HYP and Oxbridge: Are students taught differently?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our dc has been accepted at both an HYPMS and an Oxbridge at this moment (trying not to doxx). We've visited both campuses and the main differences pointed out to us in the UK were:

1) Focused curriculum. You have to really want to study the course you applied for, and changing majors is difficult (but not impossible) so long as they are generally related subjects.

2) Tutorial system, with regular interaction with a professor to keep you on track.

3) Shorter terms, with kids in college for 8-weeks, the last 4 of which are basically preparing for the final/papers, etc.

My kid is at Oxford. I've found the facebook "Oxford University - parents group" to be helpful.

What has been insightful to me about the posts on this Facebook page is the number of UK kids (not usually American!) who have difficulty adjusting to Oxford. Once the excitement of moving in is over you start seeing a lot of parents asking about problems with depression (it's very very sad there during Jan and Feb - same weather every day - always overcast), adjustment issues, problems with old dorms (currently there is a discussion about lack or or too much steam heat) and rusticating, which means the kid knows they aren't cutting it and want to take time off. The term "rusticating" came from "being sent to the countryside", i.e., being sent home. The child might decide to rusticate. Or the school can suggest rusticating: "Rustication is a term used at Oxford, Cambridge and Durham Universities to mean being suspended or expelled temporarily, or, in more recent times, to leave temporarily for welfare or health reasons." My DC says rusticating usually takes place just before exams.

This sounds like every college I've ever seen. The weather part applies to everywhere with similar weather.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cambridge is the only school that MIT allows the transfers of letter grades from. My friends that did the exchange absolutely loved Cambridge and some went back for post-graduate studies. My roommate still lives there and is married and a British citizen now.

Cambridge is an easier admit for Americans.

Not for STEM.

Also, Cambridge still requires 5 5s on APs.

But these all AP and test score requirements are pretty low for the UK. A low floor, indeed. My kid's high school didn't offer APs, which is pretty typical for privates now, and about a third of the class sits for APs anyway to maybe get credit or placement - in a "can't hurt" kind of way - and most end up with 5-9 5s. (The whole AP thing is a bit of a racket, right? It's only in back half of senior year that you know if any of these scores are useful or not.)

Yes, definitely for STEM; if you take into account how HYPS does account for major (without admitting it), STEM at Cambridge (though a very difficult admit, to be sure) is a far easier admit than a STEM kid at Stanford…

Look at it this way: 1/13 Computer Science applicants at Cambridge are admitted (8%). What do you think the admissions rate is for CS at HYPSM? Is it even 2%? Natural sciences? Please. 1/4 applicants at Cambridge are admitted.

What’s worse is that the curriculum at Cambridge is set in stone. An American CS whiz will learn nothing the entire first year, taking the equivalent of remedial courses (for them). The philosophy is everyone in the same boat from the start and all will be good eventually. It is a very European — and non- American — attitude.

There are no restrictions in the US on who can apply to Harvard. There are plenty of restrictions in the UK on who can apply to Ox or Cambs. The school has to give permission and its normally a very small handful of candidates each year. So it’s a self selecting group already of highly qualified students. Your numbers are meaningless when you don't have this information.

There are no school restrictions, anywhere, on Oxbridge apps, other than an applicant meeting the minimum requirements. And the percentage of UK kids with the requisite A-levels is very high. Anyhow, love to see a cite about these mysterious “gatekeeper” restrictions you are referring to instead of this gobbledygook.

Anyhow, 1/3 of Oxbridge apps aren’t even from the UK. To say the least, it is far easier for a UK kid to get into Oxbridge (or even a Chinese, Indian, or American kid) than it is for any of those groups to get into Harvard. By such an order of magnitude in terms of raw numbers (4-20x easier, in fact), than even a 2-3x adjustment in your favor gets you nowhere where. It is not even close.

But go ahead, believe Oxbridge is as selective as HYPS. Or even Emory. The admissions stats are there to see, at Oxford and Cambridge, for every course of study. Numbers are stubborn things.

