Cambridge Natural Sciences (NatSci) Students and Applicants

Original post by AmeliaLost

Can't speak about the interviews but regarding the Access course: Unless you also offer at least 2 science A-levels you won't (or, at least, are incredibly unlikely) to be offered an interview at Cambridge for NatSci. The access course isn't rigorous enough preparation for NatSci in most cases, apparently.

I was hoping to do Bio NatSci too, but may have the option of A-levels removed from me, so spoke to them about this recently :frown:

Sorry to hear that :frown:

I forgot to say that I plan on doing chemistry and maths A level alongside the course.

I was going to email them about this as well just to confirm that doing this would be okay so you kind of saved me the time. Thank you!

Why do you have the option of A levels removed? Were you applying this year or next? I hope you find a solution! Luckily the new A levels make it a lot easier for external candidates to sit A level exams and if you go to a college that also has a sixth form then they may be able to sit you in for exams at a very cheap price compared to other exam centres. It shouldn't be too hard to do alongside the access course as a lot of the content will be overlapping. So any science a levels done on your own will be a breeze in the access course class. That's my assumption.

Did the colleges tell you what offers they usually give? I understand that they expect the access course to be completed with 45 D and but what about the a levels? A or A*

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 3362

Original post by daniilS

They normally won't ask you questions requiring post-A level knowledge, unless you clearly display that knowledge during the interview (I expressed an interest in a certain aspect of quantum mechanics during my chemistry interview, and they asked me a question about it). What some colleges might do though is give you a piece of reading material on something you haven't seen before right before the interview, and then ask you questions about it during.

Thanks!

So say if I haven't done A level biology but I applied as bio natsci and expressed interest and knowledge on human pathophysiology would they only test me on chemistry, maths and human pathophysiology?

Reply 3363

AmeliaLost

20

Original post by StudyAngel

Sorry to hear that :frown:

I forgot to say that I plan on doing chemistry and maths alongside the course.

I was going to email them about this as well just to confirm that doing this would be okay so you kind of saved me the time. Thank you!

Why do you have the option of A levels removed? Were you applying this year or next? I hope you find a solution! Luckily the new A levels make it a lot easier for external candidates to sit A level exams and if you go to a college that also has a sixth form then they may be able to sit you in for exams at a very cheap price compared to other exam centres. It shouldn't be too hard to do alongside the access course as a lot of the content will be overlapping. So any science a levels done on your own will be a breeze in the access course class. That's my assumption.

Did the colleges tell you what offers they usually give? I understand that they expect the access course to be completed with 45 D and but what about the a levels? A or A*

Ah, fab. 2 A-levels AND an access course in 1 year could be incredibly difficult though? When I spoke to my course head she was very against sitting 2 fast-tracked A-levels alongside, saying that the workload for the access course is bad enough without adding in A-levels, and that the syllabus doesn't match up. Access course syllabuses aren't standardised though, so this may be different for you. (I guess it could set you up nicely for Oxbridge-level workloads though?! )

My college's sixth form might be closing; no new intake this year. So, I can sit the final A-level exams with the current cohort next June but that's it. The practicals are basically impossible for me to take too, as my college is refusing to provide staff for me, and standard age schools won't take me either. I live basically in the countryside and don't drive, so I'm a bit stuck for options :redface:

I may be able to take just the Maths A-level though (obviously no practicals to take, and wont be a huge increase in workload), and waste an application for Cambs anyway :rolleyes:

Going back to college this September, so would have been applying for 2019 entry after A-levels, or next year if I take Access.

Offer would be 45D and at least A in each A-level plus practical accreditation, for Lucy Cavendish at least.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 3364

daniilS

6

Original post by StudyAngel

Thanks!

So say if I haven't done A level biology but I applied as bio natsci and expressed interest and knowledge on human pathophysiology would they only test me on chemistry, maths and human pathophysiology?

In my understanding yes, but it's best to confirm with your college/on the current admission tutor thread.

Reply 3365

Original post by StudyAngel

Thanks!

