You can only apply to Oxford or Cambridge though, so that will make the application per place numbers look artificially low compared to those other unis.
Harvard has 60,000 applications a year, but Cambridge only just under half that. So we really need a post A-Level system of applying for UCAS with grades and no more predicted grades. This was discussed by the education department many years ago but was not implemented.
The thing is that none of this changes if you are aware of it - and also that it's basically irrelevant at an individual level. If you are taking double maths, physics and economics and you are really good at economics and love economics, you are much more likely to get a place for E&M than you are to get a place for physics, even though physics has half as many applicants per place.
Because they are seen as prestigious and most likely to earn you good money. Many people try to apply for medicine or law just because of how fancy it sounds, without having a deep insight/ keenness about the subject, or what it entails. Those purely in it for the money will get found out at interview stage.
inaccuracy of predicted grades: On average, 18 year old UK students studying A levels are predicted 2.35 A level grades above their achieved grades. Using UCAS data, the consultation states that 79% of individuals had predicted grades which were overpredicted, and 8% were underpredicted, with a view that this presents risks in relation to ‘undermatching’, particularly by disadvantaged students.
Does anyone know what studying medicine at Oxford uni is like?
Do a lot of people drop out a lot?
How many people make it to 5th year of a 1st year cohort?
What is the resit policy like?
How is the style of teaching, do you learn things or do you self study a lot, are the lecturers good at teaching?
How are the placements and do you feel like you learn anything on them?
As much insight will be highly appreciated.
My son is at present in his sixth and final year of Oxford medicine. It’s hard to get in and the drop out rate is quite low. You get used to the relentless pace.
the course goes into massive detail - you spend ages just learning about cells - and little patient contact ( apart from gps) until you graduate with your first degree. You don’t just learn to be an doctor but an innovator.
it’s great if you are interested in research like my son. He was able to work across five labs alongside his studies. He was encouraged to get his research published and now has three research papers published. After his final degree he is doing his elective but has reached out to some labs in America, where the big money is and it looks like he has been able to secure an internship there. Oxford is certainly opening a lot of doors for him ( although it was he who networked and took every opportunity he could find).
as for the tutors, one of them were telling him an idea and said don’t quote me as the research has not been published yet and I am hoping for a Nobel prize. If you are ambitious Oxford will get right behind you.
having said that if you want to be a successful hospital doctor a lot will depend on your attitude to patients and all the staff. Book learning and your university does not count when you have a suffering patient and distressed relatives to deal with. Apply to Oxford because you love medicine not for the pose.
Just looking at the thread title got me thinking - shouldn't the most popular course be defined as the one with the most applicants, regardless of how many places there are? I don't know whether/how that changes the statistics, but it seems odd to me that you'd theoretically be defining a course with 100 applicants for 5 places as "more popular" than one with 10000 applicants for 600 places.