Durham Applicants 2008 Thread

Itchynscratchy

OH FFS!!

We have had a bad enough time trying to quash the 6A* policy rumour, and now this one rears its ugly head again.

I really want to know why it is that some applicants will believe any stupid rumour they are told without thinking it through themselves first. :rolleyes:

Yeah sorry about that, I was simply trying to quash the idea that Oxbridge applicants are some sort of higher beings who the other, 'lesser' Uni's will be willing to lap up. :rolleyes:

Reply 582

Itchynscratchy

10

DannyBoy123

Yeah sorry about that, I was simply trying to quash the idea that Oxbridge applicants are some sort of higher beings who the other, 'lesser' Uni's will be willing to lap up. :rolleyes:

I am sorry, I don't understand. What are you apologising for? :confused:

EDIT: I see now, but to be honest it wasn't you i was ranting at

Reply 583

A Stranger in Moscow

vanillawick

I applied last year and only a handful of offers were made this side of New Year, they are one of the "fairer" unis that waitys until the jan 31st deadline to receive everyones applications!!

How is 5/6 NOT a handful?

Reply 584

I just thought I might have given the other poster the idea that Durham might reject you BECAUSE you have applied to Oxbridge...

Reply 585

Hopping Mad Kangaroo

Reblet

*has a desperation to quell Oxbridge myth*

They do NOT know you have applied to Oxbridge. I know lots of folk who got offers from both, rejections from both and offers from one or the other. If the myth was true wouldn't all of them have been rejected from Durham because they applied to Oxbridge?
Personally last year I got an offer from Durham after I had an interview at Oxford. But I got rejected from York. Maybe York discriminates against Durham applicants!!! <--- nobody ever thinks this, so why should people assume Durham does the same to Oxbridge applicants?
Hundreds of Oxbridge rejects go to Durham every year. If the myth had any validity then there would be substantially less.
Face it: They are looking for different things. Oxbridge has separate tests, essays submitted and does not look at extra curriculars. Durham hasn't got the tests or essays and does have a look at what you get involved in as it has very high student involvement in extra curriculars.
Don't assume Durham rejected you because you're an "Oxbridge" person. I'm afraid it just sounds like and excuse.
Sorry, rant over. I just think it's rather ridiculous for such a foolish myth to be perpetuated. Don't get me started on the A* myth.... haha. :biggrin:

Mince pie anyone? xxx

They can infer that you have applied to Oxbridge because your application has arrived earlier. Asides that, they cant actually see at all. I doubt it makes a good deal of difference though tbh whether or not you applied there though.

Reply 586

I think we need the Durham Stress Thread back.

Actually what we need is a "Durham Myths - Revealed" to kill these damned rumours off.

Did you know that Durham automatically rejects you if you don't have at least four vowels and the letter S in your name? That's a fact because my friend Henry Brick got rejected. Haha. :biggrin:

I love the rumours slightly.

Reply 587

Lol, tbh I think that Durham has always been perceived as the retreat of the Oxbridge reject - at least that was the impression my Dad gave me from his time there. The collegiate system probably doesn't help with that image...

Reply 588

jellybaby17

I got a letter today saying I'm getting an offer for Chemistry at Durham, it's not official yet though so I don't know whether it's the college I applied to. I know loads of people that have applied to Durham though, and I'm the only one that's had an offer. I wouldn't worry about it because I know they nearly always wait really late.

Reply 589

Tabris

16

I'm kind of ****ting it for my medicine interview on the 12th, which is odd because interviews are normally something I'm alright at :s

Reply 590

I also have my SPS interview at Cambridge on the 12th...but looking forward to it :biggrin:

Just relax and be yourself. :smile:

Reply 591

Hopping Mad Kangaroo

Itchynscratchy

OH FFS!!

We have had a bad enough time trying to quash the 6A* policy rumour, and now this one rears its ugly head again.

I really want to know why it is that some applicants will believe any stupid rumour they are told without thinking it through themselves first. :rolleyes:

Meh, maybe we should just say the policy is totally true, and move on...

Reply 592

Minerva

17

Itchynscratchy

OH FFS!!

We have had a bad enough time trying to quash the 6A* policy rumour, and now this one rears its ugly head again.