So say if I haven't done A level biology but I applied as bio natsci and expressed interest and knowledge on human pathophysiology would they only test me on chemistry, maths and human pathophysiology?

Ask in here:
https://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=4662588

Reply 3366

Original post by AmeliaLost

Ah, fab. 2 A-levels AND an access course in 1 year could be incredibly difficult though. When I spoke to my course head she was very against sitting 2 fast-tracked A-levels alongside, saying that the workload for the access course is bad enough without that A-levels, and that the syllabus doesn't match up. Access course syllabuses aren't regulated though, so this may be different for you. Have you spoken to your college about this? (I guess it could set you up nicely for Oxbridge-level workloads though?! )

My college's sixth form might be closing, and my options for taking exams elsewhere are incredibly limited/fiddly to get to - especially the practicals, which are basically impossible for me to take, as standard age schools won't take me for that! Going back to college this September, so would have been applying for 2019 entry after A-levels, or next year if I take Access. I may be able to take just the Maths A-level though, and waste an application for Cambs anyway :rolleyes:

Offer would be 45D and at least A in each A-level, for Lucy Cavendish at least.

I truly don't think you should let a teacher discourage you if it's what you need to get where you want to be. I don't plan on telling my college teacher about me sitting extra a levels until later on in the year at least no earlier than January. Keep things to yourself! Especially if you are going to a vocational college with teachers who have little academic experience. Your teacher is only there to refer to your academic performance on your access course. When you reveal too much the first thing they do is tell you have impossible it is. People get into Cambridge doing this so why can't you?

I don't know which college I'm going to yet. I have a pick of quite a few because I'm in the London area.

Also A levels have changed and practicals have no bearing on the final grade anymore. Your get a separate practical endorsement which is used as proof of your lab skills. I can only assume that they would accept the practical skills developed on the access course as proof of your lab skills? Most universities understand that it is very expensive and tedious to do practicals externally.

I think it's all about how academic you perceive yourself to be. I'm confident in my academic skill to push myself. Cambridge will be a lot harder than an access course and two a levels which is why they want you to have them.

I hope you don't let anyone else discourage you if you see yourself as capable. Also just to clarify I plan on perfecting AS content before September and starting A2 past papers by Jan.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 3367

Original post by daniilS

In my understanding yes, but it's best to confirm with your college/on the current admission tutor thread.

Okay thank you. I'll do that :h:

Reply 3368

AmeliaLost

20

Original post by StudyAngel

I truly don't think you should let a teacher discourage you if it's what you need to get where you want to be. I don't plan on telling my college teacher about me sitting extra a levels until later on in the year at least no earlier than January. Keep things to yourself! Especially if you are going to a vocational college with teachers who have little academic experience. Your teacher is only there to refer to your academic performance on your access course. When you reveal too much the first thing they do is tell you have impossible it is. People get into Cambridge doing this so why can't you?

I don't know which college I'm going to yet. I have a pick of quite a few because I'm in the London area.

Also A levels have changed and practicals have no bearing on the final grade anymore. Your get a separate practical endorsement which is used as proof of your lab skills. I can only assume that they would accept the practical skills developed on the access course as proof of your lab skills? Most universities understand that it is very expensive and tedious to do practicals externally.

I think it's all about how academic you perceive yourself to be. I'm confident in my academic skill to push myself. Cambridge will be a lot harder than an access course and two a levels which is why they want you to have them.

I hope you don't let anyone else discourage you if you see yourself as capable. Also just to clarify I plan on perfecting AS content before September and starting A2 past papers by Jan.

It's not a vocational college, they do currently have a sixth form. I spoke to them about trying to sneak into their A2 cohort originally. They're pretty good and supportive tbh. My hands are somewhat bound by what they decide to do too, as they're my only option! You're lucky that you're in a city and have a lot of options.

Lucy Cav Admissions told me they would want the practical endorsement, again I guess because they're certain of the standard for a-levels, whereas Access courses are a bit variable. Some people I've spoken to here haven't done any practicals on their access courses! I guess everything is on an individual basis though, and if you can demonstrate you've worked to a certain standard they'll take that on board.

