This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- Oxford University: Your Guide to Oxford Interviews
- Does Oxford mind if your supercurriculars are to do with Cambridge?
- Oxford Law GCSE Grades
- Oxford super/extracurricals
- what does cambridge actually want from a medical applicant?
- Oxbridge applicants for modern languages - 2025 entry (applying in 2024)
- Oxford Demystified - Engineering
- Geography: Oxford or Cambridge?
- Which university, Oxford or Cambridge cares more about GCSE grades?
- Cambridge Demystified - Law
- University of Oxford 2025 Undergraduate Applicants Official Thread
- Oxbridge Medicine Extracurriculars
- State school
- oxford
- Oxford medical school application
- Oxford personal statement
- Oxford Demystified - Chapter 1 - Should I apply?
- Cambridge Demystified - Applying as a Mature Student
- Oxford Demystified – Physics and Philosophy
- Oxford Demystified - Law and Spanish Law
Applying for and studying History at Oxford
My road to Oxford was long-winded and unconventional. I first applied in Year 13 for Magdalen College and got an offer. However, I then missed the grades for that offer (I needed AAA and got A*A*B) and decided to take a gap year and reapply for New College. I managed to get an offer and then re-sat the subject I had gotten a B in (philosophy) and managed to get an A. Bearing that in mind, there may be aspects of my Oxford application experience which may be less relevant to you personally than others parts of it but I hope this helps!
Why History?
I’ve been lucky in that I’ve been interested in History since I was a small child. And that isn’t just the cliché start to a personal statement; I watched (and still do watch) historical dramas from a young age and then, when I was a bit older I started watching TV documentaries with Simon Schama and Michael Wood. So there was never any doubt in my mind about what to apply for when it came to university.
I was probably a bit unusual in this: most of my school friends took a while to decide what subject to apply for and that’s very natural. Unless something really jumps out at you then it’s a good idea to spend sometime thinking about what you want to study, since you’re going to be doing just that subject (or combination of subjects) for the next three years (four if you go to Scotland). As I’ll expand on, I think the key to doing well and enjoying your time at Oxford is to want to study what it is your studying.
If your torn between History and another subject these are a few of the things I’ve enjoyed about studying History at university. Firstly, you get to study a real range of different subjects: one week I’ve been writing essays about Charlemagne and early medieval Europe and the next I’ve been working on the impact of feminism in History. Second of all it teaches you skills that are incredibly transferrable. Each week I’m essentially approaching a topic from scratch and I have to produce a 2,000 word essay on it and that means going through a lot of written material (where one document will often conflict with another one) and thinking about what my views are on the topic and then finding evidence to fit my case. These are skills of fact-finding, arguing and understanding that we use on a daily basis
My road to Oxford was long-winded and unconventional. I first applied in Year 13 for Magdalen College and got an offer. However, I then missed the grades for that offer (I needed AAA and got A*A*B) and decided to take a gap year and reapply for New College. I managed to get an offer and then re-sat the subject I had gotten a B in (philosophy) and managed to get an A. Bearing that in mind, there may be aspects of my Oxford application experience which may be less relevant to you personally than others parts of it but I hope this helps!
Why History?
I’ve been lucky in that I’ve been interested in History since I was a small child. And that isn’t just the cliché start to a personal statement; I watched (and still do watch) historical dramas from a young age and then, when I was a bit older I started watching TV documentaries with Simon Schama and Michael Wood. So there was never any doubt in my mind about what to apply for when it came to university.
I was probably a bit unusual in this: most of my school friends took a while to decide what subject to apply for and that’s very natural. Unless something really jumps out at you then it’s a good idea to spend sometime thinking about what you want to study, since you’re going to be doing just that subject (or combination of subjects) for the next three years (four if you go to Scotland). As I’ll expand on, I think the key to doing well and enjoying your time at Oxford is to want to study what it is your studying.
If your torn between History and another subject these are a few of the things I’ve enjoyed about studying History at university. Firstly, you get to study a real range of different subjects: one week I’ve been writing essays about Charlemagne and early medieval Europe and the next I’ve been working on the impact of feminism in History. Second of all it teaches you skills that are incredibly transferrable. Each week I’m essentially approaching a topic from scratch and I have to produce a 2,000 word essay on it and that means going through a lot of written material (where one document will often conflict with another one) and thinking about what my views are on the topic and then finding evidence to fit my case. These are skills of fact-finding, arguing and understanding that we use on a daily basis
And why Oxford?
The big advantage of studying History at Oxford in my opinion is the vast amount of choice you are given in terms of what you want to study. Oxford’s history department is the largest in Europe and they have specialists in most historical fields. So whatever it is you’re interested in chances are Oxford will have someone who will teach it.
I’d always recommend looking at the course structure of any degree and what modules they offer to get a sense of what it is you’ll actually be studying. Every module I’ve studied at Oxford is one that I’ve chosen to do. To give an example in your first year, you take a module called an ‘Optional Subject’ and within that you can choose from around thirty different subjects which vary massively from studying the venerable Bede, to the Haitian Revolution or radicalism in 1970s Britain. This is only for first year, later on in your degree you’ll get even more topics to choose from. Most other universities in your first year will have a lot of compulsory modules over which you will have no choice.
You will also probably have some very general modules going over vast areas of history. For instance at York (which was my insurance choice the first time I applied) there was a paper going all the way from the Fall of Rome to the fall of the Berlin Wall. If more broad and general ways of studying history are what you’re looking for then this approach may appeal to you more, but personally I like to get to grips with smaller chunks of history and really feel like I know my way around inside of them.
Did any of my teachers inspire me?
I had a fantastic teacher in sixth form who saw that I was interested in the subject and was really helpful about giving me suggestions for books to read up further on different topics and was always happy to chat with me about history. I’ve also been lucky in that my dad used to work for English Heritage and we’ve chatted about history ever since I was growing up.
What resources did I use? What books did I read?
Because history is such a vast topic and people will always have their own favourite time periods and topics, there aren’t really any ‘universal’ textbooks that you have to have read. By far the best thing you can do to prepare is to think about what particular topics and subjects you enjoy and then try to pursue your interest in them. For instance some of my favourite subjects at the time of applying were in medieval and Japanese history, so I read up on these subjects. Below are the topics I wrote about in both of my personal statements to give you some examples.
First personal statement – history’s role in shaping national identities
I talked about how events in the past histories of Scotland, Israel and Japan have shaped their sense of who they are in the modern age. I used B Anderson "Imagined Communities" to develop the theory of how nation’s construct their national identity.
Second personal statement – cults of personality
I talked about how rulers use symbols and performances to try and make themselves look more powerful and/or legitimate.
I talked about late medieval England and compared as kings Richard II and Edward IV, using these books for it:
N. Saul Richard II
C. Ross Edward IV
C. Carpenter The Wars of the Roses
E. Kantorowicz The King’s Two Bodies
I also talked about how Japanese warlords did the same thing in the sixteenth century, the key book I used for this was M. Berry Hideyoshi.
