Taking EPQ is useless

No, I disagree universities want to know what you do in your spare time. They don't want to know that you just study a lot, they want to see your personality.

😂 Why would you take an EPQ expecting it to get you a better grade in your core subjects? That doesn't make it useless- there's just no statistical link between doing an EPQ and getting good a-levels. You take it because you want to research something you're interested in and gain an insight into the skills that you'll be using in university.

You'd stand out based on the essay title you chose/ the process you went through? No two people are gonna have the same EPQ experience.

Why would I come here saying EPQ is useless, without researching it? Also, your graph just proved my point. There's only a 1.8+ difference in score from normal A-level students. ''It's not statistically significant' just proved EPQ is useless according to Cambridge, top uni in the world.

That's hysterically wrong, why would a university care if I like tennis? They want to know if I can do the course. But obviously you can do EPQ and have other things in your life, it's only one qualification. I had it done by Spring year 12

Yes, but you still haven't proved to me that EPQ is useful at all. Universities especially top unis don't want to know that you just study all the time, that wouldn't make you stand out.

They do care, believe me. It's very hard to get into university (especially top universities) if you haven't done anything outside of school or school-related. Y

They do care, believe me. It's very hard to get into university (especially top universities) if you haven't done anything outside of school or school-related.

It depends, if you are looking at Cambridge and Oxford, they do not care if you happen to play tennis, they will only care if you do it at an *extremely* high level. Other RG unis are not as strict, but trust me, playing chess frequently doesn't appeal to them as much as a full on research project unless you happen to be a titled chess player. (example)

"It is mostly true. We do care about extracurricular activities related to the course you are applying to. But usually they do not carry too much weight. If it is unrelated, then we mostly do not care, unless you achieved a very high level."

This is from the Oxford website itself.

State comp or grammar school?

(I work in admissions at a RG Uni)

Whilst we don’t include EPQ’s in our offers, they’re far from useless. Experience in researching & writing in a longer format, especially in a topic linked to the undergraduate course, can be very valuable.

The OP is also massively overstating the value of extracurriculars, (unless directly linked to the course of study), and is also repeating the myth of “needing to stand out”.

It doesn’t matter? I know people from comps who do EPQ, I know people from grammar schools who do EPQ. It literally doesn’t matter.

But think about it, why would you do a course that you haven't researched the past school, that just shows that you don't love your subject. What I mean is, for example, I'm applying for Maths, and I did some programs to do with maths outside of school. So if you obviously love a subject a lot, you would do research more into it so it does matter. Also, I know someone who applied for Engineering at Imperial, and they said that they love to programme and have done it for years so that helped them get in.

Yes, maths is one of the subjects where EPQ is not as helpful as it is in other subjects. Maths is one half of my degree, and for me STEP and BMO were enough as extracurriculars. The other half is comp sci, and like your friend, my years of programming helped me with that. I see where you are coming from with this, as its exactly why I didn't do an EQP - as I feel that I didn't need to. However, for others, it is a welcome boost to their application and it is something that universities do look favourably upon (lots of RG unis decrease their grades if you do EQP)

Also, unless you are very good at your said activity, it is not weighed as much as an EQP during their admission process. I could say that I love chemistry and love reading about it and going to events about it and while that is greatly appreciated, it won't be as appreciated as an A* in the A level it self. Similarly, 70% of CS applicants have been programming for 'years' so unless you make the finals of some informatics olympiad/other crazy thing, you don't really stand out either but having a well planned and established project with an 'A* in EPQ' to show for it on top of 'having programmed for years' will make you stand out if you don't have any other acheivements.

This is mainly STEM though, where I feel like even if your EPQ boosts your application during the admission (so not useless), you can get by without having done it and still be as competent as people who have.

In humanities however, it is a lot more useful as not only does it boost your chances of getting it, you learn valuable referencing (harvard referencing) and essay writing skills ahead of time.

But think about it, why would you do a course that you haven't researched the past school, that just shows that you don't love your subject. What I mean is, for example, I'm applying for Maths, and I did some programs to do with maths outside of school. So if you obviously love a subject a lot, you would do research more into it so it does matter. Also, I know someone who applied for Engineering at Imperial, and they said that they love to programme and have done it for years so that helped them get in.

It does matter hence I asked. So, do you go to a comp or grammar?

How? It's not even considered as a full A-level and most people from top unis don't take it.

I went to a grammar, but as I said before, I have friends who went to comps who did EPQ and found it benefitted them (I think some found it benefitted them more than it did me actually). It’s very subjective whether EPQ is beneficial, but you blanket saying it’s useless in all cases is plain incorrect.