Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Yipyipee)
    oxford has a slightly lower entry requirement with only one a*, so naturally more people will apply, in comparison to the fewer and (debatable) smarter people who apply for cambridge
    I guess that could be the case for some applicants, but many who do apply often do have more than 1 A* prediction, but yeah that might be the case to some extent.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Cambridge comes before Oxford even in the dictionaries. :yep: Coincidence? I don't think so.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ilyacarey)
    You're right in saying that a smaller proportion of applicants receive an offer at Oxford compared to Cambridge, but you cannot take this statistic out of context. Keep in mind that Oxford generally has lower standard offers than Cambridge, which means that a lot of applicants will not apply to Cambridge because their predicted grades are not enough, or they just want a lower offer. In general more people apply to Oxford than Cambridge, though this difference is not enormous (Oxford 2016: >19000 https://www.ox.ac.uk/about/facts-and...tistics?wssl=1 , Cambridge 2016: 16750 https://www.undergraduate.study.cam....ply/statistics).
    It is true that Oxford interviews a smaller proportion of applicants (about 60% I believe) than Cambridge (about 80% I believe), but in theory this should not affect your chances of getting in, because if you are good enough to get in you will still be interviewed because you will be in the top 60% or whatever percent of applicants.
    There are some people from my school who have offers from Oxford (and Cambridge) who in my opinion do not deserve them; there's this one girl who had a hangover at one of her interviews, wrote her personal statement on the deadline, had not read any of the books on her personal statement, and who's attendance is maybe around 50%, yet she's got an offer from Oxford.
    I have an offer from Cambridge so I appreciate that there may be some bias in what I say. However, there are so many variables to take into account that I do not think it is fair to say that Oxford is harder to get into than Cambridge.
    It's much much lower at 20%-your PS and BMAT need to be really good for oxford to get to interview stage.
    In terms of medicine we're saying oxford is harder-based purely upon the competition you face, not the grades or anything. It's more competitive than cambridge and thus is harder
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by xxvvvxxc)
    I know what you mean, but what I am saying is that although GCSE may matter to a certain extent, people applying all basically have roughly the same GCSEs, and this is for Medicine specifically. Also, I am sure Cambridge look at GCSEs more now anyways in comparison to before as they also need a set of firm results from a student as AS and the whole UMS system is gone.

    Also, I never said this was about the grades, it's about the type of procedure they use to select potential applicants, and the way they go about interviewing. As it is clear they want the better applicants, as shown by the national exams Medics in Oxford do.

    And no, I literally went on a thread spree and saw how people were basically saying it's approx the same difficulty to get an offer when clearly it is not, and decided to make a thread on why I think what I do, and have had people also agree to it!
    Another thing definitely worth noting is that Cambridge has the SAQ. Using this they can tell whether you have taken certain exams already. For example my friend did maths in y12, got an A*, but he did not cash in his A-level, meaning that the universities he applied to did not know he had it. However, Cambridge did see he had it using their SAQ so they did not include his A* in maths as part of his offer. His offer was to obtain another 3 a*s, and his offer is in a way 4 a*s then.
    I have a friend who applied for the same course (engineering) at Oxford and he also did maths in y12 (A*), and his offer is A*A*A. Because he has an A* already his offer is essentially A*A, but Oxford do not know this.
    Although this loophole will no longer apply to people doing linear A-levels, this was certainly the case before.
    Also I would like to add that Cambridge use entrance exams as well when deciding whether to give an interview.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ilyacarey)
    Also I would like to add that Cambridge use entrance exams as well when deciding whether to give an interview.
    Yes, their process is holistic so they look at a lot of things including the BMAT in this case.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    Do you have any particular reasons for wanting to do medicine at universities that can’t provide you with clinical exposure? Cambridge in particular is little more than a country town. Oxford is only slightly bigger.
    Medicine is not like other subjects in terms of reputation. And Oxbridge has a strange one. You will find these days that places like Imperial and Birmingham are more the thing. Far more people in the business if nothing else. As in most things, Oxbridge grads tend to disappear into research rather then end up in leadership positions.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    When I read threads like these the first thing that come into my mind is "Battle of the nerds"
    Seriously Oxford, Cambridge....who gives a ****? Both unis are really good and equally better
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Doonesbury)
    Unlike Cambridge?