You are very encouraging! My concern is time, rather than academic ability. You can be the brightest thing but if you're trying to take on 60 hours of study a week... I'm not convinced I won't burn out and hate it. I've been out of serious study for a decade though, so your situation may be different. Ultimately I would rather go to an RG to study neurosci (my pathway) specifically, and apply to oxbridge post-grad with a solid class, than burn myself out and end up falling at the first hurdle :tongue:

If you're effectively taking a full year to study, rather that just from September, you'll probably do great anyway :h:

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 3369

Original post by AmeliaLost

It's not a vocational college, they do currently have a sixth form. I spoke to them about trying to sneak into their A2 cohort originally. They're pretty good and supportive tbh. My hands are somewhat bound by what they decide to do too, as they're my only option! You're lucky that you're in a city and have a lot of options.

Lucy Cav Admissions told me they would want the practical endorsement, again I guess because they're certain of the standard for a-levels, whereas Access courses are a bit variable. Some people I've spoken to here haven't done any practicals on their access courses! I guess everything is on an individual basis though, and if you can demonstrate you've worked to a certain standard they'll take that on board.

You are very encouraging! My concern is time, rather than academic ability. You can be the brightest thing but if you're trying to take on 60 hours of study a week... I'm not convinced I won't burn out and hate it. I've been out of serious study for a decade though, so your situation may be different. Ultimately I would rather go to an RG to study neurosci (my pathway) specifically, and apply to oxbridge post-grad with a solid class, than burn myself out and end up falling at the first hurdle :tongue:

If you're effectively taking a full year to study, rather that just from September, you'll probably do great anyway :h:

Wow that is surprising! I know a lot of shortcuts are taken at some FE colleges. It definitely does depend on what college your choose. That makes me even more determined to go to a college with a good reputation for sending students onto HE. I was considering going to my local college but they are very vocational and aren't as well known. Plus a lot of the students tend to end up on social science courses. I definitely will not be applying to them now.

okay thank you for letting me know. I just read of somewhere charging £1600 for a practical endorsement yikes :frown:

If that's a reason for them to reject me then I guess on to next best. I will still give applying a shot though! I was thinking about applying to wolfson so I might contact them about this also.

Yes definitely do what's best for you! I hope you get onto your desired course at college and at uni. I'm going to PM you :smile:

Reply 3370

R T

13

Original post by StudyAngel

Hi I have a question. I would like to apply for bio natsci. It's really hard to find interview info on it vs an abundance of info on phys natsci interviews.

I'd like to specialise in pathology if I did get accepted and I have a very keen interest in immunology. I have done a lot of personal research on it and could comfortably talk about my topics of interest. I have very little interest and knowledge on plants and animal biology. I'm way more comfortable with chemistry than plant biology.

My question is, would they test me on plants and things that I have not studied in the classroom? I plan on doing an access course but I'm unsure of how in depth the content will be. I'm only comfortable in my knowledge of human pathophysiology, chemistry and hopefully maths.

The interview rarely has a focus on knowledge, particularly outside of maths, engineering and physnatsci. (In such subjects, not knowing F=ma or simple calculus, etc. would be considered unacceptable - however, anyone with an A at AS-Level should be very familiar with such things). Obviously for bionatsci there is a huge range of backgrounds. Not just different boards, but different countries will apply. Therefore, you are not going to be heavily scored on a random question like "name the 2nd stage of translation" or "what species of finches did Darwin study" or "what are the two most abundant pigments in photosynthesis".

It is a very firm rule that the interviewers cannot criticise you for not knowing something that you have never learned or have no reason to know. Now, if you have done AS biology but don't know what the major organelles of a cell are then they can pull you up for that because that is something you have learned (or at least, something you have plenty of time to lookup in a textbook after reading the syllabus). However, knowledge in general is very helpful. You are never at a disadvantage for knowing something and surprising the interviewers with very specific knowledge would look good (if it was relevant to what you were discussing).

