Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Guys, I am thinking of applying to bath, I have 4 A*'s at A2 in maths, chemistry, physic, and econ and will do FM in gap year. Do you think that bath would be "safe" for me, I know its competitive, they had 1800 applicants for 150 places last year but would it be considered safe for me ?

    Secondly, the Gaurdian ranks bath as 27th on the economics table. I knew different tables differed slightly over some uni's but 27th is quite low. What do you all think ?
    • PS Helper
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    (Original post by economyst)
    Guys, I am thinking of applying to bath, I have 4 A*'s at A2 in maths, chemistry, physic, and econ and will do FM in gap year. Do you think that bath would be "safe" for me, I know its competitive, they had 1800 applicants for 150 places last year but would it be considered safe for me ?

    Secondly, the Gaurdian ranks bath as 27th on the economics table. I knew different tables differed slightly over some uni's but 27th is quite low. What do you all think ?
    You have a good chance, what more is there to say? Nowhere in the top 10 is safe.

    The guardian league tables are the biggest load of "nonsense" I have ever seen, steer clear and use the entry requirements and competitiveness as a fairly good indicator (Also, the placement year they offer is invaluable)
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    2
    PS Helper
    (Original post by Tateco)
    You have a good chance, what more is there to say? Nowhere in the top 10 is safe.

    The guardian league tables are the biggest load of "nonsense" I have ever seen, steer clear and use the entry requirements and competitiveness as a fairly good indicator (Also, the placement year they offer is invaluable)
    I agree with this. Although league tables in general aren't good indicators, The Times' guides are much better.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tateco)
    You have a good chance, what more is there to say? Nowhere in the top 10 is safe.

    The guardian league tables are the biggest load of "nonsense" I have ever seen, steer clear and use the entry requirements and competitiveness as a fairly good indicator (Also, the placement year they offer is invaluable)
    This. Another good table
    • PS Helper
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    (Original post by Groat)
    I agree with this. Although league tables in general aren't good indicators, The Times' guides are much better.
    TheCompleteUniversityGuide is very good too

    (Original post by Psychotic546)
    This. Another good table
    Beat me to it
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    2
    PS Helper
    (Original post by Aluu93)
    No, only for the AS you are intending on dropping- this is what our school says at least. We declare no AS grades unless its the one being dropped
    That's an interesting policy. So you haven't certificated subjects you're continuing with?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tateco)
    The whole point of UMS is it's not easier in any subject It's 'easy' to get high UMS in subjects you are good at. Yes it may be more difficult to get 100% raw marks in arts but raw marks mean nothing for comparison!
    If UMS were an even indicator across subjects. Would you say 90 UMS in Media studies was as good as 90 in History?

    Some subjects are harder than others, and I don't think there's any objective measure of measuring how hard a subject is relative to others. It's merely my personal opinion that sciences are easier to score higher in due to the disambiguiety in the mark schemes. There is usually only one right answer. Where as in the arts the marking is subject and up to the markers discretion. This disparity is why I personally feel it's harder to get higher marks in certain arts subjects. Feel free to disagree.
    • PS Helper
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    (Original post by zxh800)
    If UMS were an even indicator across subjects. Would you say 90 UMS in Media studies was as good as 90 in History?

