The interview (installment three)
Dec. 7th, 2004 11:07 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ravenI had the worst night ever. I finished off yesterday evening by losing spectacularly at Scrabble, despite getting "divot" on a triple word score - 33 points - and went to bed thinking I should get to sleep early and be well-rested. Argh. First, my mother woke me up at about eleven, because she called thinking quite reasonably that I wouldn't be asleep yet, as I never am at that time. Sigh. And I tossed and turned till about one, because there were people downstairs who would not shut up, including one person who was just screaming randomly, not happily or anguishedly but just psychotically. I don't know who it was but I would lay money on the Arsehole of the Universe.
Then at two am, my phone rang to tell me I had a message, which I'd already listened to, and I went back to bed wanting to kill everyone and everything for keeping me awake. By eight o'clock this morning I gave up the pretence of being asleep, got dressed in horrible interview clothes (actually, they're not horrible - white shirt and black pants, simple, though it's supposed to be informal and I would have worn jeans and a nice top if my mother hadn't threatened to kill me) and didn't bother with breakfast, consuming two cups of black coffee and two paracetamol. With one more hour to kill, I withdrew to the JCR and nervously read through the Guardian.
One of the helpers, Craig, who is from West Yorkshire and sounds like it, showed me the way up to the room. He, like all the helpers, is terribly nice - I'm not fond of any of the other applicants because of the undoubtedly cut-throat atmosphere round here. There's a constant game of one-upmanship going on, at which the clear and smug winner is a half-Chinese, half-Jewish-Hungarian boy who speaks four languages, is a black belt in judo, has backpacked all over Europe and apparently did something very important related to the UN. I did my best to ignore him.
So I sat there outside the interview room, waiting to be called in, distracting myself by reading the wall notices about German scholarships, and took deep breaths. And the door opened and the previous applicant came out. It turned out to be Mumless Pierced Guy, who ignored me entirely as he drifted down the stairs. They asked me to wait another minute before calling me in.
The two interviewers were female, one a Politics tutor and the other a Philosophy one (I was so grateful for the lack of Economics), and really very nice and keen to put me at my ease. The study was wonderfully lived-in, with books and papers all over the floor, squishy comfy chairs and an arthritic electric fire. They faced me, I sat back, and they asked questions.
"What are the indicators of effective checks by the legislature on the executive?"
"Do you believe in determinism?"
"What sort of political system does Britain have?"
"Why should we continue asking philosophical questions if our every action is pre-determined?"
That last one was my favourite - what I said boiled down to the fact we don't have any choice in the matter.
And they didn't ask me at all about my application for Medicine. I'm impressed by that, and also that I was called for interview at all, considering how many applicants they turned away before even this stage. The interview drew to a close a long time before I thought it would, and they didn't even give me an article to look at or any such thing. I look back and don't feel I did badly, but don't feel I was anything at all exceptional, and that's a shame because it's really what I wanted to aim for. We shall see - the calls for second interviews go up late tonight, and that's a whole different kettle of fish.
Now I'm going to call Helena and attempt to drag her out of Merton, and probably spend some time roaming round Oxford. I can breathe now.
Then at two am, my phone rang to tell me I had a message, which I'd already listened to, and I went back to bed wanting to kill everyone and everything for keeping me awake. By eight o'clock this morning I gave up the pretence of being asleep, got dressed in horrible interview clothes (actually, they're not horrible - white shirt and black pants, simple, though it's supposed to be informal and I would have worn jeans and a nice top if my mother hadn't threatened to kill me) and didn't bother with breakfast, consuming two cups of black coffee and two paracetamol. With one more hour to kill, I withdrew to the JCR and nervously read through the Guardian.
One of the helpers, Craig, who is from West Yorkshire and sounds like it, showed me the way up to the room. He, like all the helpers, is terribly nice - I'm not fond of any of the other applicants because of the undoubtedly cut-throat atmosphere round here. There's a constant game of one-upmanship going on, at which the clear and smug winner is a half-Chinese, half-Jewish-Hungarian boy who speaks four languages, is a black belt in judo, has backpacked all over Europe and apparently did something very important related to the UN. I did my best to ignore him.