The interviewers will be probing your thinking more than anything. They will be analysing your scientific ability to deconstruct and solve problems and come up with ideas and arguments. This is something which you can be better at by learning and assimilating information in general (tv shows, books, documentaries, whatever). But it is also something that someone bright who has never seen any of this before could potentially come up with. Especially in bionatsci, they will not even be necessarily interested in the "correct" answer (even if such a thing exists for the question) - but rather the reasoning and thought behind what you say.

That is all a bit general, so to give a specific example (this is just from the top of my head):
-Interviewer could show a candidate 3 photos of cells. 1 from the liver, the other from the dividing layer of skin, the other from a plant.
-Could ask, point out some organelles you can see. (If the candidate is ignorant then they would have to point it out and potentially explain a bit, but this alone would not lose the candidate any "marks" if the candidate genuinely has never studied cells).
-Could ask to describe (and explain or have ideas for) differences and similarities between the cells in the photographs given. May potentially ask a further more stretching question - such as "why are these cells smaller/larger - remember total size is determined by cell size multiplied by cell number, so why is there not a uniformity to the size?" or "do you think the organisms metabolic rate or total size would heavily affect what these cells look like? By considering this, do you have any ideas about what animals these cells could have come from" or "why is this organelle here and not over here. Can you think of a way the cell could keep it there" or "can you think of a limitation of using photos to discuss these concepts? What is wrong with using a static 2d image?"

The above would probably last around 10-20mins, probably would be 1/3 to 1/2 of that interview. There is interaction on both ends - the candidate will give answers, but the interviewers will also help or give "hints" when there is silence or the candidate gets stuck. Most likely, if the candidate is obviously very good at a certain area, the interviewers will move on to questions about something else.

In the above, there are some correct answers (e.g. the nucleus is definitely the nucleus) but there are also some questions which may not necessarily have an answer even the interviewers know for certain. It really is a discussion, just spewing out (thought out) ideas. It will be more than just "the liver cells are metabollically very active so need a lot of energy ergo more mitochondria".

However, obviously a candidate who knows a lot about cells will be at an advantage because they may already know or have read articles, etc. on some of the topics or questions asked. However, from the interviewers perspective - this would be fair, because the candidate would know this by having an interest in biology that goes beyond what their teacher tells them to learn. It would show that they surf the internet/read books/ watch documentaries/ etc. because they are interested.

The tl;dr is no, but yes. It's worth reading up on everything, particularly everything in AS Biology (which is what the interview is based on). It is possible to do very well, but you don't want to be having a fast-paced intellectual discussion with experts if you only learned what a mitochondria was 2 minutes ago when they told you. There is no doubt that the interview is biased towards people with a lot of background knowledge and interest.

It would be a huge risk to ignore plant biology, even if you have never covered it in school. They will likely ask all candidates the same (or very similar) questions to keep it fair. They will try to allow for your ignorance to not count against you, but in reality if you got an interview on plants you would almost certainly under perform due to your unfamiliarity with the content.

Reply 3371

Say if I applied for physical natural sciences, would they make an offer with specific subjects or just overall 2A*s. Hopefully when I apply, I'll have an A* in the bag from doing maths a-level a year early but say if I only got an A in my a-level physics and chemistry but an A* when I did further maths would that still be okay?

Actually super conflicted over whether I should go for maths or natural sciences at cambridge tbh because I think preparing for step alongside basically having 4 a-level classes next year (as and a2 further, a2 chem, a2 phys) would probably break me. The natural sciences course is really appealing to me as I'm really enjoying having a focused group of subjects that are both independent but also inform each other. I do find physics and chemistry really interesting and I would love to actually properly use all the calculus I've been learning in maths in context in physics. I definitely find the physical world extremely interesting but also I also still find maths really cool and interesting although I don't know how much I simply like using maths and doing methods I've basically just learned by rote by doing past papers compared to actually understanding, applying and using problem solving within maths. Based on step, cambridge is really looking for people with great mathematically understanding and problem solving skills and if I did lots of work on step over the and throughout year 13 I'm sure I could get quite good at it but I mean I really don't know. Whereas I'm much better at the still involved but shorter questions in pretty much every other enterance test at cambridge like the engineering, nat sci and comp sci tests. The natural sciences is such an open course and I could go into physics, chemistry or material science within it (have to make pretty concrete decision in year 2 though). If I did the computer science modules in the first year, am I right in thinking there is potential to switch to computer science correct? In fact natural sciences has pathways into almost all the fields I'm potentially interested into going into apart from maths. I guess my fear is that I do the maths modules in the first two years of natural sciences and then end up being like "well out of all these subjects I'm doing- I like maths the most" but then realize that there's no way for me to do that as I would be very behind in maths compared to maths students.