\


it is a shame you wasted so much time on an ill informed post. If you don't have the backing of your school admin in the UK you cannot, literally cannot apply to ox or cambs.

You are clearly a total moron

+1. Please read 21:42 to better understand the system

I know the system. I'm from England, attended university there, have a sibling who went to Cambridge and a DH who went to Oxford. Thanks anyway for your theories but they're worthless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cambridge is the only school that MIT allows the transfers of letter grades from. My friends that did the exchange absolutely loved Cambridge and some went back for post-graduate studies. My roommate still lives there and is married and a British citizen now.

Cambridge is an easier admit for Americans.

Not for STEM.

Also, Cambridge still requires 5 5s on APs.

But these all AP and test score requirements are pretty low for the UK. A low floor, indeed. My kid's high school didn't offer APs, which is pretty typical for privates now, and about a third of the class sits for APs anyway to maybe get credit or placement - in a "can't hurt" kind of way - and most end up with 5-9 5s. (The whole AP thing is a bit of a racket, right? It's only in back half of senior year that you know if any of these scores are useful or not.)

Yes, definitely for STEM; if you take into account how HYPS does account for major (without admitting it), STEM at Cambridge (though a very difficult admit, to be sure) is a far easier admit than a STEM kid at Stanford…

Look at it this way: 1/13 Computer Science applicants at Cambridge are admitted (8%). What do you think the admissions rate is for CS at HYPSM? Is it even 2%? Natural sciences? Please. 1/4 applicants at Cambridge are admitted.

What’s worse is that the curriculum at Cambridge is set in stone. An American CS whiz will learn nothing the entire first year, taking the equivalent of remedial courses (for them). The philosophy is everyone in the same boat from the start and all will be good eventually. It is a very European — and non- American — attitude.

There are no restrictions in the US on who can apply to Harvard. There are plenty of restrictions in the UK on who can apply to Ox or Cambs. The school has to give permission and its normally a very small handful of candidates each year. So it’s a self selecting group already of highly qualified students. Your numbers are meaningless when you don't have this information.

There are no school restrictions, anywhere, on Oxbridge apps, other than an applicant meeting the minimum requirements. And the percentage of UK kids with the requisite A-levels is very high. Anyhow, love to see a cite about these mysterious “gatekeeper” restrictions you are referring to instead of this gobbledygook.

Anyhow, 1/3 of Oxbridge apps aren’t even from the UK. To say the least, it is far easier for a UK kid to get into Oxbridge (or even a Chinese, Indian, or American kid) than it is for any of those groups to get into Harvard. By such an order of magnitude in terms of raw numbers (4-20x easier, in fact), than even a 2-3x adjustment in your favor gets you nowhere where. It is not even close.

But go ahead, believe Oxbridge is as selective as HYPS. Or even Emory. The admissions stats are there to see, at Oxford and Cambridge, for every course of study. Numbers are stubborn things.

\


it is a shame you wasted so much time on an ill informed post. If you don't have the backing of your school admin in the UK you cannot, literally cannot apply to ox or cambs.

You are clearly a total moron

+1. Please read 21:42 to better understand the system

I know the system. I'm from England, attended university there, have a sibling who went to Cambridge and a DH who went to Oxford. Thanks anyway for your theories but they're worthless.

They weren't mine but from an Oxford statistician but continue on!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our dc has been accepted at both an HYPMS and an Oxbridge at this moment (trying not to doxx). We've visited both campuses and the main differences pointed out to us in the UK were:

1) Focused curriculum. You have to really want to study the course you applied for, and changing majors is difficult (but not impossible) so long as they are generally related subjects.

2) Tutorial system, with regular interaction with a professor to keep you on track.

3) Shorter terms, with kids in college for 8-weeks, the last 4 of which are basically preparing for the final/papers, etc.

My kid is at Oxford. I've found the facebook "Oxford University - parents group" to be helpful.

