OXFORD HAT Issues

The tests were online last year. Some people used test centres if their schools were not able to provide test facilities. Students all over the world did an online test.
“The HAT test has literally NEVER been done online before.Google it FFS” i suspect you have now practiced what you preached and done some investigation yourself as your tone seems to have calmed down and you’re not effing and blinding anymore. There are numerous accounts on here of people doing it last year online on a computer and typing.
So in fact you are incorrect when you say “the HAT has literally never been done online”

Honestly I pity anyone who has to have a tutorial with you with your attitude! You are like a rabid dog! It’s really not the sort of thing they are looking for - you’re so angry! We had papers and typed answers and these were not run in online centres. Thanks for quoting back to everything back to me though in case I have early onset dementia.

Now I’m like a dog. And I’m the angry one. I think I’ve done pretty well staying calm with someone who has been swearing and typing in caps. The tests were online. I’m not sure what you think online means.You made the statement.

You come across as disproportionately angry, raging at a perceived injustice, despite the absence of any evidence that anyone has obtained or will obtain an unfair advantage in the admissions process; and throwing around generalisations about privilege and so forth. If you obtain an offer to study at Oxford, will you still proclaim the admission system to be unfair?
Top tip from an Oxford History graduate; the subject is about measured, evidence-based discussion, and seeing several points of view.
The Pearson test centres cockup sounds like a right mess. Perhaps the software employed in the testing system had not been adequately tested. No doubt the project was done to a budget.

Out of curiosity, was this ever resolved/did you receive any further communication? I'm based in the US so I was able to take it without any errors but I'm curious as to how all this will be factoring into admissions.

I am disappointed that you have chosen to use my reference to privilege in a rather disingenuous way. I think it was a fair comment to point to the fact that people shouldn’t in this day and age have to just accept that some things are just unfair and there is no use in complaining. #MeToo #BlackLivesMatter. Imagine how lovely that would be for people like Harvey Weinstein.
“There are some things in life that are just unfair, you have to just learn to accept that as you grow up. There is no usein complaining” “I seriously urge you to come to terms with the fact that life isn't always fair”
I simply pointed to many things that happen in life that are unfair like racism, oppression, sexism. I referenced “privilege and head starts” as some of the things that we are supposed to just accept as just being “unfair” and there is no use in complaining. Oxford have actively commented on trying to change the admissions dynamic and break the status quo.
If I were to receive an offer would I still maintain that the HAT system offered this year is open to cheating. It is. I think I’ve made my point on this before. You can’t have a fair test if everyone doesn’t sit under the same conditions at the same time. That’s why GSCE’s and A Levels aren’t tested in the same way the HAT is. I am disappointed in Oxford for setting the test this way. You see it as “disproportionately angry, raging”
“the subject is about measured, evidence-based discussion, and seeing several points of view”
I looked at many discussions yesterday. Hence my concerns. There were people posting about the test and speaking of discussions they’d had with other students. Also if a test isn’t set up to be foolproof then it won’t be. That’s a basic ideology.
And, with all you’ve said, funny how you saw fit to comment on my behaviour yet you don’t seem to have commented on the swearing and name calling, judgement on whether I’m the “sort of thing they are looking for” that I have received. As an Oxford graduate as you pointed out, you didn’t see anything worth comment with any of the other points of view. Only mine. Very revealing.

Disingenuous is just a fancy word for lying. I suggest it is inappropriate to accuse others of lying, absent evidence that they are lying.
I have seen no swearing on this thread.
More free advice that you are of course free to ignore: Oxford is looking for students who are teachable.

Very revealing

Disingenuous is just a fancy word for lying. I suggest it is inappropriate to accuse others of lying, absent evidence that they are lying.
I have seen no swearing on this thread.
More free advice that you are of course free to ignore: Oxford is looking for students who are teachable.

I am sorry for you. I hope that one day you will be happy.

If anyone was wondering about whether they will be able to reschedule their HAT, Oxford's undergraduate twitter account has tweeted that there will be no second test, and that if students missed it they will be considered without it

I’d be a little disappointed…(though not the fault of those that couldn’t take the test) If those who did take the paper were scrutinised harshly, meanwhile, colleges are handing out more interviews to those who couldn’t take the paper. Using data on UCAS applications undermines the whole point behind the HAT - To balance out grade inflation and look at everyone’s performance. To be lenient with those who never sat the paper - whilst good for them, isn’t necessarily a balanced approach (in my opinion) someone who sat the paper yesterday.
Ps: I know there have been many tedious and quite frankly pedantic arguments about ‘fairness’ on this thread, so don’t want to add to that by using what seems to be a pretty hot topic of late. I just wanted to share my thoughts 😂

This! I didn’t want to contribute further to that discourse, but I’m definitely hoping that the HAT will generally receive less consideration relative to other aspects of the app given the amount of people who couldn’t complete it (though luckily we didn’t quite hit the scale of the ELAT last year!) Should we consider reaching out to our selected colleges and asking about how the HAT is going to be weighed this year?

If anyone was wondering about whether they will be able to reschedule their HAT, Oxford's undergraduate twitter account has tweeted that there will be no second test, and that if students missed it they will be considered without it

I’d be a little disappointed…(though not the fault of those that couldn’t take the test) If those who did take the paper were scrutinised harshly, meanwhile, colleges are handing out more interviews to those who couldn’t take the paper. Using data on UCAS applications undermines the whole point behind the HAT - To balance out grade inflation and look at everyone’s performance. To be lenient with those who never sat the paper - whilst good for them, isn’t necessarily a balanced approach (in my opinion) someone who sat the paper yesterday.
Ps: I know there have been many tedious and quite frankly pedantic arguments about ‘fairness’ on this thread, so don’t want to add to that by using what seems to be a pretty hot topic of late. I just wanted to share my thoughts 😂

I actually feel the opposite way. I'd be inclined to think that those who weren't able to take the test would be at a disadvantage, as the admissions tutors would have less material to work with when choosing those to be shortlisted, therefore would be less inclined to select those who they have less information about. But that's just my opinion. Who knows how it will play out.

Interesting. This is no fault of the applicants who never got to take the exam, but how would they make the process maximally fair? I’d imagine that they’d shortlist most if not next to all of the people whose entrance exams were ultimately cancelled so as to avoid complaints (since they would be judging them off of their UCAS application alone), so would that lead them to be a little more critical with applicants who took the HAT? Or would the HAT just matter less overall for all applicants?