This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- HAT test
- Tips for HAT exam preparations for Oxford
- HAT exam
- History and Economics 2024 Entry (Oxford)
- Oxford HAT Test 2023
- History + modern languages at Oxford - MLAT?
- Oxbridge hopeful
- 80/100 on HAT and still rejected from Oxford
- Oxbridge reapplication/Durham
- Good books to read for a Psychology personal statement?
- Oxford history - supercurriculars?
- What should I wear to theory test?
- 80/100 on HAT, 12A*’s at GCSE, 4A*’s predicted and still rejected
- Should I bother with Oxford
- History Admissions Assessment (Cambridge HAA)
- Private candidate for A-levels in the UK
- History Oxford Admissions Test
- What degree should I take/ How do I make a lot of money
- PAT - Physics Aptitude Test (Oxford)
- How do you start preparing for the Oxford PPE admissions test?
HAT Test
Hi,
Ive applied to Oxford (new college) to read history, so now have to do the HAT test on 1st November. I've looked at th specimen papers on the uni wensite, and to be honest they look absolutely solid. If anyone has taken it in the last couple of years, or knows of anywhere where i can get help on doing the test, please let me know anything abotu it you can, because at the moment iam really, really scared because it looks so hard.
Weez
Ive applied to Oxford (new college) to read history, so now have to do the HAT test on 1st November. I've looked at th specimen papers on the uni wensite, and to be honest they look absolutely solid. If anyone has taken it in the last couple of years, or knows of anywhere where i can get help on doing the test, please let me know anything abotu it you can, because at the moment iam really, really scared because it looks so hard.
Weez
Oxford did some research on what the best preparation for the HAT was, and found that going through the two specimen papers online is the best way to improve your score, because you get familiar with the style of questioning. So, even though it looks hard, just sit down for two hours with each specimen, then go through the marking scheme as a way of reviewing your efforts.
It is a challenging paper, because the whole point of it is to seperate really bright students who almost all have AAB/AAA. The fact you find it hard doesn't mean you're doing badly, it means that HAT does its job.
It is a challenging paper, because the whole point of it is to seperate really bright students who almost all have AAB/AAA. The fact you find it hard doesn't mean you're doing badly, it means that HAT does its job.
I loved the HAT simply because it wasn't the same formulaic sort of stuff that you did at ALevel... the last source is great, you can ramble on about almost anything that you infer from the text...
Yea, the HAT test is pretty solid. But, dont be put off by that, as long as you show orignality you will shine through and get yourself an interview.
The questions are deliberately set on periods that are not studied in depth to avoid rote learning ( I think the second question when I sat it was on an African king of some kind).
In the first section, I found that catergorisation of the different possible interpretations helps tremendously in your argument, and makes what your writing look more impressive, ie by saying that two appaperntly different argument differ only on apoint of logic or a couple of assumptions and then distinguishing these.
Anyway, good luck on it.
The questions are deliberately set on periods that are not studied in depth to avoid rote learning ( I think the second question when I sat it was on an African king of some kind).
In the first section, I found that catergorisation of the different possible interpretations helps tremendously in your argument, and makes what your writing look more impressive, ie by saying that two appaperntly different argument differ only on apoint of logic or a couple of assumptions and then distinguishing these.
Anyway, good luck on it.
I've been doing some AEA papers, but they require 'in depth' knowledge to be shown in order to get good scores on them (I read this on the AEA specification). For the HAT, is just having the general gist of arguments and not having the dates of acts and battles from your AS/A levels all drilled into your head enough? I know its not testing knowledge, but the main question asks you to apply the concept to a historical situation. Therefore, the more you know about the historical situation you'll be applying the concept to the more convincing your argument will be. Bascially what im saying is can i just have a general idea of my A level topics without having to be tip-top on dates etc and still get credit for backing up the points im making with semi-generalised references to historical instances I know about?
I’m not buying any of this crap that you cant read any stuff to prepare for it either. Reading stuff on the methodology of history would help tremendously. I’ve left it all too late (as usual), so im just going to cram a bit and hope I get a half decent question on the day. I think this is the only time I don’t want half term to come, coz I wont be able to get to teachers so they can mark my work. Im really worried about this hat, if you mess it up bad enough you don’t get an interview, and it’s a BIG factor in application. Tutors for maths at Cambridge say they base their opinions of applicant’s abilities on their STEP scores, and the same is done for History. Sure the interview is important, but how much can you do in half an hour? Also, if you go into the interview and you’ve got a big HAT score, its naturally going to go better as the tutors are subconsciously going to think that you know your stuff, and so will interpret what you say more favourably. In many ways, I reckon this HAT is the be all and end all – people say they’ll just shine at interview, but this is easier said than done.
I’m not buying any of this crap that you cant read any stuff to prepare for it either. Reading stuff on the methodology of history would help tremendously. I’ve left it all too late (as usual), so im just going to cram a bit and hope I get a half decent question on the day. I think this is the only time I don’t want half term to come, coz I wont be able to get to teachers so they can mark my work. Im really worried about this hat, if you mess it up bad enough you don’t get an interview, and it’s a BIG factor in application. Tutors for maths at Cambridge say they base their opinions of applicant’s abilities on their STEP scores, and the same is done for History. Sure the interview is important, but how much can you do in half an hour? Also, if you go into the interview and you’ve got a big HAT score, its naturally going to go better as the tutors are subconsciously going to think that you know your stuff, and so will interpret what you say more favourably. In many ways, I reckon this HAT is the be all and end all – people say they’ll just shine at interview, but this is easier said than done.