What has been insightful to me about the posts on this Facebook page is the number of UK kids (not usually American!) who have difficulty adjusting to Oxford. Once the excitement of moving in is over you start seeing a lot of parents asking about problems with depression (it's very very sad there during Jan and Feb - same weather every day - always overcast), adjustment issues, problems with old dorms (currently there is a discussion about lack or or too much steam heat) and rusticating, which means the kid knows they aren't cutting it and want to take time off. The term "rusticating" came from "being sent to the countryside", i.e., being sent home. The child might decide to rusticate. Or the school can suggest rusticating: "Rustication is a term used at Oxford, Cambridge and Durham Universities to mean being suspended or expelled temporarily, or, in more recent times, to leave temporarily for welfare or health reasons." My DC says rusticating usually takes place just before exams.

This sounds like every college I've ever seen. The weather part applies to everywhere with similar weather.

What? California, Texas, Florida? What are you talking about? Lots of weather choices when it comes to higher education. Harvard was cold when I went but not dreary and overcast every single day. My SLAC in california was gloriously 75 every day and rained twice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

But DC went through the undergrad application process, which I was involved in, although towards the end I hired a coach to review the essays. As for self, I was in a slac that doesn't send many students to Rhodes or Marshall so was grossly unprepared for regionals. Unlike Harvard, my slac did no coaching for the Rhodes. I said I wanted to get into the PPE programme which is embarrassing since it exists only for undergrad not grad. I had a strong history record though and was no 1 in slac, etc. Interesting process but I clearly didn't know what I was doing.

Eh, I was a Rhodes finalist from Harvard. There was no coaching. And it's pretty common for Rhodes winners to do a second BA, with PPE a common choice (I ended up there on a different fellowship but knew several of the Rhodes winners).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cambridge is the only school that MIT allows the transfers of letter grades from. My friends that did the exchange absolutely loved Cambridge and some went back for post-graduate studies. My roommate still lives there and is married and a British citizen now.

Cambridge is an easier admit for Americans.

Not for STEM.

Also, Cambridge still requires 5 5s on APs.

But these all AP and test score requirements are pretty low for the UK. A low floor, indeed. My kid's high school didn't offer APs, which is pretty typical for privates now, and about a third of the class sits for APs anyway to maybe get credit or placement - in a "can't hurt" kind of way - and most end up with 5-9 5s. (The whole AP thing is a bit of a racket, right? It's only in back half of senior year that you know if any of these scores are useful or not.)

Yes, definitely for STEM; if you take into account how HYPS does account for major (without admitting it), STEM at Cambridge (though a very difficult admit, to be sure) is a far easier admit than a STEM kid at Stanford…

Look at it this way: 1/13 Computer Science applicants at Cambridge are admitted (8%). What do you think the admissions rate is for CS at HYPSM? Is it even 2%? Natural sciences? Please. 1/4 applicants at Cambridge are admitted.

What’s worse is that the curriculum at Cambridge is set in stone. An American CS whiz will learn nothing the entire first year, taking the equivalent of remedial courses (for them). The philosophy is everyone in the same boat from the start and all will be good eventually. It is a very European — and non- American — attitude.

There are no restrictions in the US on who can apply to Harvard. There are plenty of restrictions in the UK on who can apply to Ox or Cambs. The school has to give permission and its normally a very small handful of candidates each year. So it’s a self selecting group already of highly qualified students. Your numbers are meaningless when you don't have this information.

There are no school restrictions, anywhere, on Oxbridge apps, other than an applicant meeting the minimum requirements. And the percentage of UK kids with the requisite A-levels is very high. Anyhow, love to see a cite about these mysterious “gatekeeper” restrictions you are referring to instead of this gobbledygook.

Anyhow, 1/3 of Oxbridge apps aren’t even from the UK. To say the least, it is far easier for a UK kid to get into Oxbridge (or even a Chinese, Indian, or American kid) than it is for any of those groups to get into Harvard. By such an order of magnitude in terms of raw numbers (4-20x easier, in fact), than even a 2-3x adjustment in your favor gets you nowhere where. It is not even close.

But go ahead, believe Oxbridge is as selective as HYPS. Or even Emory. The admissions stats are there to see, at Oxford and Cambridge, for every course of study. Numbers are stubborn things.

