Pooling? (at Oxford)

So I think I understand....

If your GCSEs/Personal statement/GCSEs/Predicted grades are very good, then you are invited for a interview at the college of your choice? And then if you don't do as well in the interview, another college can pool you?

So it's to do with how you 'rub off' on the tutors? And this 'rubbing off' is basically random, since all college tutors have their own preferences ?

The details vary but in general subjects will try to ensure the interview pools at each college are equal in size (in terms of ratio of applicants to places) and the more strongly assessed candidates are as far as possible equally distributed. Banding pre-interview will take into account what is in the UCAS application and any admissions test scores.

Post interview, candidates are either ranked high enough to gain a place or they are not. If more candidates at a college are ranked high enough than there are places, some will be exported to a college where there are fewer candidates ranked high enough than places.

I see. So the admissions people don't really care about you individually when pooling, they'll just do it randomly to ensure the quality in each college is equal?

What if the college only allowed in say 4 people for a subject; would these 4 people be evenly spread in terms of quality?

Also, if what you're basically saying is that there is an element of randomness to it, then what is the point of putting a college preference down in the first place?

There is an element of randomness to pooling. The reason for putting down a college preference is because colleges get first dibs on their own applicants I think (see for example https://www.merton.ox.ac.uk/admissions-feedback-law-and-law-law-studies-europe - for Law, "Colleges were able to nominate up to two of their first choice applicants per available place and then a Faculty Selection Committee identified further candidates to be reallocated to colleges." According to one of my Law tutors, the reallocation (at least for Law) is done by a computer algorithm and so is pretty random.

I think the quality spread is consistent across colleges. So say in one year, taking into account the UCAS application/ written work/ admissions test, the average across the university pre-interview for a subject is 20% band 1 candidates, 40% band 2 and 40% band 3. Only candidates in bands 1 and 2 are shortlisted.

College A has 30% band 1 candidates, 40% band 2 and 30% band 3. College B has 10% band 1 candidates, 40% band 2 and 50% band 3.

To ensure fairness, some of college A's band 1 candidates would then be reallocated to college B to even out the quality of the interview pools. Therefore, all colleges would have an even quality pool at interviews.

When it comes to making offers, all the candidates get ranked again. Say college B's applicants performed extremely well in the interviews, and there are 5 worthy applicants with only 3 spots. College A's applicants don't do so well, and only produce 2 worthy applicants with 4 spots. College B's extra 2 worthy applicants would then be made offers by college A, rather than college A taking two relatively weaker applicants from their own interviewee pool.

Does that make sense?

So it's to do with how you 'rub off' on the tutors? And this 'rubbing off' is basically random, since all college tutors have their own preferences ?

At the pre-interview stage, it's pretty much random. I have no idea at what point the tutors at each college even see students' applications, since most of it will be done centrally.

Could I ask what you're actually trying to find out by asking these questions? Are you trying to assess your likelihood of getting an interview at a college other than your first choice? Because if so it would be helpful to know which college you're applying to.

The point of choosing a college is that typically around 3 in 4 new students go to the college they chose. The randomness is that pre/post interview pooling (& open applications...which really are pointless as you'll only ever get allocated to colleges with fewer applicants) mean 1 in 4 do not. Choose a college you 'like'. Accept you might go somewhere else. If you get a place you really won't wind up caring & whichever college you join becomes home.

At the pre-interview stage, it's pretty much random. I have no idea at what point the tutors at each college even see students' applications, since most of it will be done centrally.

Could I ask what you're actually trying to find out by asking these questions? Are you trying to assess your likelihood of getting an interview at a college other than your first choice? Because if so it would be helpful to know which college you're applying to.

That does, thank you so much !

In your example in the last paragraph where you say College B's extra 2 worthy applicants would then be made offers by College A; how are the 2 applicants that are the 'extras' chosen? Would it be that they were not quite as good as the other 3, or would they be picked randomly?

Also, if someone was brilliant in all aspects of their application, are you saying that they will not be guaranteed a place at their chosen college? They have as equal a chance as someone who was not as good ('band 3'?

I applied to Worcester, but my main reason for asking is because I am just interested Geography at Worcester is v competitive, so there is a fairly high chance I would be pooled, but there's not a lot I can do about it now!

Of course, this is all assuming I do well in the TSA (*touch wood*) !!

...I personally think if the data suggests admissions process (andperhaps more importantly the ethnic/social diversity of admissions staff & tutors) is still a factor in impairing diversity/poorer students from applying the push for uniform central admissions will be impossible to ignore...Back to the Oxford essay grindstone!

I have no idea of the specifics, but they will have a decent idea of a student's interests and specialisms from their personal statement and any written work sent prior to interview, so they can use that to judge which applicants have a good chance of thriving under the particular tutors at that college, but when you're dealing with that many applications there's always going to be some element of randomness. It's really not to do with ability, though, and you shouldn't take it as any reflection on yourself if you don't happen to be interviewed at your first choice college.

To be honest, I'm as confused as I was at the beginning xD Everyone is giving different answers. I'm not that bothered really, I will just do the best I can, but I'm still interested and would like to understand it

(Having read all of this, is it any wonder that many applicants find the entire Oxford application process totally baffling and apply somewhere else. If Oxford is actually serious about increasing social diversity, this archaic and unfathomable process really does need a total overhaul.)

The only advice/insight to pay attention to is that from actual admissions staff like Brasenose. It's consistent and honestly not that confusing...

Posted from TSR Mobile

I’d add that the cost inherent in the interview process is a factor as some people simply cannot afford to travel. The university needs to look at funding interview travel costs at least for low-income families which may mean capturing that information earlier in the application process.