    Some subjects are harder than others, and I don't think there's any objective measure of measuring how hard a subject is relative to others. It's merely my personal opinion that sciences are easier to score higher in due to the disambiguiety in the mark schemes. There is usually only one right answer. Where as in the arts the marking is subject and up to the markers discretion. This disparity is why I personally feel it's harder to get higher marks in certain arts subjects. Feel free to disagree.
    No, because generally the people taking Media Studies are not as intelligent as the people doing History so it would be easier to get higher grades. But as everyone here is taking academic subjects that argument is no longer valid. I agree they are easier to get higher raw marks in, but surely UMS evens it out?
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by Tateco)
    I agree they are easier to get higher raw marks in, but surely UMS evens it out?
    I haven't seen any figures but I don't think it does. In Maths and the Sciences, strict mark schemes ensure that a high number get the top marks, whereas in Arts subjects the marking is much more subjective and so there is variance that prevents so many getting the top marks. Another way of looking at it: imagine the distribution of ability/aptitude of candidates in both 'Arts' and 'Sciences' to be the same. Now the top (say) 10% in the 'Sciences' subjects will almost always get (say) 95-100% in the exams. But the top 10% in the 'Arts' subjects may instead get (say) 85-100% due to the subjectivity of the marking. Of course that means the next decile have a chance of doing better, but even if the distribution is of a linear fashion it wouldn't cancel out due to the 100% upper limit (you can't do better than 100%, even if they wanted to give the Arts students 85-110% to account for the variance and centre on the same mean).
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    2
    PS Helper
    (Original post by alex_hk90)
    I haven't seen any figures but I don't think it does. In Maths and the Sciences, strict mark schemes ensure that a high number get the top marks, whereas in Arts subjects the marking is much more subjective and so there is variance that prevents so many getting the top marks. Another way of looking at it: imagine the distribution of ability/aptitude of candidates in both 'Arts' and 'Sciences' to be the same. Now the top (say) 10% in the 'Sciences' subjects will almost always get (say) 95-100% in the exams. But the top 10% in the 'Arts' subjects may instead get (say) 85-100% due to the subjectivity of the marking. Of course that means the next decile have a chance of doing better, but even if the distribution is of a linear fashion it wouldn't cancel out due to the 100% upper limit (you can't do better than 100%, even if they wanted to give the Arts students 85-110% to account for the variance and centre on the same mean).
    I agree with this. UMS is strictly a scale for one subject - supposedly, if you sat an exam on one exam board and then a different exam board, you'd get the same UMS marks.

    It doesn't take into account difficulty between two different subjects, but admissions tutors know that 90 UMS in General Studies isn't as good as 90 UMS in English Literature, for example.
    • PS Helper
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    (Original post by alex_hk90)
    I haven't seen any figures but I don't think it does. In Maths and the Sciences, strict mark schemes ensure that a high number get the top marks, whereas in Arts subjects the marking is much more subjective and so there is variance that prevents so many getting the top marks. Another way of looking at it: imagine the distribution of ability/aptitude of candidates in both 'Arts' and 'Sciences' to be the same. Now the top (say) 10% in the 'Sciences' subjects will almost always get (say) 95-100% in the exams. But the top 10% in the 'Arts' subjects may instead get (say) 85-100% due to the subjectivity of the marking. Of course that means the next decile have a chance of doing better, but even if the distribution is of a linear fashion it wouldn't cancel out due to the 100% upper limit (you can't do better than 100%, even if they wanted to give the Arts students 85-110% to account for the variance and centre on the same mean).
    Hmm that's interesting, thanks
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tateco)
    Hmm that's interesting, thanks
    Yup, he said it better than I ever could
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Anyone else considering Pembroke College, Cambridge? I completely fell in love with the college after visiting it on one of the open days. The only thing putting me off slightly is the fact that there are so few places available (4-6 apparently).
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by VCR)
    Anyone else considering Pembroke College, Cambridge? I completely fell in love with the college after visiting it on one of the open days. The only thing putting me off slightly is the fact that there are so few places available (4-6 apparently).
    I just graduated from there - it's amazing. :awesome:
    • PS Helper
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    (Original post by VCR)
    Anyone else considering Pembroke College, Cambridge? I completely fell in love with the college after visiting it on one of the open days. The only thing putting me off slightly is the fact that there are so few places available (4-6 apparently).
    Don't let it put you off, you'll get pooled if you're good enough



    (Original post by zxh800)
    Yup, he said it better than I ever could
    I understand what you meant now, sorry
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alex_hk90)
    I just graduated from there - it's amazing. :awesome:
    Perfect! I'll be sending a PM your way with a few questions; I hope you don't mind.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    My personal statement reads like a man banging his head on a wall -_-
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Wow another year has come and gone, good luck to this year's applicant.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by perrytheplatypus)
    My personal statement reads like a man banging his head on a wall -_-
    At least you have something written .
    • PS Helper
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    (Original post by zxh800)
    At least you have something written .
    You haven't started yet?
 
 
 
  • 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
    Brexit voters: Do you stand by your vote?
  • 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

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