So I hope that gives you a sense of how you can take a particular theme or idea and then come up with your own examples from studying or reading.
More generally, it’s a good idea to read one or two books on Historiography (the theory behind history, which asks questions like ‘why study history?’ ‘what should historians study?’ and ‘how should historians study history?’).
These books tend to be a bit more dense and difficult to follow, but don’t be put off! They’ll really get you thinking about what history is and the problems with it and that’s really important for the HAT and interviews: the people who will look at your application aren’t interested in how many facts you’ve memorised for an essay but in how you think about topics and evidence. A few suggestions for books on historiography are:
E. Carr What is History?
E. Hobsbawm On History
J. Vincent An Intelligent Person’s Guide to History
Beyond books there are a massive number of other resources you can use to develop your historical knowledge and mindset. Podcasts are great. If you search online or in Castbox you can find podcasts on almost any aspect of history. My personal favourite is Mike Duncan’s show ‘Revolutions’ where he goes through a different revolution (America, France, Haiti, etc.) in a series of about 12-5 episodes, each of which are about half an hour long. Dan Carlin’s podcast ‘Hardcore History’ is also very popular.
There are also public lectures which you can go to for free or watch online. Gresham College offer a lot of free lectures on a massive range of subjects, including quite a lot on history; they’re London-based but you can find recordings of all their past lectures online.
The big advantage of studying History at Oxford in my opinion is the vast amount of choice you are given in terms of what you want to study. Oxford’s history department is the largest in Europe and they have specialists in most historical fields. So whatever it is you’re interested in chances are Oxford will have someone who will teach it.
I’d always recommend looking at the course structure of any degree and what modules they offer to get a sense of what it is you’ll actually be studying. Every module I’ve studied at Oxford is one that I’ve chosen to do. To give an example in your first year, you take a module called an ‘Optional Subject’ and within that you can choose from around thirty different subjects which vary massively from studying the venerable Bede, to the Haitian Revolution or radicalism in 1970s Britain. This is only for first year, later on in your degree you’ll get even more topics to choose from. Most other universities in your first year will have a lot of compulsory modules over which you will have no choice.
You will also probably have some very general modules going over vast areas of history. For instance at York (which was my insurance choice the first time I applied) there was a paper going all the way from the Fall of Rome to the fall of the Berlin Wall. If more broad and general ways of studying history are what you’re looking for then this approach may appeal to you more, but personally I like to get to grips with smaller chunks of history and really feel like I know my way around inside of them.
Did any of my teachers inspire me?
I had a fantastic teacher in sixth form who saw that I was interested in the subject and was really helpful about giving me suggestions for books to read up further on different topics and was always happy to chat with me about history. I’ve also been lucky in that my dad used to work for English Heritage and we’ve chatted about history ever since I was growing up.
What resources did I use? What books did I read?
Because history is such a vast topic and people will always have their own favourite time periods and topics, there aren’t really any ‘universal’ textbooks that you have to have read. By far the best thing you can do to prepare is to think about what particular topics and subjects you enjoy and then try to pursue your interest in them. For instance some of my favourite subjects at the time of applying were in medieval and Japanese history, so I read up on these subjects. Below are the topics I wrote about in both of my personal statements to give you some examples.
First personal statement – history’s role in shaping national identities
I talked about how events in the past histories of Scotland, Israel and Japan have shaped their sense of who they are in the modern age. I used B Anderson "Imagined Communities" to develop the theory of how nation’s construct their national identity.
Second personal statement – cults of personality
I talked about how rulers use symbols and performances to try and make themselves look more powerful and/or legitimate.
I talked about late medieval England and compared as kings Richard II and Edward IV, using these books for it:
N. Saul Richard II
C. Ross Edward IV
C. Carpenter The Wars of the Roses
E. Kantorowicz The King’s Two Bodies
I also talked about how Japanese warlords did the same thing in the sixteenth century, the key book I used for this was M. Berry Hideyoshi.
So I hope that gives you a sense of how you can take a particular theme or idea and then come up with your own examples from studying or reading.
More generally, it’s a good idea to read one or two books on Historiography (the theory behind history, which asks questions like ‘why study history?’ ‘what should historians study?’ and ‘how should historians study history?’).
These books tend to be a bit more dense and difficult to follow, but don’t be put off! They’ll really get you thinking about what history is and the problems with it and that’s really important for the HAT and interviews: the people who will look at your application aren’t interested in how many facts you’ve memorised for an essay but in how you think about topics and evidence. A few suggestions for books on historiography are:
E. Carr What is History?
E. Hobsbawm On History
J. Vincent An Intelligent Person’s Guide to History
Beyond books there are a massive number of other resources you can use to develop your historical knowledge and mindset. Podcasts are great. If you search online or in Castbox you can find podcasts on almost any aspect of history. My personal favourite is Mike Duncan’s show ‘Revolutions’ where he goes through a different revolution (America, France, Haiti, etc.) in a series of about 12-5 episodes, each of which are about half an hour long. Dan Carlin’s podcast ‘Hardcore History’ is also very popular.
There are also public lectures which you can go to for free or watch online. Gresham College offer a lot of free lectures on a massive range of subjects, including quite a lot on history; they’re London-based but you can find recordings of all their past lectures online.
Did I visit any Museums?
I didn’t mention any museums specifically in my personal statement but I have been very lucky in that growing up my parents took me around a lot of castles, art galleries, churches and museums. I think that getting a chance to see buildings, art and objects linked to a particular period is a great way to try and put yourself in the shoes of those from the past. The British Museum, Wallace Collection (which has lots of suits of armour if you like military history), Victoria & Albert Museum and the Imperial War Museum are some of my top recommendations in London. Art galleries are also a great idea as a lot of the sources you’ll be using as a history student are visual and pictures are a great way of helping you to imagine a particular individual or period and of bringing it to life.
In London my top few are the National Gallery (next to it the National Portrait Gallery has lots of portraits of major historical figures from the late middles ages right up to the 20th century on its top two floors), the TATE Britain and Dulwich Picture Gallery.
Did I do an EPQ?
I did an EPQ on Oda Nobunaga, a Japanese warlord who tried to reunify Japan in the 16th century. I really enjoyed doing my EPQ and it’s good preparation for university where you will do much more individual study than at secondary school. That said, my EPQ did not come up in any of my Oxford interviews and I don’t think it makes a huge difference to your application, but it may well provide a good starting point for writing your personal statement. If there’s something that you really want to find out more about I’d definitely recommend doing an EPQ, not just for the sake of interest but because it will give you a good idea about what studying history at university is like and whether you enjoy the subject.
I didn’t mention any museums specifically in my personal statement but I have been very lucky in that growing up my parents took me around a lot of castles, art galleries, churches and museums. I think that getting a chance to see buildings, art and objects linked to a particular period is a great way to try and put yourself in the shoes of those from the past. The British Museum, Wallace Collection (which has lots of suits of armour if you like military history), Victoria & Albert Museum and the Imperial War Museum are some of my top recommendations in London. Art galleries are also a great idea as a lot of the sources you’ll be using as a history student are visual and pictures are a great way of helping you to imagine a particular individual or period and of bringing it to life.