I really want to know why it is that some applicants will believe any stupid rumour they are told without thinking it through themselves first. :rolleyes:

Because it is true for History, whether you personally want to accept it or not. It may or may not be true for any other subject, but I'm afraid - in general terms, there are always going to be exceptions - it is true for History. I should be surprised if there wasn't some kind of unofficial benchmark for other highly popular subjects like English, but it isn't as explicitly stated as it is by the History department.

That said, I agree that the urban myth that Durham rejects Oxbridge applicants on principle does deserve drowning in a bucket of water. I mean just imagine the conversation:

Tutor A:
Ooh look, this candidate is predicted AAAA, and has squillions of A*s; must be applying to Oxbridge
Tutor B:
What a pity, we'll have to reject him/her, in line with our admissions policy
Tutor A:
Yes, such a shame, I'm sure we ought to tell everyone to wait until after 15 October to put in their UCAS form, so that we know for sure that they aren't applying to Oxbridge

I think not... but I might buy the notion that Durham are looking for "rounded" personalities with non-academic interests as well, and maybe the Oxbridge candidates they reject are the ones whose PS's are too academically focussed? Even Oxbridge reject a few of those....

Reply 593

Itchynscratchy

10

kw2005

Because it is true for History, whether you personally want to accept it or not. It may or may not be true for any other subject, but I'm afraid - in general terms, there are always going to be exceptions - it is true for History. I should be surprised if there wasn't some kind of unofficial benchmark for other highly popular subjects like English, but it isn't as explicitly stated as it is by the History department.

I will say here what I said in the other thread. Prove it.

Where does it say explicitly ''we will not take you if you do not have at least 6 A*s''? I don't want it quoted about ''a significant number'' I want it to say somewhere in black and white that the blanket benchmark exists below which everyone is rejected regardless. Show me.

EDIT: I would also like to add, for the last frigging time, that I personally know history students with less than 6A*s. Therefore people can be accepted without having 6A*s, therefore the rumour is complete rubbish.

Why do applicants always think they know better? Or are you one of these people who was rejected and is bitter about it? Its always one or the other.

Reply 594

Minerva

17

Itchynscratchy

I will say here what I said in the other thread. Prove it.

Where does it say explicitly ''we will not take you if you do not have at least 6 A*s''? I don't want it quoted about ''a significant number'' I want it to say somewhere in black and white that the blanket benchmark exists below which everyone is rejected regardless. Show me.

EDIT: I would also like to add, for the last frigging time, that I personally know history students with less than 6A*s. Therefore people can be accepted without having 6A*s, therefore the rumour is complete rubbish.

Why do applicants always think they know better? Or are you one of these people who was rejected and is bitter about it? Its always one or the other.

As you are a 4th year student, it is likely that the people you know were accepted for Durham when the benchmark was lower - which it was in 2004-05 and 2005-06. It was only last year that the History department added in the explicit statements about "substantial" numbers of A*s being required - in response, one suspects, to feedback from rejected applicants who were being told that their GCSEs weren't good enough. Further, as I have pointed out in this thread and in the other one where you have posted too, it is a general rule not an absolute one, so there will always be exceptions. However, if you look in the History 'offers' thread you will find that there is the usual crop of people who have received rejections already (in spite of the "we don't make offers until all the applications are in" statements) and lo and behold their GCSEs are below what seems to be this year's benchmark 7A*s. I know personally of one strong applicant with "only" 6A*s who has already been rejected for this year (straight A predictions for A2 etc etc).

What I'm interested in is people being able to make informed choices about where to apply, and whether you like it or not this sort of information is important, so that people don't end up (which happens in History if not in Physics) with a complete set of rejections that need not have happened (ie, choose your risks knowingly). As for applicants thinking "they know better", it is not immediately obvious to me why you, as a physics student, should have any better insight into the workings of the History department than they do?

No, I am not an embittered unsuccessful ex-applicant. And, like you, I work on evidence. The feedback from different people has been too consistent over the last two and a half years that I've been hanging around on TSR, for it to be mere chance that history applicants with fewer than 5/6/7 A*s (depending on the year in question) have been consistently rejected by Durham.

Finally - why does it bother you anyway? I'm bemused by your strength of feeling about the issue.

