This thread is closed
The "I've been pooled" thread
Scroll to see replies
sorry if sound stupid, but what does "pooled" mean?
So weird - I got pooled this year for philosophy, having been pooled last year for english.
I hate to make everyone feel negative, but pooling leads to rejection more often than not, and so you shouldn't get your hopes up too much.
having said that, of the 3000 or so "pool-ees" last year, about 800 got offers, 500 of those made without interview.
About 100 got offers from their original college!
I hate to make everyone feel negative, but pooling leads to rejection more often than not, and so you shouldn't get your hopes up too much.
having said that, of the 3000 or so "pool-ees" last year, about 800 got offers, 500 of those made without interview.
About 100 got offers from their original college!
Swires
I hope I get a straight forward offer without the bother of another interview... But I think this is everyone's ideal situation lol.
I think those that have been pooled under the autopooling criteria/category will mostly be the ones who have to undergo a second round of interviews (a sort of second chance to impress I guess, therefore allowing for a 'bad day' for the original interviews) Any thoughts on this?
Swires
I don't get why the original colleges then make offers to applicants they pooled...???
I think they like to sometimes give some offers to the very strongest applicants, then weigh up their others against candidates from a different college in the pool - they might end up deciding to take you back.
Murphology
I think those that have been pooled under the autopooling criteria/category will mostly be the ones who have to undergo a second round of interviews (a sort of second chance to impress I guess, therefore allowing for a 'bad day' for the original interviews) Any thoughts on this?
The "S" category is the one which recommends another set of interviews, for people who had like one cruddy interview and one great one or deserve another shot at interview for whatever reasons, "P" is just for people who turned out not to be that strong at interview but are pooled because of their grades, but apparently only 5% of people pooled are in category "P" so you're very unlikely to have been auto-pooled anyway.
Swires
I don't get why the original colleges then make offers to applicants they pooled...???
They want to see if they can better their own potential uptake by taking pooled applicants from other colleges, if not they can safely make offers to those they planned to.
EDIT:
littleshambles
but apparently only 5% of people pooled are in category "P"
Ahh I wasn't aware of this, where did you hear this?? That scuppers my idea lol. I know I've not been pooled under the the autopool anyway however.
Murphology
I think those that have been pooled under the autopooling criteria/category will mostly be the ones who have to undergo a second round of interviews (a sort of second chance to impress I guess, therefore allowing for a 'bad day' for the original interviews) Any thoughts on this?
I'm not sure, I'd think it's more the "probably worth an offer" (Category B) or "strongly recommended" (though these may be the ones who get straight offers w/o interviews) who get called as they were good at interview and somewhat borderline-ish that they get another chance.
Swires
I don't get why the original colleges then make offers to applicants they pooled...???
Moderation purposes, so say the bottom few at a college gets pooled, college sees if there's anyone better in the pool, and if there aren't then the poolees are taken back.
Agneisse
I'm not sure, I'd think it's more the "probably worth an offer" (Category B) or "strongly recommended" (though these may be the ones who get straight offers w/o interviews) who get called as they were good at interview and somewhat borderline-ish that they get another chance.
Hmmm. Firstly, are we allowed to discuss what our letters actually said here? And if so, does everyone being pooled receive the same old standard reply?
Murphology
Hmmm. Firstly, are we allowed to discuss what our letters actually said here? And if so, does everyone being pooled receive the same old standard reply?
i've been wondering that lol
Ruth xx
littleshambles
only 5% of people pooled are in category "P" so you're very unlikely to have been auto-pooled anyway.
Where did you hear this D:
Damn, so I'm one of the 5%!
http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/offices/admissions/handbook/appendices/winterpool.pdf
Oh wait I misread the thing about being pooled in category P!
There are four criteria for pooling:
A Recommendation: If places are available, this applicant is strongly recommended
[applicants pooled with tags/strings should normally be in this category]
B Recommendation: This applicant is probably worth an offer
P Applicant looked absolutely outstanding on paper but was less impressive at interview
S Applicant in special need of reassessment
The pool cover sheet is designed so that the criterion (A, B, P or S) under which an applicant is being
pooled is prominently displayed.