In London my top few are the National Gallery (next to it the National Portrait Gallery has lots of portraits of major historical figures from the late middles ages right up to the 20th century on its top two floors), the TATE Britain and Dulwich Picture Gallery.
Did I do an EPQ?
I did an EPQ on Oda Nobunaga, a Japanese warlord who tried to reunify Japan in the 16th century. I really enjoyed doing my EPQ and it’s good preparation for university where you will do much more individual study than at secondary school. That said, my EPQ did not come up in any of my Oxford interviews and I don’t think it makes a huge difference to your application, but it may well provide a good starting point for writing your personal statement. If there’s something that you really want to find out more about I’d definitely recommend doing an EPQ, not just for the sake of interest but because it will give you a good idea about what studying history at university is like and whether you enjoy the subject.
Any techniques for the HAT?
Oxford aren’t looking to see how many facts, dates and figures you know, but rather to see how you think when confronted with new ideas. This is true in the HAT and also in the interview. Although the nature of the HAT has changed from when I sat it, now there is only one question which you answer in one hour based on a primary source, whereas when I did the paper there were three questions to answer in two-hours, the essence of what they’re looking for remains the same.
So when you open the HAT paper and don’t recognise the source in the paper don’t worry, the point of the paper is (to quote the HAT page on the Oxford History Faculty website) to be ‘a test of skills, not substantive historical knowledge.’ You need to read the paper carefully and think critically about it. Don’t just look at the text itself but the information they give you about it. For instance, if the source is an official government decree, then maybe that might limit how helpful it is for thinking about how people like you or me would have viewed the topic or how they would have responded to it.
Don’t worry about being wrong. There’s no way you can know (to use an example from the paper I sat) about how the 17th French government enforced race laws in the Caribbean without any prior knowledge. Even if you do (and it’s probably a long shot, given how niche and eccentric the sources they tend to go for are) know something about the period around the source leaves this out. If you start bringing in knowledge from outside of what’s given to you in the exam paper then you’re missing the point of the exam. Remember it’s about how you think, not about what you know!
Oxford aren’t looking to see how many facts, dates and figures you know, but rather to see how you think when confronted with new ideas. This is true in the HAT and also in the interview. Although the nature of the HAT has changed from when I sat it, now there is only one question which you answer in one hour based on a primary source, whereas when I did the paper there were three questions to answer in two-hours, the essence of what they’re looking for remains the same.
So when you open the HAT paper and don’t recognise the source in the paper don’t worry, the point of the paper is (to quote the HAT page on the Oxford History Faculty website) to be ‘a test of skills, not substantive historical knowledge.’ You need to read the paper carefully and think critically about it. Don’t just look at the text itself but the information they give you about it. For instance, if the source is an official government decree, then maybe that might limit how helpful it is for thinking about how people like you or me would have viewed the topic or how they would have responded to it.
Don’t worry about being wrong. There’s no way you can know (to use an example from the paper I sat) about how the 17th French government enforced race laws in the Caribbean without any prior knowledge. Even if you do (and it’s probably a long shot, given how niche and eccentric the sources they tend to go for are) know something about the period around the source leaves this out. If you start bringing in knowledge from outside of what’s given to you in the exam paper then you’re missing the point of the exam. Remember it’s about how you think, not about what you know!
How did I choose my college?
The first time I applied for Oxford, I didn’t put too much thought into it. I saw someone mention Magdalen College in something I was reading and I looked at pictures of it online, before looking round a few months later on a trip to Oxford. I didn’t look at how many places for history the college usually accepted or what the field of interest of the historians at the college was. I’d recommend doing both of these things.
The second time round, I had a much better sense of what the colleges were like as I’d been up to look at Oxford the first time round I applied, I’d then been there for a few days in interviews and had come up again twice. So I’d seen most of the colleges in person and knew which ones I liked the feel of and which ones I didn’t.
I chose New College because I wanted to be in a big, old (despite the name) college with a large number of students. The colleges vary massively in size from about 30 in each year at Regent’s Park to around 200 at St Catherine’s, so have a think about whether you like being a part of a large group or a small one. Physically the colleges can be very different and have a think about what sort of space you’d like: some of the large grand colleges are of course very impressive buildings but don’t always feel very homely and can leave you feeling a bit out of place.
It’s also worth getting a sense of how wealthy each college is (this can vary a lot) as this will usually impact the colleges financial policy for things like bursaries, rent and meal cost and scholarships and prize money. For example, Hertford college, despite not being one of the wealthier colleges puts a lot of effort and money into providing affordable accommodation, and studying there means that you can have some of the cheapest student accommodation anywhere in the country! Conversely, I’ve had friends who due to personal finance issues have struggled due to the policies in place at their college so it’s worth looking into finances.
The student room has a really informative section on the pros and cons of each college which is written by students, definitely check it out.
Some people get very caught up looking at college league tables and admission statistics. In my opinion this shouldn’t be a major impact on applying. Despite how it may appear, no college is harder or easier to get into than any other for a particular subject. It’s often the case that one college will be oversubscribed in a particular year and will have a lot of very good applicants, more than they have spaces for themselves, so it can appear that a certain college is harder to get into. But when this happens, a college will pool a candidate off to another college, meaning that your application is transferred to another college. This is very common (about 25% of successful interviewees were pooled to another college in 2016) and in no way means that you are an inferior candidate to a non-pooled candidate. So, to my mind, if you are good enough to get into Oxford, you will get offered a space, either at the college you first applied for or at another one.
It’s also worth saying that if you can’t make up your mind you can make an open application, meaning you don’t choose a particular college but get randomly allocated one. There is no harm at all in this as when it comes to applications a college has no way of telling whether an applicant has chosen to apply for their college or whether they have been allocated it.
The first time I applied for Oxford, I didn’t put too much thought into it. I saw someone mention Magdalen College in something I was reading and I looked at pictures of it online, before looking round a few months later on a trip to Oxford. I didn’t look at how many places for history the college usually accepted or what the field of interest of the historians at the college was. I’d recommend doing both of these things.
The second time round, I had a much better sense of what the colleges were like as I’d been up to look at Oxford the first time round I applied, I’d then been there for a few days in interviews and had come up again twice. So I’d seen most of the colleges in person and knew which ones I liked the feel of and which ones I didn’t.
I chose New College because I wanted to be in a big, old (despite the name) college with a large number of students. The colleges vary massively in size from about 30 in each year at Regent’s Park to around 200 at St Catherine’s, so have a think about whether you like being a part of a large group or a small one. Physically the colleges can be very different and have a think about what sort of space you’d like: some of the large grand colleges are of course very impressive buildings but don’t always feel very homely and can leave you feeling a bit out of place.