Reply 595

Right, decision time. Do I have a quick rant about the A* policy... Yes, yes I think I will. :biggrin:

The A* Policy has only one iota of truth if you apply for History. Any other subject breathe a sigh of relief but keep in mind that GCSEs are still important for any course.

In History they say a "substantial number". So do people assume this is at least half of your GCSEs? The majority? At least one? Nobody knows! It almost certainly will help to have an A* in History but so what if you get 4 A*s all in Humanities and 5 As in sciences? Surely Durham has the sense enough not to go "Oh dear they are a fabulous candidate but look only 4 A*s!". I got in for English and History with 7A*s last year, I know someone who got in for History with 3. They do look at other factors, honestly don't worry if you don't have 20 A*s!

People will assume that just because they got all As at AS and A-level predictions it must be their GCSEs that let them down. Maybe it was subject choices at AS? Maybe it was the reference or the personal statement? Extra-curriculars? There are hundreds of reasons. I think we just have to trust Durham in its years of experience to pick the right candidates. They've done a pretty good job of it so far!
Soooo let's all just wait and see.

Reply 596

Any English offers yet? I know it's foolish to panic, but I really am going slightly crazy. Ahhh to know for the new year... :frown:

Reply 597

Itchynscratchy

10

kw2005

As you are a 4th year student, it is likely that the people you know were accepted for Durham when the benchmark was lower - which it was in 2004-05 and 2005-06.

Wrong I'm afraid. Two of these people I know and have spoken to about this matter are in fact first years.

Also, about the benchmark being lower in earlier years. I can definitely tell you that the rumour hasn't changed. It was 6A*s when I applied, all those years ago. The rumour of there being a blanket benchmark is older than perhaps you think

Further, as I have pointed out in this thread and in the other one where you have posted too, it is a general rule not an absolute one, so there will always be exceptions.

So then, it is not really a rule at all if there are exceptions. You realise that here you are agreeing with me yes?

If there are exceptions, then there cannot possibly be a blanket benchmark where everyone below is automatically rejected. Which is what people mean when they say ''6A* policy'' and is what I am trying to prove is untrue.

However, if you look in the History 'offers' thread you will find that there is the usual crop of people who have received rejections already (in spite of the "we don't make offers until all the applications are in" statements) and lo and behold their GCSEs are below what seems to be this year's benchmark 7A*s. I know personally of one strong applicant with "only" 6A*s who has already been rejected for this year (straight A predictions for A2 etc etc).

Well of course it is going to be more likely that people with better grades generally get in, thats obvious. What I am saying is that there is no blanket benchmark, which to try to disprove using TSR as a sample size is basically statistical nonsense. It only takes one to get in to disprove the 6A* policy theory.

Your feelings here seem to contradict your eariler statment about it being a ''general rule''. We have seen one person on here rejected even though they have 8A*s apparently. Does that mean that the benchmark is now 9? :rolleyes:

Other things on an application (ie the personal statement) are important as well

What I'm interested in is people being able to make informed choices about where to apply

and so am I. Which is why I am determined to quash the rumour of a blanket benchmark.

As for applicants thinking "they know better", it is not immediately obvious to me why you, as a physics student, should have any better insight into the workings of the History department than they do?

I have seen this rumour spouted time and again for the past 4 years. That fact, coupled with the fact that I know history students at durham who contradict the rumour, means that I know better than they regarding its truth. Not every applicant has the resources that I do, so I don't mind when they ask. Its when they insist that it is true that they annoy me.

And, like you, I work on evidence.

Just a different kind of evidence it seems. You work on hear say and conjecture. I will not be convinced until I hear it, in black and white, direct from the horse's mouth.

Finally - why does it bother you anyway? I'm bemused by your strength of feeling about the issue.

Because when I was applying for uni I was told (by teachers no less!) that I shouldn't apply to Durham because I was applying to Oxford and that they would probably reject me instantly. I believed them and left it off my application, until 1 day before I sent it in I changed my mind. I could have missed out on everything I have experianced in the past 4 years based on a stupid untrue rumour, and so when I see similar things posted here it does make my blood boil. These things influence life changing decisions that people have to make who know no better. That might sound dramatic but it is true, and it is why I am determined to show that they are entirely false.

Reply 598