Do bear in mind the HAT is viewed differently by different colleges. Some simply use it as a screening process, ie. they will interview the top 2/3rds that the History department accept, and look at it no further. Meanwhile many use it to find out the strongest candidates, e.g. if you score 80%+ a place is pretty much scored.
So that comes down to researching your college.
But as for preparation, I could just recommend practising it. To prepare, last year I did all of the papers and had them marked by my school. This year I can't get the same support from my school, but instead of doing full exams I'm choosing bits and pieces, writing sample answers then comparing them to the sample answers, my previous answers and my answers from last year.
It is easier for me as I've got more experience, but to be honest the best I could advise is to practise and then review. And then if you've done that try writing different answers, play around with the arguments and see how you feel about them, and see whether or not you can get secondary opinions on them.
So that comes down to researching your college.
But as for preparation, I could just recommend practising it. To prepare, last year I did all of the papers and had them marked by my school. This year I can't get the same support from my school, but instead of doing full exams I'm choosing bits and pieces, writing sample answers then comparing them to the sample answers, my previous answers and my answers from last year.
It is easier for me as I've got more experience, but to be honest the best I could advise is to practise and then review. And then if you've done that try writing different answers, play around with the arguments and see how you feel about them, and see whether or not you can get secondary opinions on them.
I think the college factor is also quite important as someone mentioned earlier.
Im at St.John's and when I came for my interviews, I remember one of the tutors saying "we used the hat to deselect quite a few candidates" and that "everyone who was in that room was good enough to be here, and it just comes down to deciding who would benefit most from the tutorial system".
The tip about historiography is pretty spot on as well, look up some work on postmodernism (go for one of the simple books!) and its relation to history. Its a pretty extreme viewpoint (in contrast to the positivists) but its always nice to show you know more than a bit of political history.
Im at St.John's and when I came for my interviews, I remember one of the tutors saying "we used the hat to deselect quite a few candidates" and that "everyone who was in that room was good enough to be here, and it just comes down to deciding who would benefit most from the tutorial system".
The tip about historiography is pretty spot on as well, look up some work on postmodernism (go for one of the simple books!) and its relation to history. Its a pretty extreme viewpoint (in contrast to the positivists) but its always nice to show you know more than a bit of political history.
I've read Jenkins, and it is (if I can be slightly un-historical and make a definite statement) a load of bull. All you need to know is that post-modernists tend to be the antithesis of everything actual historians study, and most tutors would probably not take kindly to their life work being called irrelevant.
That said, to know the enemy is to defeat the enemy, so long as post-modernists aren't taken too seriously, by knowing their arguments you can always be able to argue against them.
That said, to know the enemy is to defeat the enemy, so long as post-modernists aren't taken too seriously, by knowing their arguments you can always be able to argue against them.
I've read In Defence of History and hated it, appart from the early chapters about whether History is an art or science. I'm worried about the HAT because I have been ill for about 3 and a half weeks now so I haven't really started to prepare yet... I'm just planning to give it my best shot and hope I don't make a mockery of myself on paper!
Darkowl
Do bear in mind the HAT is viewed differently by different colleges. Some simply use it as a screening process, ie. they will interview the top 2/3rds that the History department accept, and look at it no further. Meanwhile many use it to find out the strongest candidates, e.g. if you score 80%+ a place is pretty much scored.
So that comes down to researching your college.
So that comes down to researching your college.
Does anyone know which colleges use the HAT in which way? We'd been told by our school that all the colleges use it to de-summon people so that the top 75-80% get interviewed and then its not longer looked at/thought of..
I got in touch with the schools liason officer at oxford and he said exacly what confuddled said. It gets used to get rid of the crap ones, but if you did well enough on it to get called to interview then it isnt really much of a factor, especailly if you have agood interview. Where it comes in to play is if you did well on teh hat but had a bad interview.
Related discussions
- HAT test
- Tips for HAT exam preparations for Oxford
- HAT exam
- History and Economics 2024 Entry (Oxford)
- Oxford HAT Test 2023
- History + modern languages at Oxford - MLAT?
- Oxbridge hopeful
- 80/100 on HAT and still rejected from Oxford
- Oxbridge reapplication/Durham
- Good books to read for a Psychology personal statement?
- Oxford history - supercurriculars?
- What should I wear to theory test?
- 80/100 on HAT, 12A*’s at GCSE, 4A*’s predicted and still rejected
- Should I bother with Oxford
- History Admissions Assessment (Cambridge HAA)
- Private candidate for A-levels in the UK
- History Oxford Admissions Test
- What degree should I take/ How do I make a lot of money
- PAT - Physics Aptitude Test (Oxford)
- How do you start preparing for the Oxford PPE admissions test?
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 weeks ago
The fate of my Oxford applications is in the hands of my teacherLast reply 2 weeks ago
Oxbridge applicants for modern languages - 2025 entry (applying in 2024)Last reply 2 weeks ago
CMV: One should be allowed to apply to both Oxford and Camrbdige for undergrad