It’s also worth getting a sense of how wealthy each college is (this can vary a lot) as this will usually impact the colleges financial policy for things like bursaries, rent and meal cost and scholarships and prize money. For example, Hertford college, despite not being one of the wealthier colleges puts a lot of effort and money into providing affordable accommodation, and studying there means that you can have some of the cheapest student accommodation anywhere in the country! Conversely, I’ve had friends who due to personal finance issues have struggled due to the policies in place at their college so it’s worth looking into finances.
The student room has a really informative section on the pros and cons of each college which is written by students, definitely check it out.
Some people get very caught up looking at college league tables and admission statistics. In my opinion this shouldn’t be a major impact on applying. Despite how it may appear, no college is harder or easier to get into than any other for a particular subject. It’s often the case that one college will be oversubscribed in a particular year and will have a lot of very good applicants, more than they have spaces for themselves, so it can appear that a certain college is harder to get into. But when this happens, a college will pool a candidate off to another college, meaning that your application is transferred to another college. This is very common (about 25% of successful interviewees were pooled to another college in 2016) and in no way means that you are an inferior candidate to a non-pooled candidate. So, to my mind, if you are good enough to get into Oxford, you will get offered a space, either at the college you first applied for or at another one.
It’s also worth saying that if you can’t make up your mind you can make an open application, meaning you don’t choose a particular college but get randomly allocated one. There is no harm at all in this as when it comes to applications a college has no way of telling whether an applicant has chosen to apply for their college or whether they have been allocated it.
What was the interview like?
Both times I was called up for interview I had two interviews, both in the college I had applied for. I didn’t get pooled or interviewed at another college (sometimes candidates will get an interview at another college, but then receive an offer from the college they originally applied to).
In both sets of interviews, one of my interviews was on the essay I had submitted as part of my application. In light of this I’d say it’s really important to think carefully about the essay you want to submit: it doesn’t necessarily have to be an essay you’ve done really well on but it should be on a topic that you found interesting and will feel comfortable talking more about in interview.
As I’ve said before, the interviewers are looking to see how you think and respond to new ideas, rather than to see what you know. So just reeling off loads of facts or quotes won’t impress them, much better to say what your views on a topic are and explain them, backing yourself up where necessary with some evidence. The interviewers will be looking to push your argument and so don’t take it as a bad sign if they start disagreeing with something you’ve written: they’re looking to see how you argue.
The interviews are designed to be hard, not scary, so if an interviewer really starts pushing you on a certain issue then don’t take that as a sign that they’re looking to traumatise you, they just want to see how you respond to academically challenging situations. If they disagree with something you’ve written then don’t automatically feel that obliged to disown your argument: if you genuinely think that there is a case to be made then make that case. At the same time though, don’t carry on defending your argument pigheadedly even after they have brought up some evidence/argument which disproves your view, all that shows is that you're stubborn and proud. Additionally, if you’ve changed your mind on what you’ve written between writing the essay and interviews that’s absolutely fine! From experience I can say that I found both of these interviews hard but enjoyable: you get an opportunity to talk with a leading expert on a topic they know a lot about and if you find the interview stimulating but challenging then that’s a good indicator that you’ll enjoy tutorials, two-on-one hour length sessions with an academic which are the principal way in which you’ll be taught at Oxford.
Both times I was called up for interview I had two interviews, both in the college I had applied for. I didn’t get pooled or interviewed at another college (sometimes candidates will get an interview at another college, but then receive an offer from the college they originally applied to).
In both sets of interviews, one of my interviews was on the essay I had submitted as part of my application. In light of this I’d say it’s really important to think carefully about the essay you want to submit: it doesn’t necessarily have to be an essay you’ve done really well on but it should be on a topic that you found interesting and will feel comfortable talking more about in interview.
As I’ve said before, the interviewers are looking to see how you think and respond to new ideas, rather than to see what you know. So just reeling off loads of facts or quotes won’t impress them, much better to say what your views on a topic are and explain them, backing yourself up where necessary with some evidence. The interviewers will be looking to push your argument and so don’t take it as a bad sign if they start disagreeing with something you’ve written: they’re looking to see how you argue.
The interviews are designed to be hard, not scary, so if an interviewer really starts pushing you on a certain issue then don’t take that as a sign that they’re looking to traumatise you, they just want to see how you respond to academically challenging situations. If they disagree with something you’ve written then don’t automatically feel that obliged to disown your argument: if you genuinely think that there is a case to be made then make that case. At the same time though, don’t carry on defending your argument pigheadedly even after they have brought up some evidence/argument which disproves your view, all that shows is that you're stubborn and proud. Additionally, if you’ve changed your mind on what you’ve written between writing the essay and interviews that’s absolutely fine! From experience I can say that I found both of these interviews hard but enjoyable: you get an opportunity to talk with a leading expert on a topic they know a lot about and if you find the interview stimulating but challenging then that’s a good indicator that you’ll enjoy tutorials, two-on-one hour length sessions with an academic which are the principal way in which you’ll be taught at Oxford.
10 minutes before my essay interview at Magdalen I was given an extract from the introduction to a book on XXXXX, in which the historian was explaining and justifying the structure of their book, to read over. At the end of the interview I was asked what I thought about their approach and whether there was anything I would do differently.
The second interview I had differed markedly at Magdalen and at New College, and it’s important to point out that all colleges do things differently for interviews so just because I had an interview on my submitted essay two times round that’s no guarantee that it will be the same for you! My interview at Magdalen was on some primary evidence and my interview at New College was based upon what I’d written in my personal statement.
My interview at Magdalen was probably the closest I came to a ‘nightmare’ interview. The sources were very peculiar (the bad photocopy didn’t help) and the questions I was asked suggested that I was on a completely different wavelength to the interviewer. At one point I was asked to make a historical comparison and after I’d done so there was a very uncomfortable pause before the interviewer said ‘Right… how does that link to what I asked you?’ As I was walking out they remarked ‘by the way there aren’t any wrong answers.’ This really brought me down and after that I remember walking around Oxford mentally preparing myself to let go of the city. But the reason why I’ve gone into such length about this ‘nightmare’ interview is to stress that I still got an offer and it’s the best way I can illustrate the point that your views on how an interview has gone will have very little bearing on reality. The cocky guy who walks out of the interview saying ‘that was easy!’ is almost always the guy who doesn’t get in; the interviews are supposed to push you and it’s therefore not at all a bad thing if you walk out unsure of your performance.
My second interview at New College was based around my personal statement. As I said above, my second personal statement was about the culture around power. My interviewers were two social historians and they deliberately set out to ask me about social history and my views on that. Seeing as I had done fairly little social history at school I had to think on my feet for a lot of this interview but that was probably a much better indicator of my aptitude than if I’d been on comfortable terrain talking about a topic I knew a lot about. If you find yourself talking in an interview about something you know very little about then don’t be alarmed. However, it’s always better to be honest with the interviewer and admit at the start that this isn’t something you’ve studied or thought much about, rather than pretending to be an expert in something you know nothing about!