So I sat there outside the interview room, waiting to be called in, distracting myself by reading the wall notices about German scholarships, and took deep breaths. And the door opened and the previous applicant came out. It turned out to be Mumless Pierced Guy, who ignored me entirely as he drifted down the stairs. They asked me to wait another minute before calling me in.
The two interviewers were female, one a Politics tutor and the other a Philosophy one (I was so grateful for the lack of Economics), and really very nice and keen to put me at my ease. The study was wonderfully lived-in, with books and papers all over the floor, squishy comfy chairs and an arthritic electric fire. They faced me, I sat back, and they asked questions.
"What are the indicators of effective checks by the legislature on the executive?"
"Do you believe in determinism?"
"What sort of political system does Britain have?"
"Why should we continue asking philosophical questions if our every action is pre-determined?"
That last one was my favourite - what I said boiled down to the fact we don't have any choice in the matter.
And they didn't ask me at all about my application for Medicine. I'm impressed by that, and also that I was called for interview at all, considering how many applicants they turned away before even this stage. The interview drew to a close a long time before I thought it would, and they didn't even give me an article to look at or any such thing. I look back and don't feel I did badly, but don't feel I was anything at all exceptional, and that's a shame because it's really what I wanted to aim for. We shall see - the calls for second interviews go up late tonight, and that's a whole different kettle of fish.
Now I'm going to call Helena and attempt to drag her out of Merton, and probably spend some time roaming round Oxford. I can breathe now.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
on 2004-12-07 05:19 am (UTC)I think you're something out of the ordinary even if you don't. There's such a thinga s being too perfect and some of these sound like they're just trying too hard. Be comforted by the fact that the interviewers can spot that too and that knowledge and prowess won't be all they're looking for.
Guess who's got candy? I'll send it out later this week. Enjoy!
no subject
on 2004-12-07 05:47 am (UTC)And they didn't ask me at all about my application for Medicine.
Surely, if you've applied for PPE at Oxford and Medicine at other places, they don't know that you've also applied for Medicine? They only get from UCAS the information that relates directly to them.
no subject
on 2004-12-07 05:49 am (UTC)They know I've applied to Medicine because they've read my personal statement, and that had to cover all the bases. So it's almost as if they don't know officially, but actually, they do know.
no subject
on 2004-12-07 05:51 am (UTC)no subject
on 2004-12-07 05:58 am (UTC)Ah, I see. That was restrained of them, then. (And that personal statement must have been hell to write. I thought it was bad enough putting philosophy in, but not too much, as it's not in the titles of all my courses...)
no subject
on 2004-12-07 06:02 am (UTC)Is that really the case? I sort of figured the American process was very similar to this.
Thank you so much for the sweets, you really didn't have to and I love you for it. *mwah*
no subject
on 2004-12-07 06:42 am (UTC)St. Augustine sweets are something special; it's the oldest city in the US and these were made in the old colonial Spanish style by hand: no modern equipment used at all.
no subject
on 2004-12-07 08:37 am (UTC)no subject
on 2004-12-07 09:52 am (UTC)Is that really the case? I sort of figured the American process was very similar to this.
I don't know if we're talking "university" in the American sense or the British sense, but if it's in the American sense, I could get behind that. While there are some very good universities here, a lot of them (especially the state schools) do have a tendency to recruit students for stupid reasons.
I guess you could say the same thing about colleges, really, though to a lesser extent. And coming from me, that should be taken with a grain of salt: when I was applying to college basically all I had going for me was academics (no amazing extracurriculars, not that much service/work experience, bad interviewing skills), so of course I'm somewhat bitter about the way the game is played.