The criteria under which applicants could be pooled ‘in special need of reassessment’ (category S)
should be:
a) When the applicant received wildly divergent subject interviewer assessments (e.g. scores of 8
Page 4 of 16
Winter Pool 2009/HR/CAO/30.11.2008
4
and 4) – large differences between subject interviewer and general academic (formerly tutorial)
interviewer assessments were not considered grounds for an applicant requiring reassessment;
b) When the applicant’s interviews malfunctioned;
c) When the applicant was seriously disadvantaged at interview due to special circumstances
(e.g. debilitating illness or recent family bereavement).
In circumstances (b) and (c) it may well be more appropriate that the preference/allocated College takes
responsibility for ensuring reassessment takes place.
It was recognised that in some subjects, where applicants are already interviewed by more than one
College as part of agreed moderation arrangements, the likelihood of an applicant needing reassessment
except in a category (c) case was low.
3. In order to try to ensure that applicants most needy of reassessment are reassessed, the following
procedure for the Winter Pool was agreed for subjects without shared interviewing arrangements:
(a) The subject convenor/moderator reviews the files of those pooled in category S (in special need of
reassessment) in order to identify from among those the applicants most needy of reassessment in
the interests of fairness;
(b) At the pool meeting in that subject the subject convenor keeps track of the files of those applicants
identified at stage (a) and endeavours to persuade those Colleges fishing the pool in that subject to
interview these applicants along with any other applicants they have selected for interview.
The Admissions Forum hopes that if applicants pooled in category S are genuinely deserving of
reassessment then
· their numbers should be relatively small (no more than 5% of those pooled) and
· it should be well worth a pool-fishing College looking at them alongside those ‘probably worth an offer’.
This being the case, the procedure detailed above should not be unduly burdensome on any of the
parties concerned.
I think I should have a lie down.
Oh wait I misread the thing about being pooled in category P!
There are four criteria for pooling:
A Recommendation: If places are available, this applicant is strongly recommended
[applicants pooled with tags/strings should normally be in this category]
B Recommendation: This applicant is probably worth an offer
P Applicant looked absolutely outstanding on paper but was less impressive at interview
S Applicant in special need of reassessment
The pool cover sheet is designed so that the criterion (A, B, P or S) under which an applicant is being
pooled is prominently displayed.
The criteria under which applicants could be pooled ‘in special need of reassessment’ (category S)
should be:
a) When the applicant received wildly divergent subject interviewer assessments (e.g. scores of 8
Page 4 of 16
Winter Pool 2009/HR/CAO/30.11.2008
4
and 4) – large differences between subject interviewer and general academic (formerly tutorial)
interviewer assessments were not considered grounds for an applicant requiring reassessment;
b) When the applicant’s interviews malfunctioned;
c) When the applicant was seriously disadvantaged at interview due to special circumstances
(e.g. debilitating illness or recent family bereavement).
In circumstances (b) and (c) it may well be more appropriate that the preference/allocated College takes
responsibility for ensuring reassessment takes place.
It was recognised that in some subjects, where applicants are already interviewed by more than one
College as part of agreed moderation arrangements, the likelihood of an applicant needing reassessment
except in a category (c) case was low.
3. In order to try to ensure that applicants most needy of reassessment are reassessed, the following
procedure for the Winter Pool was agreed for subjects without shared interviewing arrangements:
(a) The subject convenor/moderator reviews the files of those pooled in category S (in special need of
reassessment) in order to identify from among those the applicants most needy of reassessment in
the interests of fairness;
(b) At the pool meeting in that subject the subject convenor keeps track of the files of those applicants
identified at stage (a) and endeavours to persuade those Colleges fishing the pool in that subject to
interview these applicants along with any other applicants they have selected for interview.
The Admissions Forum hopes that if applicants pooled in category S are genuinely deserving of
reassessment then
· their numbers should be relatively small (no more than 5% of those pooled) and
· it should be well worth a pool-fishing College looking at them alongside those ‘probably worth an offer’.
This being the case, the procedure detailed above should not be unduly burdensome on any of the
parties concerned.
I think I should have a lie down.
Pooled. I'm not bothered about it, I knew I was applying to one of the most competitive colleges, so I knew it was a possibility. I still believe I'm good enough, but it would have been nice to find out definitely either way today. I think if they offer another interview, I might turn it down, too much travelling, and interviews are so monotanous, maths q after maths q. But meh, even if I'm rejected, I'm still going to an amazing uni, so can't complain.