At many interviews (three out of the four I had in fact) there will be more than one person in the room interviewing you. Sometimes the second person is just there to take notes and will not ask you any questions, sometimes they will also ask you questions. Usually they are a postgraduate student rather than a tutor so they feel a bit more relatable and less imposing. My best advice on this would be to not let it phase you. If the second person is silent this can be disconcerting but try not to pay them any attention, they’re there so that the main interviewer can focus on what you’re saying and won’t be distracted making notes so they’re probably a blessing in disguise!
One other bit of advice that I think comes through from my experience is that it’s incredibly hard to prepare for interviews. To be a broken record, the interviewers aren’t interested in how quickly you can recite the kings and queens of England, they want to know what your views are on the kings and
queens of England and how you think. So endlessly swotting up will only get you so far, though it can be useful psychologically to go into an interview feeling like you’ve tried to prepare for it. Based on my own experience I’d make sure that you know your submitted essay like the back of your hand: go over each paragraph and think about what you argued and why you argued it, do you still agree with that, what might a counter-argument be and so on. Other than that for prep continuing to read and engage with history is really important: it will give you more ideas and examples to draw on in your interview.
The interview process can be scary and stressful. I remember how terrified I when at the start of both interview periods a general meeting was called of all the history applicants. There were sixty of us in the room at New College and I remember very clearly thinking ‘last year only twelve people were made an offer’. Of course mindsets like that will throw you off so focus on your own performance. And don’t spend every waking moment before your interview stress cramming in your room. As I said, there’s only so much preparation you can really do for each interview and it’s far better to go into each one feeling rested and calm. Moreover, enjoy Oxford, it’s a lovely city and hopefully where you’ll be for the next three years! It can also seem like you’re in competition with all the other applicants but remember everyone, no matter how clever and confident they seem, will be as nervous as you are. I actually met some of my closest friends now in Oxford at interviews and it’s a really great antidote to the nerves to get to know other applicants.
Where was I when I got my offer?
I can clearly remember both times I applied that I knew to check my emails (or letterbox, some colleges will let you know by post) when I got a message on Facebook from other people I knew who had replied. The first time I was out having a walk and I ran back home; I was so lightheaded and nervous that when I first opened my letter from Magdalen I thought I might be hallucinating. It can be nerve-wracking waiting to hear back about your interview but try as best as you can not to let it get to you. Remember throughout the entire Oxford process that getting into Oxford is not the sole indicator of intelligence or ability, the skills the interviewers are looking for aren’t general indicators of how intelligent you are but are tailored towards your degree and how well they think you’ll do at it.
The second interview I had differed markedly at Magdalen and at New College, and it’s important to point out that all colleges do things differently for interviews so just because I had an interview on my submitted essay two times round that’s no guarantee that it will be the same for you! My interview at Magdalen was on some primary evidence and my interview at New College was based upon what I’d written in my personal statement.
My interview at Magdalen was probably the closest I came to a ‘nightmare’ interview. The sources were very peculiar (the bad photocopy didn’t help) and the questions I was asked suggested that I was on a completely different wavelength to the interviewer. At one point I was asked to make a historical comparison and after I’d done so there was a very uncomfortable pause before the interviewer said ‘Right… how does that link to what I asked you?’ As I was walking out they remarked ‘by the way there aren’t any wrong answers.’ This really brought me down and after that I remember walking around Oxford mentally preparing myself to let go of the city. But the reason why I’ve gone into such length about this ‘nightmare’ interview is to stress that I still got an offer and it’s the best way I can illustrate the point that your views on how an interview has gone will have very little bearing on reality. The cocky guy who walks out of the interview saying ‘that was easy!’ is almost always the guy who doesn’t get in; the interviews are supposed to push you and it’s therefore not at all a bad thing if you walk out unsure of your performance.
My second interview at New College was based around my personal statement. As I said above, my second personal statement was about the culture around power. My interviewers were two social historians and they deliberately set out to ask me about social history and my views on that. Seeing as I had done fairly little social history at school I had to think on my feet for a lot of this interview but that was probably a much better indicator of my aptitude than if I’d been on comfortable terrain talking about a topic I knew a lot about. If you find yourself talking in an interview about something you know very little about then don’t be alarmed. However, it’s always better to be honest with the interviewer and admit at the start that this isn’t something you’ve studied or thought much about, rather than pretending to be an expert in something you know nothing about!
At many interviews (three out of the four I had in fact) there will be more than one person in the room interviewing you. Sometimes the second person is just there to take notes and will not ask you any questions, sometimes they will also ask you questions. Usually they are a postgraduate student rather than a tutor so they feel a bit more relatable and less imposing. My best advice on this would be to not let it phase you. If the second person is silent this can be disconcerting but try not to pay them any attention, they’re there so that the main interviewer can focus on what you’re saying and won’t be distracted making notes so they’re probably a blessing in disguise!
One other bit of advice that I think comes through from my experience is that it’s incredibly hard to prepare for interviews. To be a broken record, the interviewers aren’t interested in how quickly you can recite the kings and queens of England, they want to know what your views are on the kings and
queens of England and how you think. So endlessly swotting up will only get you so far, though it can be useful psychologically to go into an interview feeling like you’ve tried to prepare for it. Based on my own experience I’d make sure that you know your submitted essay like the back of your hand: go over each paragraph and think about what you argued and why you argued it, do you still agree with that, what might a counter-argument be and so on. Other than that for prep continuing to read and engage with history is really important: it will give you more ideas and examples to draw on in your interview.
The interview process can be scary and stressful. I remember how terrified I when at the start of both interview periods a general meeting was called of all the history applicants. There were sixty of us in the room at New College and I remember very clearly thinking ‘last year only twelve people were made an offer’. Of course mindsets like that will throw you off so focus on your own performance. And don’t spend every waking moment before your interview stress cramming in your room. As I said, there’s only so much preparation you can really do for each interview and it’s far better to go into each one feeling rested and calm. Moreover, enjoy Oxford, it’s a lovely city and hopefully where you’ll be for the next three years! It can also seem like you’re in competition with all the other applicants but remember everyone, no matter how clever and confident they seem, will be as nervous as you are. I actually met some of my closest friends now in Oxford at interviews and it’s a really great antidote to the nerves to get to know other applicants.
Where was I when I got my offer?
I can clearly remember both times I applied that I knew to check my emails (or letterbox, some colleges will let you know by post) when I got a message on Facebook from other people I knew who had replied. The first time I was out having a walk and I ran back home; I was so lightheaded and nervous that when I first opened my letter from Magdalen I thought I might be hallucinating. It can be nerve-wracking waiting to hear back about your interview but try as best as you can not to let it get to you. Remember throughout the entire Oxford process that getting into Oxford is not the sole indicator of intelligence or ability, the skills the interviewers are looking for aren’t general indicators of how intelligent you are but are tailored towards your degree and how well they think you’ll do at it.