\


it is a shame you wasted so much time on an ill informed post. If you don't have the backing of your school admin in the UK you cannot, literally cannot apply to ox or cambs.

You are clearly a total moron

Cite? And we aren’t talking about which kids Eton is supporting. Andover does the same in the US. Show me an article about any UK kid who wants to apply to Oxbridge but cannot do so because the school won’t let him. This is a new one under UCAS. Still waiting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cambridge is the only school that MIT allows the transfers of letter grades from. My friends that did the exchange absolutely loved Cambridge and some went back for post-graduate studies. My roommate still lives there and is married and a British citizen now.

Cambridge is an easier admit for Americans.

Not for STEM.

Also, Cambridge still requires 5 5s on APs.

But these all AP and test score requirements are pretty low for the UK. A low floor, indeed. My kid's high school didn't offer APs, which is pretty typical for privates now, and about a third of the class sits for APs anyway to maybe get credit or placement - in a "can't hurt" kind of way - and most end up with 5-9 5s. (The whole AP thing is a bit of a racket, right? It's only in back half of senior year that you know if any of these scores are useful or not.)

Yes, definitely for STEM; if you take into account how HYPS does account for major (without admitting it), STEM at Cambridge (though a very difficult admit, to be sure) is a far easier admit than a STEM kid at Stanford…

Look at it this way: 1/13 Computer Science applicants at Cambridge are admitted (8%). What do you think the admissions rate is for CS at HYPSM? Is it even 2%? Natural sciences? Please. 1/4 applicants at Cambridge are admitted.

What’s worse is that the curriculum at Cambridge is set in stone. An American CS whiz will learn nothing the entire first year, taking the equivalent of remedial courses (for them). The philosophy is everyone in the same boat from the start and all will be good eventually. It is a very European — and non- American — attitude.

There are no restrictions in the US on who can apply to Harvard. There are plenty of restrictions in the UK on who can apply to Ox or Cambs. The school has to give permission and its normally a very small handful of candidates each year. So its a self selecting group already of highly qualified students. Your numbers are meaningless when you don't have this information.

+1. This!

There's more restrictions about applying to Oxbridge, limiting the size of the applicant pool. For example, you can't apply to Cambridge and Oxford in the same year. Have to pick ONE. Contrast that to Americans who want to apply to all the ivies + several others just because. Oxbridge admissions are much more of a meritocracy than the holistic American system. You have to meet minimum standards for the A-levels to even be considered, and the fact that you're all-star field hockey player isn't going to give you an edge. There are hard cutoffs that don't exist in the American admissions system, and admissions are conditional on maintaining a high GPA and A-level performance. You simply can't compare the admission rates between the schools and conclude that one is harder or easier to get into than the other.

Sure you can compare. Any international Chinese or Indian applicant app.ying to both Oxbridge and the Ivies does it all the time. The chances of an Oxbridge admit are way higher.

A top unhooked American student from an urban area has a 0-1% chance of a Harvard admit. A top UK student (and almost 20% get an A on every A-level, so an AAA or A*AA is, if anything, more common than a 4.0, 1570, 8+ APs kid in America) has between an 8 and 45% chance of an Oxbridge admit, depending on the course. And, yes, I said 45%. Any questions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But DC went through the undergrad application process, which I was involved in, although towards the end I hired a coach to review the essays. As for self, I was in a slac that doesn't send many students to Rhodes or Marshall so was grossly unprepared for regionals. Unlike Harvard, my slac did no coaching for the Rhodes. I said I wanted to get into the PPE programme which is embarrassing since it exists only for undergrad not grad. I had a strong history record though and was no 1 in slac, etc. Interesting process but I clearly didn't know what I was doing.

Eh, I was a Rhodes finalist from Harvard. There was no coaching. And it's pretty common for Rhodes winners to do a second BA, with PPE a common choice (I ended up there on a different fellowship but knew several of the Rhodes winners).