Anyway, my love-hate relationship with higher education is getting out of hand again-- I'll shut up. Good luck, again. (And I know I'm beginning to sound indiscriminate, but you should kill that overachiever, too. I hate those people.)
no subject
on 2004-12-07 10:31 am (UTC)What are the "stupid reasons?" Getting in is such a fraught process, I'm keen to hear of other systems that are more illogical. :)
I haven't actually seen the overachiever today, but if I do, rest assured I will kill him.
no subject
on 2004-12-07 10:58 am (UTC)no subject
on 2004-12-07 11:06 am (UTC)xx
no subject
on 2004-12-07 11:57 am (UTC)Community colleges cover the first two years and allow you to get an associate's degree; I got one because I did the Running Start program and actually spent my last two years of high school at Bellevue Community College, so I got my high school diploma and associate's at the same time, then transferred to the U and finished up my bachelor's there. A lot of people do transfer and finish their bachelor's at the university level, but you don't have to, necessarily; obviously the four-year degree carries more weight, though. Community colleges, along with the general-education two-year degrees, also tend to offer many more vocationally-tilted programs (BCC had a really good nursing program, my father teaches welding at another technical college in the area, etc).
no subject
on 2004-12-07 12:21 pm (UTC)In general, the difference between an American college and a university is that universities serve both undergraduate and graduate populations. Accordingly, universities are usually larger than colleges, though not always. The athlete-recruitment issue arises from the fact that a lot of universities -- especially the state universities -- are the major players in national college sports, so they pour a lot of money and energy into building up their programs.
What are the "stupid reasons?"
As I said, I'm bitter and self-serving. :) "Stupid reasons" for me usually include anything other than intellectual considerations, which is probably very nasty and unfair. Sports recruitment is high on the list, though. Another example-- when I was applying to schools, there was this (possibly apocryphal) saying that I heard a lot. People would tell you shouldn't take it personally if you didn't get into the top schools, because what they're looking for is arbitrary and changes yearly. So the story was: if one year Harvard needs a bassoonist in its orchestra or something, you'd better hope that in admissions you didn't come up against a candidate who was approximately your equal... except he played the bassoon.
Plus, I'm under the impression that there is, if not a strict quota system, at least an unspoken rule among prestigious colleges/universities that you can't take too many students from the same high school. So sucks to be you if you attend a school full of qualified applicants who are all applying to the top schools; even if you're objectively good enough, your chances of admission are lower than if you were the big fish in a smaller pond.
Around this time last year,
no subject
on 2004-12-07 12:41 pm (UTC)no subject
on 2004-12-07 12:45 pm (UTC)see yas soon ooky person
no subject
on 2004-12-07 01:31 pm (UTC)A bachelor's degree is four years? Here it's three...
What's an associate's degree? Running Start? High school diploma? Vocationally-tilted?
*sighs* Colour me confused.
no subject
on 2004-12-07 01:45 pm (UTC)You're right, when we say "go to university" we mean "undertake higher education." UCAS is Universites and Colleges Admissions Service - no distinction made between the two. Also, no distinction made between graduate and undergraduate admissions. Is university sport a big deal over there? Here the only thing of note is the Oxford vs. Cambridge boat race, in which one or both crews have been known to sink.
Here, people are worried about all sorts of bias in admissions, but the main one is state versus public schools. Before, it was all about Oxbridge favouring public school candidates, and the government got snippy. Now the balance has tipped the other way, with public school candidates worrying about being discriminated against. That said, there's no focus on anything at all outside of intellectual considerations. My interview today was entirely academic - nothing about extracurricular stuff at all, because as one of my mentors put it, they don't give a damn. They like work experience and wide reading, but that's it.
The quota system is something I'm familiar with, though. I've applied to Balliol, but among the others from Merchants', there are applications to Somerville, St John's St Anne's, Trinity and Merton, and the boys were actually told to make sure they weren't applying to the same college as someone else. I suppose that it makes sense - for a course with fourteen places, they can't take two from the same school. The great thing is there are thirty-nine colleges to choose from!