Was I worried about not getting my grades?
Massively. Everyone in my year at school was very stressed about A-levels and that certainly didn’t help things. However with Oxford it’s important to remember that once you’ve received your offer you’ve in many ways done the difficult part, the majority of offer holders get the grades they need. That isn’t for a moment to say that you should get complacent, but I found it comforting both times to think in the run-up to exams how far I’d come already and how many barriers I’d passed to get to Oxford.
Although objectively the second time I was sitting exams I only had to worry about one subject’s worth of exams psychologically the fact that a lot was resting on just two exams was quite nerve-racking for me. Having spent so long trying to get into Oxford (and become a bit fixated on it perhaps) I was determined not to let it slip away. Although I’m incredibly happy at Oxford now and the last two years have probably been the best of my life so far, Oxford certainly isn’t worth sleepless nights worrying about whether or not you’ll get in. As I said above, getting or not getting into Oxford is not a reflection on your intelligence or capability and it certainly shouldn’t become a benchmark by which to measure your self-worth. The very fact that you’re considering applying shows that you have an exceptional amount of ability and drive.
How did I feel about coming up to Oxford?
Having come so close and not gotten into Oxford the first time round, and seeing most of my old school friends go off to university, I was incredibly excited about the prospect of finally going up myself. I might have felt a bit more trepidation had I gotten in the year before about going up to university and living away from home for the first time by myself. Socially I was perhaps a bit nervous and talking with someone the other day who was about to start at university I remembered the anxiety: what if I don’t make any friends, what if everyone is a genius, what if everyone went to a private school and is related to the aristocracy. These are all understandable but misplaced anxieties to have before arriving at Oxford: no one ‘type’ of person gets into Oxford and looking at my own group of friends at university it’s actually far more diverse in all senses than my group of friends from my old school, so don’t worry about not fitting in.
Was it how I imagined?
People have all sorts of ideas and images they associate with Oxford and as with most ideals the reality is quite different. Not everyone went to a private school. We don’t spend all day stressing in the library. It’s true that studying in such a grand and ancient space does make it feel different to other universities. Sometimes, even now after two years here, it can feel as though I don’t belong, as though I’m not worthy of the grand spaces I inhabit. Yet these are feelings that friends I have at other universities have felt and I think in many ways it’s an inevitable price of getting into such a prestigious institute that you occasionally second-guess whether or not you deserve to be there. When I feel that way I remind myself that I wouldn’t be here if my tutors didn’t think I wasn’t capable of it.
Oxford is quite a traditional place. You have to wear silly gowns to sit exams in and to graduate and in my college we say grace before formal hall (a special type of dinner with table service that the college offers three-times a week as a free alternative to our regular dinner). This is at once part of what makes Oxford special and distinctive but it can also make you feel like you don’t belong. Again, my advice is to reflect that though these traditions have been carried on for centuries and link you back to students from the middle ages (which is quite amazing when you think of it), that doesn't mean they define what Oxford is today.
Massively. Everyone in my year at school was very stressed about A-levels and that certainly didn’t help things. However with Oxford it’s important to remember that once you’ve received your offer you’ve in many ways done the difficult part, the majority of offer holders get the grades they need. That isn’t for a moment to say that you should get complacent, but I found it comforting both times to think in the run-up to exams how far I’d come already and how many barriers I’d passed to get to Oxford.
Although objectively the second time I was sitting exams I only had to worry about one subject’s worth of exams psychologically the fact that a lot was resting on just two exams was quite nerve-racking for me. Having spent so long trying to get into Oxford (and become a bit fixated on it perhaps) I was determined not to let it slip away. Although I’m incredibly happy at Oxford now and the last two years have probably been the best of my life so far, Oxford certainly isn’t worth sleepless nights worrying about whether or not you’ll get in. As I said above, getting or not getting into Oxford is not a reflection on your intelligence or capability and it certainly shouldn’t become a benchmark by which to measure your self-worth. The very fact that you’re considering applying shows that you have an exceptional amount of ability and drive.
How did I feel about coming up to Oxford?
Having come so close and not gotten into Oxford the first time round, and seeing most of my old school friends go off to university, I was incredibly excited about the prospect of finally going up myself. I might have felt a bit more trepidation had I gotten in the year before about going up to university and living away from home for the first time by myself. Socially I was perhaps a bit nervous and talking with someone the other day who was about to start at university I remembered the anxiety: what if I don’t make any friends, what if everyone is a genius, what if everyone went to a private school and is related to the aristocracy. These are all understandable but misplaced anxieties to have before arriving at Oxford: no one ‘type’ of person gets into Oxford and looking at my own group of friends at university it’s actually far more diverse in all senses than my group of friends from my old school, so don’t worry about not fitting in.
Was it how I imagined?
People have all sorts of ideas and images they associate with Oxford and as with most ideals the reality is quite different. Not everyone went to a private school. We don’t spend all day stressing in the library. It’s true that studying in such a grand and ancient space does make it feel different to other universities. Sometimes, even now after two years here, it can feel as though I don’t belong, as though I’m not worthy of the grand spaces I inhabit. Yet these are feelings that friends I have at other universities have felt and I think in many ways it’s an inevitable price of getting into such a prestigious institute that you occasionally second-guess whether or not you deserve to be there. When I feel that way I remind myself that I wouldn’t be here if my tutors didn’t think I wasn’t capable of it.
Oxford is quite a traditional place. You have to wear silly gowns to sit exams in and to graduate and in my college we say grace before formal hall (a special type of dinner with table service that the college offers three-times a week as a free alternative to our regular dinner). This is at once part of what makes Oxford special and distinctive but it can also make you feel like you don’t belong. Again, my advice is to reflect that though these traditions have been carried on for centuries and link you back to students from the middle ages (which is quite amazing when you think of it), that doesn't mean they define what Oxford is today.
(edited 4 years ago)
What are my impressions of the course?
As I said at the start, history at Oxford is great because of the sheer amount of choice offered. Everyone in my year at New College doing history is working on something different which reflects their own interests. The trade off of this is that it means history can be a slightly anti-social degree as you aren’t usually able to collaborate with other people in your college on work, whereas some subject groups where they all do the same papers become very close. History is different to this but that doesn’t mean we don’t get along: we do and where we can we work together on things and make an effort to all meet up and socialise outside of work at least once a term.
History at Oxford also has very few contact (teaching) hours. To give you a sense, in my very first term at Oxford I had between three and five lectures a week (each one hour) and one to two tutorials a week (between an hour and an hour and a half). Last term I only had one tutorial a week with no lectures, so one hour of teaching a week. This is obviously much less fixed teaching time than at school or for other degrees (especially sciences and medicine).