I, too, went to Harvard. Of course there's coaching. endless! No, Rhodes do not do a second batchelors. every one i know did an MPhil or DPhil.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cambridge is the only school that MIT allows the transfers of letter grades from. My friends that did the exchange absolutely loved Cambridge and some went back for post-graduate studies. My roommate still lives there and is married and a British citizen now.

Cambridge is an easier admit for Americans.

Not for STEM.

Also, Cambridge still requires 5 5s on APs.

But these all AP and test score requirements are pretty low for the UK. A low floor, indeed. My kid's high school didn't offer APs, which is pretty typical for privates now, and about a third of the class sits for APs anyway to maybe get credit or placement - in a "can't hurt" kind of way - and most end up with 5-9 5s. (The whole AP thing is a bit of a racket, right? It's only in back half of senior year that you know if any of these scores are useful or not.)

Yes, definitely for STEM; if you take into account how HYPS does account for major (without admitting it), STEM at Cambridge (though a very difficult admit, to be sure) is a far easier admit than a STEM kid at Stanford…

Look at it this way: 1/13 Computer Science applicants at Cambridge are admitted (8%). What do you think the admissions rate is for CS at HYPSM? Is it even 2%? Natural sciences? Please. 1/4 applicants at Cambridge are admitted.

What’s worse is that the curriculum at Cambridge is set in stone. An American CS whiz will learn nothing the entire first year, taking the equivalent of remedial courses (for them). The philosophy is everyone in the same boat from the start and all will be good eventually. It is a very European — and non- American — attitude.

There are no restrictions in the US on who can apply to Harvard. There are plenty of restrictions in the UK on who can apply to Ox or Cambs. The school has to give permission and its normally a very small handful of candidates each year. So its a self selecting group already of highly qualified students. Your numbers are meaningless when you don't have this information.

+1. This!

There's more restrictions about applying to Oxbridge, limiting the size of the applicant pool. For example, you can't apply to Cambridge and Oxford in the same year. Have to pick ONE. Contrast that to Americans who want to apply to all the ivies + several others just because. Oxbridge admissions are much more of a meritocracy than the holistic American system. You have to meet minimum standards for the A-levels to even be considered, and the fact that you're all-star field hockey player isn't going to give you an edge. There are hard cutoffs that don't exist in the American admissions system, and admissions are conditional on maintaining a high GPA and A-level performance. You simply can't compare the admission rates between the schools and conclude that one is harder or easier to get into than the other.

Sure you can compare. Any international Chinese or Indian applicant app.ying to both Oxbridge and the Ivies does it all the time. The chances of an Oxbridge admit are way higher.

A top unhooked American student from an urban area has a 0-1% chance of a Harvard admit. A top UK student (and almost 20% get an A on every A-level, so an AAA or A*AA is, if anything, more common than a 4.0, 1570, 8+ APs kid in America) has between an 8 and 45% chance of an Oxbridge admit, depending on the course. And, yes, I said 45%. Any questions?

False. read 21:42 above.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But DC went through the undergrad application process, which I was involved in, although towards the end I hired a coach to review the essays. As for self, I was in a slac that doesn't send many students to Rhodes or Marshall so was grossly unprepared for regionals. Unlike Harvard, my slac did no coaching for the Rhodes. I said I wanted to get into the PPE programme which is embarrassing since it exists only for undergrad not grad. I had a strong history record though and was no 1 in slac, etc. Interesting process but I clearly didn't know what I was doing.

Eh, I was a Rhodes finalist from Harvard. There was no coaching. And it's pretty common for Rhodes winners to do a second BA, with PPE a common choice (I ended up there on a different fellowship but knew several of the Rhodes winners).

Oh, honey, there's an entire Office at Harvard with eight staff that do nothing but coach undergraduates in the Rhodes and Marshall. https://uraf.harvard.edu/people

[Anonymous]

dated article on the degree of prep and coaching U of Arkansas and Harvard do on their Rhodes candidates. https://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/12/education/how-to-win-a-rhodes.html

[Anonymous]

You pick an area to study. Program is not as broad as US bachelor programs. When you major in history you take mostly history courses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cambridge is the only school that MIT allows the transfers of letter grades from. My friends that did the exchange absolutely loved Cambridge and some went back for post-graduate studies. My roommate still lives there and is married and a British citizen now.