    And where do most of the BMO team go to?
    https://www.imo-register.org.uk/#stats
    252 have gone to Cambridge
    20 to Oxford
    Oh no, I'm not denying Cambridge University takes the best(especially as I LIVE in Cambridge), a lot depends on the subject to be honest. I didn't really put enough explanation into my response I agree, should have explained more.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by xxvvvxxc)

    Also, I never said this was about the grades, it's about the type of procedure they use to select potential applicants, and the way they go about interviewing. As it is clear they want the better applicants, as shown by the national exams Medics in Oxford do.
    Yeah, exactly, that's what I was saying. Not sure why you were then talking about the difficulty of GCSEs.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RedGiant)
    Yeah, exactly, that's what I was saying. Not sure why you were then talking about the difficulty of GCSEs.
    I was confused about your question sorry.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AzureCeleste)
    In the end no, my interview wasn't the best-but I'm actually happy I didn't get in because I've realised that other places would suit me better
    Well well done anyway, and its good that you will be happier elsewhere.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sanjith Hegde123)
    I mean are you sure...

    Med students at oxford need to get A*AA while dudes at cambridge need A*A*A
    Entry requirements are not a measure of how good the course is.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by ilyacarey)
    There are some people from my school who have offers from Oxford (and Cambridge) who in my opinion do not deserve them; there's this one girl who had a hangover at one of her interviews, wrote her personal statement on the deadline, had not read any of the books on her personal statement, and who's attendance is maybe around 50%, yet she's got an offer from Oxford.
    None of those things suggest anything about ability at all. In fact, you've made her sound very naturally talented and exactly what Oxbridge are after!
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    I think the issue with this question is that we are conflating "harder to get into" with "better institution".

    The admission process varies massively at each institution. Personally, I think Cambridge is far more effective, holistic and rigorous (with the SAQ, interviewing more, having their own extenuating circumstances form) and it allows students who are not conventionally academic but still excel in exams to showcase their interests that may be more intangible to articulate. I know that in regard to my exam results, whilst they are stellar, I am far below the average Oxbridge applicant. It is because of the comprehensive way in which Cambridge evaluates their applicants that I believe I got in

    TLDR: Oxford is harder to get into, but their admission system is not as cohesive. And Cambridge is the better uni
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by raskolnikova)
    I think the issue with this question is that we are conflating "harder to get into" with "better institution".

    The admission process varies massively at each institution. Personally, I think Cambridge is far more effective, holistic and rigorous (with the SAQ, interviewing more, having their own extenuating circumstances form) and it allows students who are not conventionally academic but still excel in exams to showcase their interests that may be more intangible to articulate. I know that in regard to my exam results, whilst they are stellar, I am far below the average Oxbridge applicant. It is because of the comprehensive way in which Cambridge evaluates their applicants that I believe I got in

    TLDR: Oxford is harder to get into, but their admission system is not as cohesive. And Cambridge is the better uni
    Couldn't have said it better!
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    who cares, get your heads out of your arses, most people in the world don't even get to finish secondary school let alone go to university.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GapYaar)
    who cares, get your heads out of your arses, most people in the world don't even get to finish secondary school let alone go to university.
    Just because some people have lower aspirations does not mean that others should too.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ilyacarey)
    Just because some people have lower aspirations does not mean that others should too.
    Lower aspirations? 80% of the world lives on $10 a day. It's not about aspirations, they have no choice, it's either manual labour or they die.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GapYaar)
    Lower aspirations? You are the thick. 80% of the world lives on $10 a day. It's not about aspirations you idiot, they have no choice, it's either manual labour or they die.
    Well clearly everyone wants education, and if you are in the position to apply to one of the leading institutes in the WORLD then of course you would. Not sure what you are trying to say on an Oxbridge thread in all honesty..
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by XxxvatxxX)
    Well clearly everyone wants education, and if you are in the position to apply to one of the leading institutes in the WORLD then of course you would. Not sure what you are trying to say on an Oxbridge thread in all honesty..
    I know you're unsure of what I'm saying, you're in a privileged bubble, don't worry about it.
 
 
 

1,030

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.