Is Imperial harder to get into than Oxford? (applying for Physics)

1

Just a thought - i was at the open day on Thursday (went to the Physics and Maths lectures).

Here's my view, the Oxford application for physics process seems to be:

Results -> PAT Test -> Interview -> Offer/Rejection

From what i've been told and from what i've read on the oxford website, the entrance test is used to screen candidates so there's a 2.5:1 ratio of applicants to places. Last years threshold for interview was 45% combined (averaged from the Maths and the Physics papers), which i thought was shockingly low after looking at the papers. Obviously, the three A's still apply and of course, GCSE's are still a weighty factor, but essentially, so long as you're predicted three A's and you perform well in the test, you're pretty much guaranteed an interview. I quote from the 2006 admission report:

"These tests have been piloted for several years, and are known to be good predictors of future
performance at Oxford; in particular they are better predictors than GCSE results."

Imperial on the other hand, seem to place a lot more emphasis on the personal statement and GCSE results - having as of yet, no way to screen applicants via a test. From what we were told at the physics lecture, the interview is more of a talk about imperial than any sort of test of ability.

As my GCSE's are good, but not outstanding, and i'm fairly sure i can get my three A's at AS/A2 (well four really) i am inclined to believe that Oxford will be easier to get into. Is this a correct assumption?

Reply 1

melissabee

7

No. Imperial will give out a lot more offers than oxford (they'll have to cover those that get into oxbridge and those who will decide to go elsewhere). I reckon that as long as you have the grades, chances are you will most likely get an offer from Imperial.
The actual oxford physics and maths test was much harder than the practice papers you'll find online, so 45% isn't as bad as it sounds.

Reply 2

Cirsium

19

Besides which you have to bear in mind that firstly getting an interview does not mean you have a place, and Oxford put far more emphasis on the interview than other places, so obviously they want to interview absolutely anybody who might be good enough - within reason; and that secondly far more people will apply to Imperial without wanting to go there than Oxford, on the basis that anybody with good grades will apply to 6 out of say Warwick, York, Bristol, Exeter, Durham, St Andrews, Bath, Newcastle, Manchester and various London universities but only pick one of the 6 offers. Whereas almost everyone who applies to Oxford and gets in will go there.

Reply 3

jammy07

7

edders

Coming from someone who knows, I would say no. But on the other hand, I should warn you, Oxford aren't very good judges of academic potential. I got rejected from Oxford and just got a First in my physics at Imperial... Oxford's loss I guess. The trouble is, they place too much emphasis on an interview, which is totally discrimating against more working class applicants who aren't used to that sort of format. Imperial is a lot more egalitarian in that respect, giving offers to those with the grades. I had **** interview skills when I was a 19 year old, so I was rejected... not so now.

I can't really agree with your point that the interview process is 'totally discriminating against more working class applicants' since i do not really think applicants from the 'middle class' are as a result of their social background more likely to be more used to the interview process. Oxford still has problems in encouraging more applicants from poorer backgrounds, but i do not think their process of choosing students is discriminatory in comparison to any other university in the country. I think Oxford is right in putting emphasis on interviews, since virtually all their applicants will in terms of academic achievements be very similar, and there is little else in an application on which to make a proper judgment.

It's rather unfair to suggest that they're poor judges of academic potential, certainly there are going to be individuals who for whatever reason don't perform as well as might have been hoped at Oxford, but you will find students like that at every university, and of course there are going to be many many students who get rejected from Oxford and go on to get firsts elsewhere, i don't think that's necessarily a sign of poor judgment by admission tutors.

Reply 4

Russell_G

i'd have to agree with jammy there. not to be cynical or to refer to 'sour grapes' or anything - but oxford most likely is harder and not because we discrimiate against anyone. oxford fully admit that they don't always get it right - there will be some in each year at each college who get kicked out because they aren't good enough for the degree - and some who are rejected will turn out to be academically awesome. the problem with oxbridge is that interviews are the chief way of judging applicants and by nature these are subjective. if person x interviews for physics at all of the colleges offering it he'd more than likely recieve offers from some and not from others. imperials admissions aren't like this.

Reply 5

Morbo

17

I really don't see your problem - why not just apply to both, put 100% into each application, and see what happens?

Reply 6

Eau

15

Don't know whether which is harder, but I know that more people at my school get into Imperial than into Oxford.

Also, Imperial's offer grades are usually lower than that of Oxford's (almost always AAA, if not higher).

Reply 7

not1

15

Eau

Don't know whether which is harder, but I know that more people at my school get into Imperial than into Oxford.

Also, Imperial's offer grades are usually lower than that of Oxford's (almost always AAA, if not higher).

