Oxford PPE (Philosophy, Politics and Economics) Students and Applicants

Ok so I recently got an offer from New college, after being rejected by Trinity last year.

Look at the application process like this:

100% of the applicants apply (tautological)
25% will get in, 75% will be rejected.
40% of those rejected were simply not up to standard

-> 30% of total applicants were simply not up to standard

20% of those accepted were "always" going to get in (superstudents)

-> 5% of total applicants were superstudents definitely getting in

So the remaining 65% of the total are gambling. Of them about 30% will get in and 70% will be rejected. They are all pretty much good enough to get in, (this is post interviews).

Your rejection the first time probably just means your not in the top 5% of superstudents. Reapplication just means your returning to the gamble.

I know this is a gross simplicfication but it's how i see it.

Sorry, but I think this is rubbish. The point about re-applying is a good one - I have one friend who did this, successfully - but everything else is tosh.

You would say that most people who got in deserved to get in over most people who didn't. Maybe .... I'm inclined to think there was a lot more of a random gamble involved. Had the interviews been a day later and gone differently then I wouldn't be surprised if someone else had performed slightly better at interview, I'd performed slightly worse and my place would belong to someone else.

I would say that desert is an abstract notion which is impossible to represent with figures. And yes, I would also be inclined to assert that the admissions process is a lot fairer than you make it out to be.

Some people are asked nice questions, some people asked nasty questions (often depending on a tutor), some people were overly nervous that interview, some people weren't, some people were feeling a little under the weather and others were in top shape ... there are so many factors that decide your interview performance and test performance, practically everyone has straight A predictions, it comes down to luck on the day (as I see it).

Tutors know whether they are asking nasty questions or nice questions, and accordingly make allowances in their assessment. Increasingly, all interviewees for a particular subject and college are given interviews of a broadly similar nature, thus eliminating any element of luck.

As for "under the weather"... Do you mean illness? Well, if this was the case, tutors could make allowances for this, too. You know, they're quite clever human beings, and can in most cases see through daily fluctuations in character and intellect.

They're quite clever human beings, and can in most cases see through daily fluctuations in character and intellect.

I got rejected from St.John's this year and was wondering whether I should reapply or if the rejection was a sign saying "you're just not good enough- tough."
I was a bit confused as I had been sent to St.Peter's too, which I took to be a good sign as I was the only one sent there, obviously not... and also because I found the interviews really fun and the topics interesting. I agree that there weren't any unreasonable questions and that the 1st question on the test was by far the hardest.
I've been given a gap year offer by Deloitte's so I'm doing that for 7months then hopefully doing some work in Westminster as a researcher (need to sort out final details for it first though). Maybe that i mentioned the Deloitte's thing when they asked me would i like a gap year wasn't a good idea- I hadn't applied for deferred as I wanted to see if i got in first and then ask for a gap year if i got in- what do you think?

Anyway, I would like some advice on choosing a college and anything else that you would recommend. I'm really eager to get in next year and am willing to do whatever's necessary (within reason).

Any help on personal statement would be great.

Many thanks in advance for any help you do give.
This is a bit of a long post-sorry!

P.S 10 A*s GCSE
5 A's AS
(Doing 4 A levels and 2 AS)
i don't think my grades let me down but do you think very high point scores give me any advantage?

Would it be seen favourably by Oxford if I wrote about Economics in my UCAS PS and then wrote about Politics and Philosophy in my additional PS?

Also, what colleges in Oxford have a fairly 'less presitigious' reputation compared to others?