11 Plus Exams Forum

Cambridge university have announced that they will be entering UCAS Adjustment for the first time ever this summer. Re-consideration will be available for students who a) had been interviewed and then rejected by Cambridge, and who b) exceed their expected grades and c) are part of widening participation.

It sort of ties in with their summer pool as well but I suppose gives a small number a second bite at the cherry. Being cynical, they have realised they are not going to meet their internal Widening Participation targets and are trying to improve these before the government analysis in April next year.

This was the most recent update I saw on how Oxbridge is performing in the updated briefing paper to Parliament.

https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk ... ry/SN00616" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Appalling.
Entrance to our leading universities ought to be decided on academic merit alone, and ought not to take account of the type of school attended or the area in which one lives (or purchases a second property for the purpose).
I can (I think) see the sense in reserving some spaces for those who perform better than forecast at A-Level, but see no reason whatsoever why places should be reserved for pupils who are considered to be "disadvantaged" by measures determined by pressure groups. Indeed if this continues our world class institutions will be world class no longer.

Loopyloulou wrote:Appalling.
Entrance to our leading universities ought to be decided on academic merit alone, and ought not to take account of the type of school attended or the area in which one lives (or purchases a second property for the purpose).
I can (I think) see the sense in reserving some spaces for those who perform better than forecast at A-Level, but see no reason whatsoever why places should be reserved for pupils who are considered to be "disadvantaged" by measures determined by pressure groups. Indeed if this continues our world class institutions will be world class no longer.

What's appalling? Cambridge have been giving an advantage to pupils from poor performing schools for years, and its generally shown that those who have had to work hard themselves to achieve their results tend to do better then those who have been coached. I assume they will still have to pass an offer and interview etc, just that more of their background will be taken into account when predicting how they will do.
Admittedly I don't know the full details so I could be wrong.

My main gripe is that Cambridge will no longer be offering a level playing field for all. They will have some places reserved for a type of child chosen by diktats set down by the likes of the Sutton Trust. I see this as every bit as odious as reserving places for pupils from Eton.

So do you think that a very bright child who has attended a failing school with poor teaching and little if no parental support will still get A's/A*s at A level?

Loopyloulou wrote:My main gripe is that Cambridge will no longer be offering a level playing field for all. They will have some places reserved for a type of child chosen by diktats set down by the likes of the Sutton Trust. I see this as every bit as odious as reserving places for pupils from Eton.

And I, on the other hand, absolutely applaud them for widening participation - and every other university who does - it is an extension of the PP effect in 11+ - if a child from a terribly deprived school can get within touching distance of a child from a school with all the advantages (and it is JUST touching distance - ie the difference between getting an A* and an A in terms of contextual offers - so they are STILL performing incredibly well) then they ABSOLUTELY should be given the place in Cambridge (or any other university) over the child with all the advantages.

Universities have never offered a level playing field, so to pretend they have is disingenuous.

kenyancowgirl wrote:

Loopyloulou wrote:My main gripe is that Cambridge will no longer be offering a level playing field for all. They will have some places reserved for a type of child chosen by diktats set down by the likes of the Sutton Trust. I see this as every bit as odious as reserving places for pupils from Eton.

And I, on the other hand, absolutely applaud them for widening participation - and every other university who does - it is an extension of the PP effect in 11+ - if a child from a terribly deprived school can get within touching distance of a child from a school with all the advantages (and it is JUST touching distance - ie the difference between getting an A* and an A in terms of contextual offers - so they are STILL performing incredibly well) then they ABSOLUTELY should be given the place in Cambridge (or any other university) over the child with all the advantages.

Universities have never offered a level playing field, so to pretend they have is disingenuous.

I completely agree. I work in a mixed area but one with significant deprivation. I have met one child from a very poor background - with supportive but bewildered parents at a comprehensive with poor results - who attended Oxford. This was in the days before A* and I think she got As and Bs. She so deserved her place, so much more than the reams of identikids who get most of the places.
I also think they've done it a good way round - not that I know much about uni applications - but allowing them to apply after results and presumably without as much of a stressful interview (?) is a really positive move in my mind.
And also, if we're looking at "top universities" - and accepting that league tables are as flawed in this field as others - 4 of the top 5 in 2019are American (and 5 of the top 10). We all know that getting into American universities can be due to high results but can also be due to particular sporting prowess etc despite average academic ability and no one says that that dilutes their reputation.

It is actually only open to students who applied, were interviewed and then did not get an offer.

It has to be for the same subject that they originally applied for and they have to be in a state school in the UK.

They will be invited to reapply for the same course with their A level results.

Every year places are wasted at Oxbridge as they have not so far participated in clearing or readjustment so they have not way of filling places which have been turned down or lost because the student did not make their offer.

Current second year at Girton College Cambridge has no Music students even though 4 offers were made.

One student turned down their offer instead choosing another university and the other three all missed their offer so Girton were left with no music students and no mechanism to fill the places.

This problem exists in other departments throughout Oxford and Cambridge.

UCAS adjustment will give them the chance to fill the spaces and get the revenue!

Wonder how long it will be before Oxford follows suit.

In terms of "a level playing field" it has never been a level playing field when you hear about the level of "help" that some private school students get.

A student studying Natural Sciences at Cembridge told me that her school had done a mock interview with her every week for six months before the interview and that every question she was asked in the interview she had already prepared for in the mock interviews.

How can that possibly be a level playing field? DG

"...It has to be for the same subject that they originally applied for and they have to be in a state school in the UK."

Just to be clear - it is not just "a state school"....Grammar Schools are not generally included in their widening participation.....It is as I said above: Re-consideration will be available for students who a) had been interviewed and then rejected by Cambridge, and who b) exceed their expected grades and c) are part of widening participation. But I did omit the detail of "for the same course for which they originally applied", which I thought everyone would assume!