You therefore need to develop skills of time management in order to succeed. There’s no one fixed rule to this, it’s about finding a system that works for you. Some of my friends need the pressure of a deadline up against them to make them work effectively so they will often leave an essay until a few days before it’s due and work very intensively on it. Personally, I prefer to spread my work over a longer period, usually four days for each essay, so that I can take plenty of breaks whilst working and keep things ticking along smoothly. The lack of teaching time also means that self-motivation is important and it’s something you should think hard about before you apply: do I want to study history or do I want the prestige of going to Oxford and history is my best chance of getting there? The people who struggle with their degree and have a worse time at Oxford tend to be the people who fall into the latter category for history. That isn’t to say that every waking moment I’m in love with my degree, like anything you do full time there are points when it gets stressful or you would rather do anything else but that’s not my standard experience. Just like my experiences at interviews, usually I find history a thought-provoking and mentally taxing degree, but it’s a challenge I enjoy.
What kind of work/life balance do I have?
I think that because A-levels in general, and getting into Oxford in particular, are hard, and at times stressful, work I imagined that Oxford would be like that around the clock. I think it was a fear of constantly having to work around the clock that put a lot of my friends, who were really capable, off of applying to Oxford.
After two years here I can definitely say that Oxford is not like that: we aren’t pulling all nighters every other day trying to finish essays. Undeniably I have more work than some of my friends at other universities. Typically at Oxford for history you will be set 1-2 essays a week, whereas some of my friends at other universities will only have one or two essays a term. But the perk of being set more work is that the pressure on each individual essay is less: you can better afford to experiment with different writing styles or scrape through with one bad essay when it’s one in 12 as opposed to one in two.
I enjoy my degree a lot but it certainly isn’t the only, or even at times the predominant, activity in my university life. I’ve never struggled to find time to do a range of extracurricular activities and the great perk of having so few contact hours as a history student is that you can be flexible. At the start it can be hard to find this balance and as I’ve said it’s about finding a system that works for you.
I’m almost always busy at Oxford but that isn’t because, as sixth-former me imagined, I’m constantly glued to my desk working. In any one day I’ll work in the library, go for lunch with someone, have a drama rehearsal in the afternoon, do a bit more work, go for dinner with my friends in the college hall, go back to my room, have a drink at the pub, go out clubbing or see a group of people. If you like always having stuff on and constantly occupying yourself with things then I think you’ll find, given a few weeks maybe, a very fulfilling work-life balance at Oxford.
As I said at the start, history at Oxford is great because of the sheer amount of choice offered. Everyone in my year at New College doing history is working on something different which reflects their own interests. The trade off of this is that it means history can be a slightly anti-social degree as you aren’t usually able to collaborate with other people in your college on work, whereas some subject groups where they all do the same papers become very close. History is different to this but that doesn’t mean we don’t get along: we do and where we can we work together on things and make an effort to all meet up and socialise outside of work at least once a term.
History at Oxford also has very few contact (teaching) hours. To give you a sense, in my very first term at Oxford I had between three and five lectures a week (each one hour) and one to two tutorials a week (between an hour and an hour and a half). Last term I only had one tutorial a week with no lectures, so one hour of teaching a week. This is obviously much less fixed teaching time than at school or for other degrees (especially sciences and medicine).
You therefore need to develop skills of time management in order to succeed. There’s no one fixed rule to this, it’s about finding a system that works for you. Some of my friends need the pressure of a deadline up against them to make them work effectively so they will often leave an essay until a few days before it’s due and work very intensively on it. Personally, I prefer to spread my work over a longer period, usually four days for each essay, so that I can take plenty of breaks whilst working and keep things ticking along smoothly. The lack of teaching time also means that self-motivation is important and it’s something you should think hard about before you apply: do I want to study history or do I want the prestige of going to Oxford and history is my best chance of getting there? The people who struggle with their degree and have a worse time at Oxford tend to be the people who fall into the latter category for history. That isn’t to say that every waking moment I’m in love with my degree, like anything you do full time there are points when it gets stressful or you would rather do anything else but that’s not my standard experience. Just like my experiences at interviews, usually I find history a thought-provoking and mentally taxing degree, but it’s a challenge I enjoy.
What kind of work/life balance do I have?
I think that because A-levels in general, and getting into Oxford in particular, are hard, and at times stressful, work I imagined that Oxford would be like that around the clock. I think it was a fear of constantly having to work around the clock that put a lot of my friends, who were really capable, off of applying to Oxford.
After two years here I can definitely say that Oxford is not like that: we aren’t pulling all nighters every other day trying to finish essays. Undeniably I have more work than some of my friends at other universities. Typically at Oxford for history you will be set 1-2 essays a week, whereas some of my friends at other universities will only have one or two essays a term. But the perk of being set more work is that the pressure on each individual essay is less: you can better afford to experiment with different writing styles or scrape through with one bad essay when it’s one in 12 as opposed to one in two.
I enjoy my degree a lot but it certainly isn’t the only, or even at times the predominant, activity in my university life. I’ve never struggled to find time to do a range of extracurricular activities and the great perk of having so few contact hours as a history student is that you can be flexible. At the start it can be hard to find this balance and as I’ve said it’s about finding a system that works for you.
I’m almost always busy at Oxford but that isn’t because, as sixth-former me imagined, I’m constantly glued to my desk working. In any one day I’ll work in the library, go for lunch with someone, have a drama rehearsal in the afternoon, do a bit more work, go for dinner with my friends in the college hall, go back to my room, have a drink at the pub, go out clubbing or see a group of people. If you like always having stuff on and constantly occupying yourself with things then I think you’ll find, given a few weeks maybe, a very fulfilling work-life balance at Oxford.
What are my impressions of my fellow students?
Like I said above, there is no ‘type’ of Oxford student. Contrary to the stereotypes we aren’t all posh private schoolers or brainiacs who never go out. There are a disproportionate number of privately educated people (including me), its true, but nor is there a really clear divide along social lines: my own social group includes people from all over the country and overseas and from very different family backgrounds. Statistically Oxford does have a long way to go and it can appear very inaccessible, but none of the staff and none of the students want to make Oxford an exclusive or unwelcoming atmosphere.
The whole ‘big fish in little pond to little fish in big pond’ transition can be a bit daunting but thankfully I’ve encountered very little arrogance or intelligence flexing among students. If anything I’m always quite inspired by the people around me, who are clearly very capable and yet quietly get on with things and don’t seek applause. It can be really great meeting people who have a clear passion for their subject and if you’ve ever felt uncomfortable or self-aware showing any academic enthusiasm Oxford can be a really refreshing change, but conversely it’s not the case that we’re all sitting at dinner talking about our latest essay argument and discussing weighty issues. I’m always impressed by the way in which most students at Oxford manage to at once so talented in their respective field and yet also live and act like anyone else
Like I said above, there is no ‘type’ of Oxford student. Contrary to the stereotypes we aren’t all posh private schoolers or brainiacs who never go out. There are a disproportionate number of privately educated people (including me), its true, but nor is there a really clear divide along social lines: my own social group includes people from all over the country and overseas and from very different family backgrounds. Statistically Oxford does have a long way to go and it can appear very inaccessible, but none of the staff and none of the students want to make Oxford an exclusive or unwelcoming atmosphere.