Swires
If we could analyse the letters we could then draw comparisons between the semantics of each and see if they correlate with the different types of pooling category!
LOL that is a fantastic idea. If any Cambridge admissions tutors are looking in I'm sure they'd be very amused
Swires
If we could analyse the letters we could then draw comparisons between the semantics of each and see if they correlate with the different types of pooling category!
Well that was the idea
:laughing: Genius!
littleshambles
http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/offices/admissions/handbook/appendices/winterpool.pdf
Oh wait I misread the thing about being pooled in category P!
There are four criteria for pooling:
A Recommendation: If places are available, this applicant is strongly recommended
[applicants pooled with tags/strings should normally be in this category]
B Recommendation: This applicant is probably worth an offer
P Applicant looked absolutely outstanding on paper but was less impressive at interview
S Applicant in special need of reassessment
The pool cover sheet is designed so that the criterion (A, B, P or S) under which an applicant is being
pooled is prominently displayed.
The criteria under which applicants could be pooled ‘in special need of reassessment’ (category S)
should be:
a) When the applicant received wildly divergent subject interviewer assessments (e.g. scores of 8
Page 4 of 16
Winter Pool 2009/HR/CAO/30.11.2008
4
and 4) – large differences between subject interviewer and general academic (formerly tutorial)
interviewer assessments were not considered grounds for an applicant requiring reassessment;
b) When the applicant’s interviews malfunctioned;
c) When the applicant was seriously disadvantaged at interview due to special circumstances
(e.g. debilitating illness or recent family bereavement).
In circumstances (b) and (c) it may well be more appropriate that the preference/allocated College takes
responsibility for ensuring reassessment takes place.
It was recognised that in some subjects, where applicants are already interviewed by more than one
College as part of agreed moderation arrangements, the likelihood of an applicant needing reassessment
except in a category (c) case was low.
3. In order to try to ensure that applicants most needy of reassessment are reassessed, the following
procedure for the Winter Pool was agreed for subjects without shared interviewing arrangements:
(a) The subject convenor/moderator reviews the files of those pooled in category S (in special need of
reassessment) in order to identify from among those the applicants most needy of reassessment in
the interests of fairness;
(b) At the pool meeting in that subject the subject convenor keeps track of the files of those applicants
identified at stage (a) and endeavours to persuade those Colleges fishing the pool in that subject to
interview these applicants along with any other applicants they have selected for interview.
The Admissions Forum hopes that if applicants pooled in category S are genuinely deserving of
reassessment then
· their numbers should be relatively small (no more than 5% of those pooled) and
· it should be well worth a pool-fishing College looking at them alongside those ‘probably worth an offer’.
This being the case, the procedure detailed above should not be unduly burdensome on any of the
parties concerned.
I think I should have a lie down.
Oh wait I misread the thing about being pooled in category P!
There are four criteria for pooling:
A Recommendation: If places are available, this applicant is strongly recommended
[applicants pooled with tags/strings should normally be in this category]
B Recommendation: This applicant is probably worth an offer
P Applicant looked absolutely outstanding on paper but was less impressive at interview
S Applicant in special need of reassessment
The pool cover sheet is designed so that the criterion (A, B, P or S) under which an applicant is being
pooled is prominently displayed.
The criteria under which applicants could be pooled ‘in special need of reassessment’ (category S)
should be:
a) When the applicant received wildly divergent subject interviewer assessments (e.g. scores of 8
Page 4 of 16
Winter Pool 2009/HR/CAO/30.11.2008
4
and 4) – large differences between subject interviewer and general academic (formerly tutorial)
interviewer assessments were not considered grounds for an applicant requiring reassessment;
b) When the applicant’s interviews malfunctioned;
c) When the applicant was seriously disadvantaged at interview due to special circumstances
(e.g. debilitating illness or recent family bereavement).
In circumstances (b) and (c) it may well be more appropriate that the preference/allocated College takes
responsibility for ensuring reassessment takes place.
It was recognised that in some subjects, where applicants are already interviewed by more than one
College as part of agreed moderation arrangements, the likelihood of an applicant needing reassessment
except in a category (c) case was low.