Cambridge is an easier admit for Americans.

Not for STEM.

Also, Cambridge still requires 5 5s on APs.

But these all AP and test score requirements are pretty low for the UK. A low floor, indeed. My kid's high school didn't offer APs, which is pretty typical for privates now, and about a third of the class sits for APs anyway to maybe get credit or placement - in a "can't hurt" kind of way - and most end up with 5-9 5s. (The whole AP thing is a bit of a racket, right? It's only in back half of senior year that you know if any of these scores are useful or not.)

Yes, definitely for STEM; if you take into account how HYPS does account for major (without admitting it), STEM at Cambridge (though a very difficult admit, to be sure) is a far easier admit than a STEM kid at Stanford…

Look at it this way: 1/13 Computer Science applicants at Cambridge are admitted (8%). What do you think the admissions rate is for CS at HYPSM? Is it even 2%? Natural sciences? Please. 1/4 applicants at Cambridge are admitted.

What’s worse is that the curriculum at Cambridge is set in stone. An American CS whiz will learn nothing the entire first year, taking the equivalent of remedial courses (for them). The philosophy is everyone in the same boat from the start and all will be good eventually. It is a very European — and non- American — attitude.

There are no restrictions in the US on who can apply to Harvard. There are plenty of restrictions in the UK on who can apply to Ox or Cambs. The school has to give permission and its normally a very small handful of candidates each year. So its a self selecting group already of highly qualified students. Your numbers are meaningless when you don't have this information.

+1. This!

There's more restrictions about applying to Oxbridge, limiting the size of the applicant pool. For example, you can't apply to Cambridge and Oxford in the same year. Have to pick ONE. Contrast that to Americans who want to apply to all the ivies + several others just because. Oxbridge admissions are much more of a meritocracy than the holistic American system. You have to meet minimum standards for the A-levels to even be considered, and the fact that you're all-star field hockey player isn't going to give you an edge. There are hard cutoffs that don't exist in the American admissions system, and admissions are conditional on maintaining a high GPA and A-level performance. You simply can't compare the admission rates between the schools and conclude that one is harder or easier to get into than the other.

Sure you can compare. Any international Chinese or Indian applicant app.ying to both Oxbridge and the Ivies does it all the time. The chances of an Oxbridge admit are way higher.

A top unhooked American student from an urban area has a 0-1% chance of a Harvard admit. A top UK student (and almost 20% get an A on every A-level, so an AAA or A*AA is, if anything, more common than a 4.0, 1570, 8+ APs kid in America) has between an 8 and 45% chance of an Oxbridge admit, depending on the course. And, yes, I said 45%. Any questions?

Yes, if that were true wouldn't there be more than the 150-200 American undergrads at Oxford? they comprise only 1.7 percent of the undergrad student body

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cambridge is the only school that MIT allows the transfers of letter grades from. My friends that did the exchange absolutely loved Cambridge and some went back for post-graduate studies. My roommate still lives there and is married and a British citizen now.

Cambridge is an easier admit for Americans.

Not for STEM.

Also, Cambridge still requires 5 5s on APs.

But these all AP and test score requirements are pretty low for the UK. A low floor, indeed. My kid's high school didn't offer APs, which is pretty typical for privates now, and about a third of the class sits for APs anyway to maybe get credit or placement - in a "can't hurt" kind of way - and most end up with 5-9 5s. (The whole AP thing is a bit of a racket, right? It's only in back half of senior year that you know if any of these scores are useful or not.)

Yes, definitely for STEM; if you take into account how HYPS does account for major (without admitting it), STEM at Cambridge (though a very difficult admit, to be sure) is a far easier admit than a STEM kid at Stanford…

Look at it this way: 1/13 Computer Science applicants at Cambridge are admitted (8%). What do you think the admissions rate is for CS at HYPSM? Is it even 2%? Natural sciences? Please. 1/4 applicants at Cambridge are admitted.