Reply 3372

Original post by black1blade

Say if I applied for physical natural sciences, would they make an offer with specific subjects or just overall 2A*s. Hopefully when I apply, I'll have an A* in the bag from doing maths a-level a year early but say if I only got an A in my a-level physics and chemistry but an A* when I did further maths would that still be okay?

Actually super conflicted over whether I should go for maths or natural sciences at cambridge tbh because I think preparing for step alongside basically having 4 a-level classes next year (as and a2 further, a2 chem, a2 phys) would probably break me. The natural sciences course is really appealing to me as I'm really enjoying having a focused group of subjects that are both independent but also inform each other. I do find physics and chemistry really interesting and I would love to actually properly use all the calculus I've been learning in maths in context in physics. I definitely find the physical world extremely interesting but also I also still find maths really cool and interesting although I don't know how much I simply like using maths and doing methods I've basically just learned by rote by doing past papers compared to actually understanding, applying and using problem solving within maths. Based on step, cambridge is really looking for people with great mathematically understanding and problem solving skills and if I did lots of work on step over the and throughout year 13 I'm sure I could get quite good at it but I mean I really don't know. Whereas I'm much better at the still involved but shorter questions in pretty much every other enterance test at cambridge like the engineering, nat sci and comp sci tests. The natural sciences is such an open course and I could go into physics, chemistry or material science within it (have to make pretty concrete decision in year 2 though). If I did the computer science modules in the first year, am I right in thinking there is potential to switch to computer science correct? In fact natural sciences has pathways into almost all the fields I'm potentially interested into going into apart from maths. I guess my fear is that I do the maths modules in the first two years of natural sciences and then end up being like "well out of all these subjects I'm doing- I like maths the most" but then realize that there's no way for me to do that as I would be very behind in maths compared to maths students.

Paragraphs would help...

Anyway, if you apply with an A-level in the bag you are still likely to get a 3 A-level offer (i.e. A*A*A) and there's a reasonable chance they will specify the subjects for the A*s - probably Physics and maybe FM, but that will be entirely up to your college.

STEP is not normally required for NatSci. There's no point factoring it into your workload.

Reply 3373

R T

13

Original post by black1blade

Say if I applied for physical natural sciences, would they make an offer with specific subjects or just overall 2A*s. Hopefully when I apply, I'll have an A* in the bag from doing maths a-level a year early but say if I only got an A in my a-level physics and chemistry but an A* when I did further maths would that still be okay?

Actually super conflicted over whether I should go for maths or natural sciences at cambridge tbh because I think preparing for step alongside basically having 4 a-level classes next year (as and a2 further, a2 chem, a2 phys) would probably break me. The natural sciences course is really appealing to me as I'm really enjoying having a focused group of subjects that are both independent but also inform each other. I do find physics and chemistry really interesting and I would love to actually properly use all the calculus I've been learning in maths in context in physics. I definitely find the physical world extremely interesting but also I also still find maths really cool and interesting although I don't know how much I simply like using maths and doing methods I've basically just learned by rote by doing past papers compared to actually understanding, applying and using problem solving within maths. Based on step, cambridge is really looking for people with great mathematically understanding and problem solving skills and if I did lots of work on step over the and throughout year 13 I'm sure I could get quite good at it but I mean I really don't know. Whereas I'm much better at the still involved but shorter questions in pretty much every other enterance test at cambridge like the engineering, nat sci and comp sci tests. The natural sciences is such an open course and I could go into physics, chemistry or material science within it (have to make pretty concrete decision in year 2 though). If I did the computer science modules in the first year, am I right in thinking there is potential to switch to computer science correct? In fact natural sciences has pathways into almost all the fields I'm potentially interested into going into apart from maths. I guess my fear is that I do the maths modules in the first two years of natural sciences and then end up being like "well out of all these subjects I'm doing- I like maths the most" but then realize that there's no way for me to do that as I would be very behind in maths compared to maths students.