Imperial's physics offers are AAA nowadays too.

Reply 8

hobnob

14

Worzo

I really don't see your problem - why not just apply to both, put 100% into each application, and see what happens?

Why waste time wondering which university would statistically be "harder to get into"? If both courses appeal to you, just apply for both.

Reply 9

thomasjtl

9

equally, there's not a lot of point going to oxford if you're not well suited to the tutorial system, which is what the interviews try to mimic.

Reply 10

F1 fanatic

16

thomasjtl

equally, there's not a lot of point going to oxford if you're not well suited to the tutorial system, which is what the interviews try to mimic.

though you could argue that with a subject like physics, the tutorial system is less of an issue anyway, since much of the learning is done through lectures. I would say there are very few tutorials I have had that have really felt like interview.

Reply 11

WokSz

17

I don't see where the problem is though - if you enjoy both courses, apply to both. It's not like the PS will have to be different.

Reply 12

tinypony

edders

Coming from someone who knows, I would say no. But on the other hand, I should warn you, Oxford aren't very good judges of academic potential. I got rejected from Oxford and just got a First in my physics at Imperial... Oxford's loss I guess. The trouble is, they place too much emphasis on an interview, which is totally discrimating against more working class applicants who aren't used to that sort of format. Imperial is a lot more egalitarian in that respect, giving offers to those with the grades. I had **** interview skills when I was a 19 year old, so I was rejected... not so now.

A first from imperial along with a good reference and a bright DPhil proposal should assure you a place at Oxford for postgrad. I hope that might compensates a little for your dissatisfaction!

Reply 13

Derek_the_Sheep

8

edders

Imperial is a lot more egalitarian in that respect, giving offers to those with the grades.

Oxford can't just "give offers to those with the grades" because pretty well everyone applying (about 3-4 people per place in physics) has the maximum predicted grades, and I guess most of them actually get those grades too.

Physics applicants do tests as well as the interviews (these days well before the interview) , so it's not all on the interviews. Yes, and I'm sure there are admission mistakes, both ways, otherwise everyone at Oxford would deserve a first, and no-one rejected would turn out to be a star.

But what do you suggest Oxford does differently with admissions, eggers?

DtS

Reply 14

F1 fanatic

16

Derek_the_Sheep

Oxford can't just "give offers to those with the grades" because pretty well everyone applying (about 3-4 people per place in physics) has the maximum predicted grades, and I guess most of them actually get those grades too.

Physics applicants do tests as well as the interviews (these days well before the interview) , so it's not all on the interviews. Yes, and I'm sure there are admission mistakes, both ways, otherwise everyone at Oxford would deserve a first, and no-one rejected would turn out to be a star.

But what do you suggest Oxford does differently with admissions, eggers?

DtS

Physics has scaled marking, so if everyone does well then that "well" becomes average and you get a 2-1, you have to be better than average to get a first.

Reply 15

Derek_the_Sheep

8

Better than the Oxford average in that subject, that is... which is sort of the point. But I would have thought that the standard of a first class degree in Physics from IC, Cambridge, Oxford, Manchester, Edinburgh, ummm.. [insert other places according to taste] is pretty much the same? - After all, AFAIK, all the top Physics depts happily take each other's 1sts as PhD / DPhil fodder ?

DtS

Reply 16

kizer

15

Edders - is it not possible that they take that into account? As in, they are fully aware that applicants from mixed ability comps won't be as used to advanced discussion, and act accordingly?

Personally I think there is a way of thinking about academic matters - creative, interesting, receptive - that they look for from all applicants. You can't polish someone into a creative thinker no matter how good the school.

Reply 17

hobnob

14

edders

Well, it should be looking more closely at academic potential, which may involve taking into account how far the applicant's grades exceed those of the average at his school. Well, I'm not going to complain... it just seems the interview rewards charm/confidence more than intelligence. I know how to interview nowdays. :wink:

Wouldn't it be fairer to say interviewing rewards intelligence as long as it's paired with a certain amount of charm and confidence, though? Otherwise there'd have to be a lot more charming thickos around... :biggrin:

Reply 18

hobnob

14

edders

lol, isn't Oxford full of rahs with their 2:2's jumping off Magdalen bridge? :p:

Hmm, are you saying there's a causal connection? Maybe they DID close off the bridge to prevent 2.ii's... :wink:

Reply 19

not1

15

hobnob

Hmm, are you saying there's a causal connection? Maybe they DID close off the bridge to prevent 2.ii's... :wink:

Haha! I'm sure the University will stop at nothing to sneakily keep up standards...

Is Imperial harder to get into than Oxford? (applying for Physics)

Related discussions

Articles for you

How The Student Room is moderated