In August, when this is all over, I will join in with the post-application bitching. Maybe we can start a support group. :)
no subject
on 2004-12-07 01:46 pm (UTC)no subject
on 2004-12-07 01:47 pm (UTC)I'm thinking about it too much. Was it easy to switch subjects?
no subject
on 2004-12-07 01:49 pm (UTC)Looking forward to seeing you all again. Expect me on Thursday. Or Friday. Depends if I get interviews from other colleges.
no subject
on 2004-12-07 01:54 pm (UTC)Oxbridge make it very easy to change between subjects once you are in, or at least they did in my day - I had to get a 2:1 in my part one exams and then I could do just about anything for my part two. Law seemed like a good idea at the time :-)
S
no subject
on 2004-12-07 01:57 pm (UTC)Maybe this is just a regionalism, but it was my impression that there's actually an acknowledged difference between universities and colleges, in that universities serve graduate students as well as undergraduates. (Although of course technically you can call a school whatever you want regardless of common usage; witness the recent Mary Washington squabble (http://www.petitiononline.com/rjone4kb/petition.html).) And since a bachelor's degree is an undergraduate degree, it's not restricted to universities.
Wikipedia's take on the subject. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/College#United_States_of_America)
(By the way, Raven, this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/College#British_and_American_usage_contrasted) explains somewhat more clearly my reference to "going to university.")
no subject
on 2004-12-07 02:06 pm (UTC)Brief summary of K-12 to start with, kindergarten through 12th grade, as that's the basic school career (most) everyone goes through. Elementary schools, which you begin when you're about six or seven, either span grades 1-5 or 1-6. Why, I have no clue; I think it's basically just a decision of whether people want budding teenagers in there with the ickle kidlets. It's up to each school district to decide. After elementary you either go to middle school (6-8) or junior high (7-9), and then high school is the rest of it up to grade 12. We're about 17 or 18 years old at graduation, and we're given diplomas at that point, so we're armed with our little pieces of paper to proclaim, "We finished! Really!" ;)
Running Start was probably an unnecessary complication of the equation on my part, but it's what I did -- it's a state program that allows qualified high school juniors and seniors (11th and 12th grade) to take their classes at a community college instead and get both high school and college credit for it at the same time. So I graduated from my community college and high school within three days of each other -- and, oddly enough, in that order.
An associate's degree is what you get when you graduate from a community college -- it's a two-year program. Bachelor's is four. If you have a general Associate of Arts (or in my case, Associate of Arts & Sciences), it's equivalent to the first two years of your bachelor's degree. So if you do go to a community college (certainly not a mandatory move), you can generally transfer to a four-year school and start as a junior, with possibly a few pick-up classes to cover the distribution requirements for your major.
The reason this works is that your first two years of university are largely taken up with distribution requirements as it is -- English 101, etc, all the courses everyone HAS to take. You don't apply to your department until that's out of the way. In order to graduate at all, there are certain specified courses to take (basic English, math, science, etc), and then individual programs have particular requirements. I couldn't apply to the communications department until I'd taken Intro to Communications and Mass Media Law, even though I had all my other distribution requirements covered while at BCC.
So effectively, you have two steps of application. You apply to the university, which is pretty basic -- UW's application form was just a few pages long, and the essays were short. They consider a combination of your high school grades and your SAT scores (the standardized test everyone in the country takes, more or less, for college entrance; there's also a test called the ACT that serves the same function. Some schools take it, some schools don't, some schools like BYU, as I recall, ONLY take the ACT, etc, etc, it's all very strange -- but mostly you just need the SAT). For the most part, as long as you have good enough grades and don't look like an imbecilic, illiterate ass within the page or so of essay material you submit, you'll qualify.
But once you're in the school, you've got your requirements to cover, and another application step (more essays, etc) to your preferred department when that's done. Again, in my case at least, it wasn't that hard, but you still have to do a couple years' work first to get there.