3. In order to try to ensure that applicants most needy of reassessment are reassessed, the following
procedure for the Winter Pool was agreed for subjects without shared interviewing arrangements:
(a) The subject convenor/moderator reviews the files of those pooled in category S (in special need of
reassessment) in order to identify from among those the applicants most needy of reassessment in
the interests of fairness;
(b) At the pool meeting in that subject the subject convenor keeps track of the files of those applicants
identified at stage (a) and endeavours to persuade those Colleges fishing the pool in that subject to
interview these applicants along with any other applicants they have selected for interview.
The Admissions Forum hopes that if applicants pooled in category S are genuinely deserving of
reassessment then
· their numbers should be relatively small (no more than 5% of those pooled) and
· it should be well worth a pool-fishing College looking at them alongside those ‘probably worth an offer’.
This being the case, the procedure detailed above should not be unduly burdensome on any of the
parties concerned.
I think I should have a lie down.
Do we get to find out our numbers/letters that we fit in? Would be interesting to find out.
"In shortage areas, pool slightly more generously (e.g. women in
Mathematics, Engineering, Physical Natural Sciences, Computer Science)." - This seems ridiculously sexist, to me.
Related discussions
- The Official Cambridge Winter Pool 2014 thread [includes FAQ and Status Reports]
- swimming vs Sauna. which is best?
- RHUL vs CITY for law
- The Same Picture of Ainsley Harriott Every Day
- Cambridge open application or not?
- a
- Admiral quotes not appearing?
- Ate a ready meal without realising I had to microwave it
- UCAS Clearing 2023 FAQ and Help Megathread
- Got a Ucas or results related question? Ask a Clearing and Applications Advisor here
- does cambridge keep your NSAA result???
- What is dating like in university?
- [Golden Thread] Which TSR users quoted you in the last 12 months?
- Sterling Car Insurance
- English mini mock help please
- First car - can't get insurance
- New Thread Experience Feedback - Official Thread
- Video essay BLOG.
- Ticker insurance
- Name the TSR user, which makes you excited when they quote you.
Trending
- MPhil Advanced Computer Science Cambridge - 2024 Entry
- Cambridge Design Tripos Opinions and Preparation?
- Clare college Cambridge Applicants 2024
- TMUA 2023 Thread
- Cambridge Chemical Engineering and Biotechnology interview peer review
- Cambridge L100 Economics - TMUA to Interview
- HSPS Selwyn
- Cambridge Economics L100 2024 Entry
- Reapplying to Cambridge medicine
- Cambridge Philosophy Admissions test
- Cambridge Interview
- Cambridge engineering rejection
- Sidney Sussex
- Cambridge interview invitation?
- Are there anybody recieved an interview of the Queens College- engineering
- St John’s Cambridge
- has anyone got a cambridge interview yet
- Cambridge Linguistics applicants 2024
- Cambridge Admissions test
- Nsaa 2023
Latest
- The Big 'Recommend Me A College' Thread
- ATAS (Academic, Technology, Approval Scheme) Certificate 2023/2024
- 1 month before University Exams
- The Official Cambridge Applicants for 2024 Entry Thread
- Nottingham hub error?
- Official 2023 formula one Thread
- Extra Curriculars
- A-level Computer Science Study Group 2023-2024
- EPQ survey - primary education/home economics
- Mature Student commuting
- word count on presentation
- Ultrasound soon
- do you have to reference images in powerpoint?
- Withdrawal from University
- I think my ex crush likes me what is ur opinion
- Student finance says “processing application” but was already approved??
- Child and young person therapy IAPT course
- BT Graduate Scheme
- Official Veterinary Medicine Applicants thread 2024 entry
- SFE Maintenance Loan
Latest
- The Big 'Recommend Me A College' Thread
- ATAS (Academic, Technology, Approval Scheme) Certificate 2023/2024
- 1 month before University Exams
- The Official Cambridge Applicants for 2024 Entry Thread
- Nottingham hub error?
- Official 2023 formula one Thread
- Extra Curriculars
- A-level Computer Science Study Group 2023-2024
- EPQ survey - primary education/home economics
- Mature Student commuting
- word count on presentation
- Ultrasound soon
- do you have to reference images in powerpoint?
- Withdrawal from University
- I think my ex crush likes me what is ur opinion
- Student finance says “processing application” but was already approved??
- Child and young person therapy IAPT course
- BT Graduate Scheme
- Official Veterinary Medicine Applicants thread 2024 entry
- SFE Maintenance Loan