The whole ‘big fish in little pond to little fish in big pond’ transition can be a bit daunting but thankfully I’ve encountered very little arrogance or intelligence flexing among students. If anything I’m always quite inspired by the people around me, who are clearly very capable and yet quietly get on with things and don’t seek applause. It can be really great meeting people who have a clear passion for their subject and if you’ve ever felt uncomfortable or self-aware showing any academic enthusiasm Oxford can be a really refreshing change, but conversely it’s not the case that we’re all sitting at dinner talking about our latest essay argument and discussing weighty issues. I’m always impressed by the way in which most students at Oxford manage to at once so talented in their respective field and yet also live and act like anyone else
BB is delighted to help with this book. He specifically would love to know if his chapter has helped anybody into Oxford (or Cambridge). So if it has, could you please tell me, and I will feed it back to him.
Thanks
Thanks
Original post by JDCoey
Hi, very useful!
You talk about a 'second personal statement' and just wanted to clarify what you meant by this?
You talk about a 'second personal statement' and just wanted to clarify what you meant by this?
It is because BB didn't get in the first time. He got an offer, but missed one of his grades, so he had to re-take one of his A levels. The first time he got into Magdalen, the second time to New College, his present home!
General books about history to read
Agrippina by Dr Emma Southon
Greg Jenner’s ‘A Million Years In A Day’ and ‘Dead Famous’,
What Is History? by E.H. Carr
The Great Cat Massacre by Robert Darnton
History: A Very Short Introduction by John Arnold (any of the VSIs are useful)
the Romanovs by Simon Sebag-Montefiore
Eyewitnessing by Peter Burke
anything by Janet L Nelson (she’s great)
Dangerous Games, Margaret MacMillan (book about how history affects us all)
BBC History Magazine (I also have notifications on my phone for BBC History Magazine - you never know when one will pop up and grab your interest! and great to read waiting for a bus etc)
-Margaret Macmillan 'The Uses and Abuses of History' is a short, engaging alternative introduction to historiography as opposed to E H Carr 'what is history'
-reading articles for your personal statement is just as valid as books - History Today magazine is really good, your school might be able to get you online access or I did their deal for 3 copies (1 per month) for £5 - was definitely worth it because was easier to create a contrast between a book and a short article, as well as getting used to academically written texts
- A little History of the World by EH Gombrich is also a nice and simple introduction to a variety of periods which I enjoyed
compiled for us by @rsmithson00
Agrippina by Dr Emma Southon
Greg Jenner’s ‘A Million Years In A Day’ and ‘Dead Famous’,
What Is History? by E.H. Carr
The Great Cat Massacre by Robert Darnton
History: A Very Short Introduction by John Arnold (any of the VSIs are useful)
the Romanovs by Simon Sebag-Montefiore
Eyewitnessing by Peter Burke
anything by Janet L Nelson (she’s great)
Dangerous Games, Margaret MacMillan (book about how history affects us all)
BBC History Magazine (I also have notifications on my phone for BBC History Magazine - you never know when one will pop up and grab your interest! and great to read waiting for a bus etc)
-Margaret Macmillan 'The Uses and Abuses of History' is a short, engaging alternative introduction to historiography as opposed to E H Carr 'what is history'
-reading articles for your personal statement is just as valid as books - History Today magazine is really good, your school might be able to get you online access or I did their deal for 3 copies (1 per month) for £5 - was definitely worth it because was easier to create a contrast between a book and a short article, as well as getting used to academically written texts
- A little History of the World by EH Gombrich is also a nice and simple introduction to a variety of periods which I enjoyed
compiled for us by @rsmithson00
honestly most useful thing I've read. Applying 2021, daunting but this has given me an extra drive to work hard
This was written by my younger son’s best friend. He now has a first class degree and studying for his masters in Cambridge. He will be thrilled when I tell him you think it’s the most useful thing you have read.
@user31jack
@user31jack
Some bright spark from the Oxford thread noticed how I hadn't posted any sample history questions here:
Here goes:
https://sites.google.com/site/oxbridgeinterviewquestions/history
http://apply.oxfordsu.org/courses/history/interviews/
https://www.oxfordinterviewquestions.com/questions/history/
https://brightyoungthings.co.uk/blog/history-oxford-interview-questions/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7rWoabGGQeY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AZverMWeg4
@nh2003
Here goes:
https://sites.google.com/site/oxbridgeinterviewquestions/history
http://apply.oxfordsu.org/courses/history/interviews/
https://www.oxfordinterviewquestions.com/questions/history/
https://brightyoungthings.co.uk/blog/history-oxford-interview-questions/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7rWoabGGQeY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AZverMWeg4
@nh2003
Original post by Oxford Mum
Some bright spark from the Oxford thread noticed how I hadn't posted any sample history questions here:
Here goes:
https://sites.google.com/site/oxbridgeinterviewquestions/history
http://apply.oxfordsu.org/courses/history/interviews/
https://www.oxfordinterviewquestions.com/questions/history/
https://brightyoungthings.co.uk/blog/history-oxford-interview-questions/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7rWoabGGQeY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AZverMWeg4
@nh2003
Here goes:
https://sites.google.com/site/oxbridgeinterviewquestions/history
http://apply.oxfordsu.org/courses/history/interviews/
https://www.oxfordinterviewquestions.com/questions/history/
https://brightyoungthings.co.uk/blog/history-oxford-interview-questions/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7rWoabGGQeY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AZverMWeg4
@nh2003
Thank you! Honestly thought I was losing my mind and not looking hard enough! Thanks again!
Original post by nh2003
Thank you! Honestly thought I was losing my mind and not looking hard enough! Thanks again!
Hold on, let me just pick up my marbles, I seem to have lost them...
Related discussions
- Oxford University: Your Guide to Oxford Interviews
- Does Oxford mind if your supercurriculars are to do with Cambridge?
- Oxford Law GCSE Grades
- Oxford super/extracurricals
- what does cambridge actually want from a medical applicant?
- Oxbridge applicants for modern languages - 2025 entry (applying in 2024)
- Oxford Demystified - Engineering
- Geography: Oxford or Cambridge?
- Which university, Oxford or Cambridge cares more about GCSE grades?
- Cambridge Demystified - Law
- University of Oxford 2025 Undergraduate Applicants Official Thread
- Oxbridge Medicine Extracurriculars
- State school
- oxford
- Oxford medical school application
- Oxford personal statement
- Oxford Demystified - Chapter 1 - Should I apply?
- Cambridge Demystified - Applying as a Mature Student
- Oxford Demystified – Physics and Philosophy
- Oxford Demystified - Law and Spanish Law
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 week ago
The fate of my Oxford applications is in the hands of my teacherLast reply 1 week ago
Oxbridge applicants for modern languages - 2025 entry (applying in 2024)Last reply 1 week ago
CMV: One should be allowed to apply to both Oxford and Camrbdige for undergrad