What’s worse is that the curriculum at Cambridge is set in stone. An American CS whiz will learn nothing the entire first year, taking the equivalent of remedial courses (for them). The philosophy is everyone in the same boat from the start and all will be good eventually. It is a very European — and non- American — attitude.

There are no restrictions in the US on who can apply to Harvard. There are plenty of restrictions in the UK on who can apply to Ox or Cambs. The school has to give permission and its normally a very small handful of candidates each year. So its a self selecting group already of highly qualified students. Your numbers are meaningless when you don't have this information.

+1. This!

There's more restrictions about applying to Oxbridge, limiting the size of the applicant pool. For example, you can't apply to Cambridge and Oxford in the same year. Have to pick ONE. Contrast that to Americans who want to apply to all the ivies + several others just because. Oxbridge admissions are much more of a meritocracy than the holistic American system. You have to meet minimum standards for the A-levels to even be considered, and the fact that you're all-star field hockey player isn't going to give you an edge. There are hard cutoffs that don't exist in the American admissions system, and admissions are conditional on maintaining a high GPA and A-level performance. You simply can't compare the admission rates between the schools and conclude that one is harder or easier to get into than the other.

Sure you can compare. Any international Chinese or Indian applicant app.ying to both Oxbridge and the Ivies does it all the time. The chances of an Oxbridge admit are way higher.

A top unhooked American student from an urban area has a 0-1% chance of a Harvard admit. A top UK student (and almost 20% get an A on every A-level, so an AAA or A*AA is, if anything, more common than a 4.0, 1570, 8+ APs kid in America) has between an 8 and 45% chance of an Oxbridge admit, depending on the course. And, yes, I said 45%. Any questions?

Yes, if that were true wouldn't there be more than the 150-200 American undergrads at Oxford? they comprise only 1.7 percent of the undergrad student body

Admit rate for Americans, and Indians, and Chinese at Oxford and Cambridge is readily available -- the UK is nicely transparent that way. But I won't do your homework for you, nor do I really care if you are "convinced"; it's just not worth it. I mean, this thread is already full of absurdities, such as UK students with the requisite minimum qualifications "literally" not being "allowed" to apply to either Oxford and Cambridge by their school administration (when Oxbridge UK students are now 70% from state schools). These Oxford boosters rival Wisconsin and Michigan boosters on other threads. And hint: one of those aforementioned midwestern schools is a harder admit than either Oxford or Cambridge, for any nationality, and for almost every field. As for graduate school, Oxbridge is happy to take your money for a one-year master's degree. While, for Wisconsin, you don't study many fields at the grad level unless you are "funded" with free tuition and a TA-ship. So Wisconsin grad school, in many fields, is a way harder admit than Oxbridge also.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do US Students get into Oxbridge science programs?

The website says they expect 5 AP scores, focuses on or near the major, including Calculus BC and Physics C (both parts) scores. It's rare to take all of these and extremely rare to take them all in junior year, and also take more related APs like Bio and Chem and CS.

Do US high school students take a gap year and apply to Oxbridge after senior year?

They get a conditional offer and once they pass the APs their senior year the offer is available for them accept.

This (and this is one of the reasons why the Oxbridge application is so difficult for Americans). Our DC's acceptance to a graduate program was also conditional. One of the conditions was achieving a certain GPA at their college during Covid. I don't remember the other condition. And Oxford means it. You don't meet the conditions you are out.

+1. There are many posts out there about conditional versus unconditional offers. IMHE the only unconditional offers were to Rhodes. My DC did not meet one of the conditions for grad work but his university went to bat for him and got Oxford to change its mind but it was a harrowing 8 weeks while we waited. https://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=4485696.

My kid has an unconditional offer to undergrad but had done 6 APs by junior year (5s), with 3 in the subject area, published original research related to course, and knocked the interview out of the ballpark (the interviewers were impressed and told the college to find a bursary for my kid if possible).