejected WITHOUT interview!

Oxford and Cambridge interview the vast majority of people (except in subjects like medicine). Fewer people are turned away from them than at other unis on the basis of UCAS forms only.

Also I think the idea that so much hinges on the strength of your AS grades is absurd. Exams are not a marker of intelligence,...

There are tons of threads in here currently agreeing with you and saying how much more there is an Oxbridge decision than grades. You're arguing in the wrong forum because Oxbridge agrees with you and spends thousands of man hours each year making sure they don't have to decide things purely on a piece of paper.

So out of interest, just who does/did get in?

See the list of Oxford and Cambridge successful applicants in either subforum.

Reply 3

magicalsausage

Chiron

I probably sound like an envious, churlish, graceless and ebittered fool

At least you're right on one count!

Reply 4

$Avatar for sTe\/o$

sTe\/o

Chiron, do a bit of research before you believe inflammatory newspaper articles and anecdotal evidence.

Reply 5

trystero

I don't know what to tell you, but when universities receive a trillion applications, examinations operate as efficient, if flawed, filters. Until universities receive more resources to handle admissions, that's how it will be: it's simply the nature of democratizing education.

Reply 6

-mb-

zaf1986

I completely agree.

*Is still bitter about his LSE rejection*

Quite justified, LSE is a practitioner of what the thread-creator is ranting about.

Oxbridge are NOT. They REALLY DO consider all aspects of your application, and compensate for the quality of your education etc.

They interview everyone, and sometimes take a sample of your work as well as setting their own test. I had a bottom C (54/90) in an Economics module, and you can see from my sig that that didn't destroy my chances.

So please, move your rant to the LSE forum where it is justified, since LSEs offers are largely based on GCSEs and anything "distinctive" in your personal statement.

Reply 7

srmcit

trystero

quite. and there isn't much of an alternative unless you move into the slightly dubious territory of proportionate admission and positive descrimination. although the current system is admittedly imperfect, seemingly arbitrary and certainly merciless, at least (relative to their schooling) everyone is in the same boat.

Reply 8

kellywood_5

To me, the Oxbridge system seems a hell of a lot fairer than all other British universities. Instead of only having predicted A-level grades, AS grades (and marks at Cambridge), GCSE grades, personal statement and reference to go on, they ask you to sumbit written work, sit a written test and attend at least 2 interviews, usually with 2 or 3 academics. It's also certainly far superior to the Ivy League American universities, where much more emphasis seems to be placed on wealth, connections and extra-curricular activities, whereas Oxbridge take your background into account to make sure no-one is disadvantaged and academic merit/potential is really the only thing that counts.

Reply 9

Ticki

Cambridge interview 98% of applicants. Those that aren't interviewed are the people who are obviously piss-taking.

Reply 10

Charlottie

If you're so bothered about people considering your grades and only that, you could always just decline them. My school does not collect AS modules, and as such I applied with no grades. In fact, the only university that did know my grades was Cambridge, and they let me in. So did everyone else.

Reply 11

GreenMonstrosity

Ok perhaps I have been hasty. I own that I am speaking out of emotion rather than necessarily reason or fact. But my main rant is over the incredible lack of fairness in the whole application system. It's a one chance kind of thing and if it were possible I wish universities didn't put so much emphasis on exam results (of course they are important but by no means the sole indicator of ability).

Reply 12

GreenMonstrosity

PS: It isn't because my grades are "bad" (personally I think they are OK) that I take umbrage with the system, it's just that people I know and whom I feel really deserved a chance, were simply flat out rejected - not just by oxbridge but by many other lesser universities - some of whom had far better grades than my motley collection of As and Bs.

Reply 13

H&E

So why choose to rant against the two universities who put least emphasis on exam results?

Reply 14

GreenMonstrosity

H&E

So why choose to rant against the two universities who put least emphasis on exam results?

Because I am sometimes surprised that they should reject who really seem to have promise, even before interviewing them.

Reply 15

Waldo

what alternative would u suggest

how many chances should people have

also, which top unis put LESS emphasis on exams and MORE on interviews and specialised tests than oxbridge? All candidates will have, in addition to exam results:
a personal statement
several references,
two or three interviews,
Most will also have submitted several sample essays and/or undergone a written test - What more can they do....?

In fact, it is the very multiplicity of factors that makes decisions controversial and hard to justify- compare with the brutal simplicity of, say, the Irish applications system.

Reply 16

GreenMonstrosity

Waldo

what alternative would u suggest

how many chances should people have

also, which top unis put LESS emphasis on exams and MORE on interviews and specialised tests than oxbridge? All candidates will have, in addition to exam results:
a personal statement
several references,
two or three interviews,
Most will also have submitted several sample essays and/or undergone a written test - What more can they do....?

In fact, it is the very multiplicity of factors that makes decisions contraversial and hard to justify- compare with the brutal simplicity of, say, the Irish applications system.

All very well and good waldo, but the majority of universities don't have such a thorough system. It isn't specifically oxbridge i have a problem with but those very universities that only look at the grades and then chuck your application in the bin (although I will still say, they seem to turn down many promising applicants on the basis of AS results or even those with pretty good grades).

Reply 17

Ticki

Chiron

Because I am sometimes surprised that they should reject who really seem to have promise, even before interviewing them.

They don't, only 2% of Cambridge applicants are rejected before interview and they're the ones who really are joking when they apply.

Reply 18

GreenMonstrosity

Ticki

They don't, only 2% of Cambridge applicants are rejected before interview and they're the ones who really are joking when they apply.

Might those 2% include those people who did not get the obligatory 4As at AS :hmmmm2:

Reply 19

srmcit

Ticki

They don't, only 2% of Cambridge applicants are rejected before interview and they're the ones who really are joking when they apply.

and no doubt with 100 GCSE A*s, 10As at A level, and fluency in 15 languages, you'd ironically fall into that catagory anyway.

Damn the whole system!

Related discussions

Trending

Latest