My conservative estimate is that at least 50% of A Level Maths and FM is actually just "applied maths for physics" - particularly in further maths. If you want a breakdown of what degree level maths is you should probably just try and borrow/ lend a textbook or do a lot of googling. University Maths is much more focus on proofs and rigor than just applying your knowledge to a problem. But A-Level Maths modules are far, far more similar to University Physics.

To further this, the Maths modules in NatSci are not pure maths and are not a substitute for it. You are not doing ~20% of a Maths degree by doing it (whereas for another subject you kind of are doing about 20% of the degree). The Maths modules in NatSci are kind of like taking A-Level and adding more topics, making it harder, and particularly learning and building the foundation for concepts which all students will need for Physics, Chemistry and ChemEng in later years of study. It is nice and probably helps understanding to learn some more advanced stuff in the context of maths rather than just being given the results to use in applied subjects (this is what would happen at ther universities for subjects like Chemistry).

In response to Computer Science, you CAN switch to it in second year. But it would require a huge amount of extra work (you basically only cover about 1/2 of Computer Science by doing it as a Natural sciences option, it would be completely on you to learn the other 1/2 over the summer - this is a huge amount of work and represent a real challenge if you don't understand it all asap). If you are strongly thinking about choosing between computer science and physics, then you should probably apply for computer science with natural sciences. Then your first year options are [double compsci, Physics, Maths (natural sciences maths)] and your second year options would be physics or computer science.

Your post strikes me as a post that matches the profile of either a NatSci applicant to Cambridge, or as one of a Physics applicant to Oxford. I'm not saying you can't do Maths at Cambridge, but reading your post I do strongly suspect you would just go into Physics in your second year anyway (both natsci > physics 2nd year and maths > physics 2nd year are equivalent in terms of credit for the degree). I also suspect you are more of an applied mathematician and that you would rather learn a bit of advanced Chemistry/ Earth Science/ Computer Science/ Cell Biology rather than a lot of theoretical maths.

As for your concern over STEP - I would recommend just downloading a random STEP I paper such as 2005/2006/etc now or in the next few weeks (or over summer I guess). Try doing some questions, you should already have the knowledge to do most of them. If you really aren't getting anywhere I would take that as an indication that maths may not be the right option. If you can do 4+ questions and are doing "most" of the parts of those questions then that's a good sign. Everyone improves after practice but the fact is that a lot of maths applicants will already be at the level where they can do pretty well at a STEP I paper. To go from the level of barely being able to do single STEP I questions in isolation with no time pressure to being able to get 1,1 in II/III represents a huge difference.

As per your concern over A* offers, don't worry about it. Almost everyone who gets a natsci offer gets 3 or 4 A*s. Missing the offer is basically unheard of. A2 modules are really no harder than AS once you factor in another year of learning, improving and familiarisation.

Reply 3374

Original post by R T

My conservative estimate is that at least 50% of A Level Maths and FM is actually just "applied maths for physics" - particularly in further maths. If you want a breakdown of what degree level maths is you should probably just try and borrow/ lend a textbook or do a lot of googling. University Maths is much more focus on proofs and rigor than just applying your knowledge to a problem. But A-Level Maths modules are far, far more similar to University Physics.