Again, this applies to state schools -- for private universities it gets much more intense, mileage may vary, insert disclaimer of choice here. :)
Any of that make sense? I hope...?
(As for the vocational stuff, that's specifically for career training. A vocational degree might train you for a specific trade, but won't cover all the academic requirements another degree program might.)
no subject
on 2004-12-07 02:15 pm (UTC)yes, good point. I tend to get a little vague on the distinctions myself.... ;)
no subject
on 2004-12-07 02:16 pm (UTC)Ah, okay. I was going to ask if the graduate/undergraduate thing is different for you, but I didn't want to sound too ignorant.
Is university sport a big deal over there? Here the only thing of note is the Oxford vs. Cambridge boat race, in which one or both crews have been known to sink.
Hee! Sounds like my kind of sport.
I suppose it depend on the circle you're in, but yes, there is a great deal of attention paid to college-level sports. The games are televised and everything, there are major rivalries, it's a big deal. I have no qualms about admitting that I've bought into it, at least the basketball and football; the basketball season is just gearing up, and I get weekly reports on my home team's progress from my father. So I guess I'm being hypocritical. :) But that was one of the reasons I didn't go to my state university-- I love to watch the sports, but I don't want my school to be the one pouring all that money in. I'd much rather leech off of someone else's school.
...the main one is state versus public schools.
Exposing my ignorance again: state schools are, I assume, state-funded? And public ones are independent? Here the division is public versus private, where public is state-funded and private is independent. I went to a public school, and while I don't know whether that was an advantage or a disadvantage, I do know that most people around here came from private schools. I'm sort of an oddity. *grins*
nothing about extracurricular stuff at all, because as one of my mentors put it, they don't give a damn.
Pardon me while I seethe with jealousy. I wished I'd emigrated last year.
...the boys were actually told to make sure they weren't applying to the same college as someone else.
That sounds familiar. No one gave us that advice at my school -- though they should've -- but I know a lot of people elsewhere whose high-school counselors kept close tabs on who was applying where, and actually dissuaded some people from applying to certain schools to give others a better chance.
The great thing is there are thirty-nine colleges to choose from!
That is a nice system.
It seems as though I need a support group. I don't know why: theoretically, the college process panned out for me!
no subject
on 2004-12-07 02:17 pm (UTC)no subject
on 2004-12-07 03:47 pm (UTC)no subject
on 2004-12-07 04:00 pm (UTC)I'll feel that way if I get accepted to graduate schools, I think. That sense of achievement. Actually, I'll probably squee for a week straight. Even more if I get funding.
Do you have to pay for university in England?
no subject
on 2004-12-08 07:44 am (UTC)What I really don't get is the necessary requirements once you're in college. For us, you pick what you want to do before you apply and when you get there you do it. I don't know if this is a good thing or not.
no subject
on 2004-12-08 07:48 am (UTC)no subject
on 2004-12-08 08:00 am (UTC)Out of mordid interest, I just looked up the stats. There have been a total of six races in which one crew sinking decided the race, including one memorable year when both crews sank.
The games are televised and everything, there are major rivalries, it's a big deal.
There's the difference, I think. That whole idea is something that isn't done here. Out of interest, is university sport "professional" sport? And are both types of sport televised?
Exposing my ignorance again: state schools are, I assume, state-funded? And public ones are independent?
You're not ignorant, we're illogical. State schools are state-funded, yes, and public schools are the ones to whom you have to pay fees. The ironic thing is once you get to university all students are state-funded, or at least all the Brish ones are. So I guess it doesn't matter.
Pardon me while I seethe with jealousy. I wished I'd emigrated last year.
Well, it's an Oxbridge thing. Other universities are interested in extra-curricular stuff, but none excessively so; Oxford are the extreme end of indifference and grill you to get the measure of your mind and don't care if you're like me and loathe all things sporty.
It seems as though I need a support group. I don't know why: theoretically, the college process panned out for me!
