The Student Room Logo

Cambridge Students: UMS Scores?

Scroll to see replies

Reply 40
Are there any other people who can share their AS Marks with us?

I think someone may have mentioned this before, but see the linked (updated) file below for a spreadsheet of all this year's offer holders including details of GSCE and UMS scores for most. If you don't have Excel and need a different format I can post that up if required (CSV, etc.) or put it on a Google Spreadsheet.

The averages on the sheet are (to the nearest integer):
7 A*s and 2 As at GSCE
92% UMS

However as other people often mention bear in mind the applicants who post on TSR on not necesarily representative of the whole applicant group (more likely to be interested in exams etc. if posting on student site and so on). Therefore don't think these are needed to get an offer or are necessarily even the actual averages :biggrin:


EDIT: Helps if you actually link to the file :rolleyes:
I'll only give you my AS marks as my A2's are biased by illness, and as its so long ago they arent all exact, just as close as I can remember!

English Lit, 278/300
Philosophy 288/300 (Damn marxism)
General Studs 265ish/300
Theatre Studies 228/300

Maths (dropped after AS) 208/300
Law (took when 14 so didn't know I could retake modules and get those 9 marks ) 231/300
:biggrin: Still, pretty good UMS marks - your at Pembroke now anyway!
I still don't quite understand the whole thing. So if i got 54/60 = 90% in a module can it go up or down from that percentage when converted to UMS?
Reply 44
It can be scaled up or down when converted to UMS, depending on how well others do. For instance, M1 for last June, a raw mark of 69/75 (92%) was converted to a UMS of 85%, since that paper was very easy and everyone did very well.
Reply 45
Solemn Wanderer
From the QCA code of practice:

Uniform marks for each unit must be calculated in such a way as to maintain the candidates’ relative position between the raw grade boundaries. Each unit must be reported in uniform marks ...

A mark of zero on the raw mark scale must always be converted to zero on the UMS scale. The maximum raw mark for the unit is always converted to the maximum UMS mark for the unit.

I'm also sure that raw mark grade boundaries specifically do not have to be linear. So your point that the scheme as I described it would result in the difference between UMS 80% and 90% being potentially a different number of raw marks from the difference between UMS 70% and 80%, but you aren't correct to believe that that is ruled out - it's exactly what is supposed to happen.

May be wrong again...., but why does that quote disprove what I'm saying?
I thought this provision was for cases where the raw grade boundaries where higher than the set UMS ones and so without this someone achieving full marks on the exam would otherwise not necessarily gain 100% UMS (and so making it impossible for the full range of UMS to be accessed). Similarly at the low end of the scale in this case people with a 0 raw score would be given UMS scores, again a bit of an absurd situation. This rule seems to account for these anomalies. It does not necessarily mean however the rest of the marks in the bottom and top ranges have to be scaled similarly though - while the quote states candidates position between raw grade boundaries must be maintained it makes no mention of candidates positions relative to the limits of the paper (max/min).

However reading the above attached Edexcel data, I can see I'm definitely wrong on the linear distribution count (though its does not appear to have any other simple distribution either as even in cases with the same 80UMS raw mark grade boundaries, the distribution of UMS marks 80-100 varies). It does still however suggest that you can get full UMS without full marks, and reading a bit further the overall document does appear to be fairly legit - Edexcel Online, and nothing to suggest it has been made up.

I accept the quote you give does suggest that marks are scaled as you state but I don't think it excludes/disproves my suggestion either. I would just accept what you're saying as from what I've read you seem very knowledgeable about admissions and exams in general :biggrin:, it's just I'm pretty certain from personal experience that there have been cases where I've got full UMS where it would have been impossible for me to have gotten full raw marks. I suppose the only definitive way would be to email an exam board/QCA, but I guess they have better things to be getting on with.

Reply 46
You certianlly do not need full raw to get full UMS. I think the quote simply means that full raw MUST equate to full UMS, but this does not exclude lower raw becoming full UMS.

For example, my Music Unit 3 was made up two papers. One, I got 40/45, and the other 51 or 52/60, on raw marks. This, however, became 120 on UMS. QED :biggrin:
Reply 47
Solemn Wanderer
Let's say we have a paper out of 90 with an A grade boundary of 60, that is, 66%. A raw score of 66% hence becomes a UMS score of 80% - an upward adjustment of 21%. But a raw score of 75, i.e. 83%, becomes a UMS score of 90% (because 75 is half-way between full marks and the A boundary) - that's an upward adjustment of only 8%. And a raw score of 90, i.e. 100%, becomes 100% on UMS - an upward adjustment of zero.

Sorry to go on about this UMS system, but does this scoring system mean its possible to get 100% UMS when you didn't actually get 100% in the paper, like at GCSE?
So how many of my 8 AS levels do you think i should be aiming to get in the 90's? i think i could get 4 maybe 5 if i worked hard enough.
Reply 49
definately 8
not getting in the 90s for any AS Level automatically disqualifies from a Cambridge offer im afraid
I've just signed up on this forum and i'm also interested in getting the correct AS grades needed. I got enough A* at GCSE, but is it true what the person before this post just said? I may as well give up then if you need in the 90's for everything :frown:
Reply 51
No of course not. I suspect VB07 just wants to put off that poster applying and is therefore giving inaccurate advice. Getting UMS scores in the 90s is deffo an advantage but even if you don't have any 90s but still 3As, it is most likely you will get an interview.
Reply 52
I really don't think that is entirely true. The reason why Cambridge interviews 98% of their applicants is so can determine your potential, not what you look like on paper in comparison to someone else.

Also it depends on how competitive the subject you are applying for is. I got roughly 84% average in my ASs, 85% in the ones I continued to A2 and only one was in the 90s.

Hope that gives a little bit of encouragement
Reply 53
definately 8
not getting in the 90s for any AS Level automatically disqualifies from a Cambridge offer im afraid

It is certainly preferable for you to have >90% in one AS Level, but you don't need it in all of them, by any means. the interview is the important bit, impress them there and you're fine.
Reply 54
lol I was just kidding - the guy has got like 45 warning points over 3 accounts and keeps asking questions like this - would anyone think that you really need 90% in EIGHT AS Levels...? - a really good place to start, is the excel sheet in the cambridge decisions thread - there you get a realistic impression of how well you need to do. Also, if you did 4 as levels and worked hard, someone with lots of A*s, would easily get 90% in the most important three - it wont be a problem for you!
Reply 55
Could someone post the excel spreadsheet in word or something please, because my computer is being annoying and wont open it.:hmpf:
Reply 56
Hope your microsoft words can open this.
Reply 57
Hope your microsoft words can open this.

Thank-you ever so much- please check your user cp for a little token of my appreciation!:biggrin:
Reply 58
Thank-you ever so much- please check your user cp for a little token of my appreciation!:biggrin:

:biggrin: thanks. I'm just using what vb07 had compiled earlier, all credits should go to him.
Reply 59
Not wanting to detract from anyones acievements in getting full/near full UMS marks, but does anyone share the feeling that it is faintly ridiculous to be able to attain full marks particularly in arts subjects - history, english, politics etc. I think it shows the degraded state of public exams at the moment.

Or maybe people are just very good at them, with good teachers....

Quick Reply