To further this, the Maths modules in NatSci are not pure maths and are not a substitute for it. You are not doing ~20% of a Maths degree by doing it (whereas for another subject you kind of are doing about 20% of the degree). The Maths modules in NatSci are kind of like taking A-Level and adding more topics, making it harder, and particularly learning and building the foundation for concepts which all students will need for Physics, Chemistry and ChemEng in later years of study. It is nice and probably helps understanding to learn some more advanced stuff in the context of maths rather than just being given the results to use in applied subjects (this is what would happen at ther universities for subjects like Chemistry).

In response to Computer Science, you CAN switch to it in second year. But it would require a huge amount of extra work (you basically only cover about 1/2 of Computer Science by doing it as a Natural sciences option, it would be completely on you to learn the other 1/2 over the summer - this is a huge amount of work and represent a real challenge if you don't understand it all asap). If you are strongly thinking about choosing between computer science and physics, then you should probably apply for computer science with natural sciences. Then your first year options are [double compsci, Physics, Maths (natural sciences maths)] and your second year options would be physics or computer science.

Your post strikes me as a post that matches the profile of either a NatSci applicant to Cambridge, or as one of a Physics applicant to Oxford. I'm not saying you can't do Maths at Cambridge, but reading your post I do strongly suspect you would just go into Physics in your second year anyway (both natsci > physics 2nd year and maths > physics 2nd year are equivalent in terms of credit for the degree). I also suspect you are more of an applied mathematician and that you would rather learn a bit of advanced Chemistry/ Earth Science/ Computer Science/ Cell Biology rather than a lot of theoretical maths.

As for your concern over STEP - I would recommend just downloading a random STEP I paper such as 2005/2006/etc now or in the next few weeks (or over summer I guess). Try doing some questions, you should already have the knowledge to do most of them. If you really aren't getting anywhere I would take that as an indication that maths may not be the right option. If you can do 4+ questions and are doing "most" of the parts of those questions then that's a good sign. Everyone improves after practice but the fact is that a lot of maths applicants will already be at the level where they can do pretty well at a STEP I paper. To go from the level of barely being able to do single STEP I questions in isolation with no time pressure to being able to get 1,1 in II/III represents a huge difference.

As per your concern over A* offers, don't worry about it. Almost everyone who gets a natsci offer gets 3 or 4 A*s. Missing the offer is basically unheard of. A2 modules are really no harder than AS once you factor in another year of learning, improving and familiarisation.

Thank you very much for the reply, it was extremely helpful. (other reply was helpful too and yeah I'm pretty bad with paragraphs XD).

Yeah over the summer I'll try out some step I, I just don't know if I apply the right thought processes for it. Honestly I actually kinda prefer the core maths modules at a-level to mechanics or stats but I guess c1-4 aren't so much about really strong understanding but more just being able to do the methods. Using those methods and developed ones in applied modules in maths at maths course at uni would be cool.

Obviously I'll see if I get 90%+ in all my maths, physics and chemistry papers on average before fully considering applying for nat sci. If I don't get super high marks in physics and chem but still 95-100 in maths, I'll probably go for maths as it's more likely I'll get an interview at cambridge in the first place but perhaps consider it's more likely I'll get into warrick, bath, bristol or exeter which are the other unis I'll probably apply to.

Reply 3375

Original post by black1blade

Obviously I'll see if I get 90%+ in all my maths, physics and chemistry papers on average before fully considering applying for nat sci. If I don't get super high marks in physics and chem but still 95-100 in maths, I'll probably go for maths as it's more likely I'll get an interview at cambridge in the first place but perhaps consider it's more likely I'll get into warrick, bath, bristol or exeter which are the other unis I'll probably apply to.

Do you still have UMS in all your subjects?

Reply 3376

Original post by Doonesbury

Do you still have UMS in all your subjects?

Oh yeah I think sciences is straight marks now but maths is ums. Fairly sure I'm right in saying you need about 90%+ in your science as exams though right?

Reply 3377

Original post by black1blade

Oh yeah I think sciences is straight marks now but maths is ums. Fairly sure I'm right in saying you need about 90%+ in your science as exams though right?

Not if you don't have UMS. Raw marks aren't comparable with UMS.

Just do the best you can and in the NSAA to make an interview more likely.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 3378