You won at a game you didn't want to play? That's what it feels like for me, except for the winning part.
no subject
on 2004-12-08 08:06 am (UTC)Yeah, it can lead to weirdness. I know my school had a limit on how many credits you could take before you have to declare a major, because otherwise you can end up with students diddling around for YEARS taking classes here and classes there and never really targeting themselves. Real-world avoidance, ahoy.
no subject
on 2004-12-08 11:58 am (UTC)*seconds that question* I nearly had a fit that one time last year when
no subject
on 2004-12-08 12:04 pm (UTC)Out of interest, is university sport "professional" sport? And are both types of sport televised?
No, they're two different things. Professional sports are done as... well, a profession. Professional athletes get paid for it. Both are televised, yes.
(The other difference is that professional sports are usually boring, whereas college sports can be exciting. In my entirely objective opinion.)
The ironic thing is once you get to university all students are state-funded, or at least all the Brish ones are.
I'm going to cry. I refer you to
You won at a game you didn't want to play?
I guess so. And if I did, then you're certain to.
no subject
on 2004-12-08 02:05 pm (UTC)Right then. Every British student - i.e. every British citizen who's lived here for more than three years - is means tested by the county local education authority (in my case the Sefton LEA). So when you fill in your LEA on your UCAS form, the relevant arrangements are made. Basically, if your parents are well-off, you pay more, which seems logical. My parents are in the top income bracket, plus they have only one child, so we have to pay the maximum possible amount. Oxford, presuming they take me, have fees of about £10,000 per year, of which the government will pay £8,000 and my family the remainder. That's only for tution, of course - battels and college fees and food and suchlike are all additional. People in the lowest income brackets don't pay anything, and people in the middle pay, well, middling amounts.
All of that said, the system is about to change. The government brought in their tution fees bill and people now have to pay rather a lot more of their fees (though still not all) and the exact details are sketchy. I'm incredibly lucky to be applying for 2005, as the laws come into effect in 2006.
The logic behind the system is quite simple for once - the government reason that if they get us through university now, we emerge with degrees, far greater earning power and thus far more potential income tax. Therefore they get all their money back and everyone's happy.
It's a good system. :) It's the only thing about this whole process that isn't causing me pain.
no subject
on 2004-12-08 02:08 pm (UTC)Do you have to pay for university in England?
The long verbose explanation. :) (http://www.livejournal.com/users/loneraven/380544.html?thread=1481088#t1481088)
no subject
on 2004-12-08 02:27 pm (UTC)no subject
on 2004-12-08 02:44 pm (UTC)As far as I know, we have nothing in place as standardized as your means testing. If you choose to, you can fill out a FAFSA form, which does serve the same purpose-- evaluates your ability to finance a college education. I have to admit that I don't know the specifics of how they calculate this, but I do know that it doesn't always work very well. I ended up not filling the form out at all because we knew in advance I'd get next to nothing, even though there was no way I could pay the full cost of my education here (especially considering that I have two younger siblings). Theoretically, though, you can get money that way.
You can take out loans to pay for college, too, and then there are scholarships offered by all sorts of organizations, and of course school-specific scholarships based either on financial need or academic/athletic/artistic/whatever merit. They award need-based scholarships according to the FAFSA form. (Hence my panicky search for merit-based scholarships last year.)
So those are your options for funding a college education, the cost of which is steadily increasing; this year it rose 13% for public schools, 6% for private, and 9% for community colleges. According to The New York Times, this year the average cost for private schools is over $20,000 per year (which, if I'm remembering conversions correctly, is roughly equivalent to your £10,000); public and community colleges are something like $5,000 and $2,000 on average. My school is at about $40,000 per year right now, of which the government pays nothing. The largest merit scholarship the school offers is $13,500 per year, which I'm using, along with picking up a little money here and there from external scholarships like the National Merit one.
So, yeah. It's some heavy stuff.
no subject
on 2004-12-08 03:20 pm (UTC)