Radcliffe Camera (Oxford)
A young student, who I believe is an American, recently asked a question on one of my Facebook groups:
Anyone from Oxford University- what is it like? I have heard that there are no general education classes, and that you work strictly on your major. Is that true?
When I responded saying that I could give him some comparisons between Oxford and a US liberal arts degree, since I have been an undergraduate at both Oxford (BA in Theology) and in the US (BFA in Drama/Psychology at NYU), he wrote back, saying:
Thanks, I would like the comparison chart. I would also imagine your knowledge is much-more in-depth with a BA from Oxford than with one from America.
So, for Ian, and for any readers and seekers on the Internet who come across this page, here is my comparison chart between reading for a BA at Oxford versus studying for a liberal arts degree in the US. (For “reading” vs. “studying”, and other Oxford vs. U.S. terminology, see the glossary at the end of the post.) All opinions are my own, based on my own experience doing a humanities degree, and I’m happy to incorporate comments/suggestions/corrections into this post, especially from students who can comment on science degrees.
I can’t compare the experiences within the same subject, since my US degree was in a completely different field than my UK degree, but I would say a BA from Oxford, in Theology at least, is more equivalent to a US MA in Theology than to a US BA. The primary difference is Oxford is focused more on teaching you how to think and how to communicate, using the subject as the battlefield upon which you’re learning intellectual sword-work. A US liberal arts degree might have this same ideal, but in practice the large lectures and frequent examinations mean you really spend your time cramming for exams and being constantly evaluated by multiple-choice, computer-scored questions, rather than by soaking in the subject, doing extensive reading, and being evaluated through the more demanding essay format. However, you may have more facts drilled into you in an American program, and you will also have more freedom to explore different subjects as part of your degree. While I think the Oxford tutorial should be (re-?)introduced into American higher education, the choice of overall program really depends on each individual student’s needs, capabilities, and desires.
Here’s a short piece on my experience that I wrote for my senior subject tutor at my Oxford college (with bonus contribution from my good friend and fellow C.S. Lewis expert Ryan Pemberton):
American Theology Students at Harris Manchester
Structure-wise, here’s a brief comparison chart between the typical US undergrad degree and an Oxford one:
US:
Years 1-2: Completion of liberal arts core requirements in the humanities and sciences (often with a required general essay-writing/composition course); choice of major and beginning on introductory classes within that major by end of 2nd year
Year 3-4: Completion of major requirements, w/ some electives related and/or unrelated to the major (often adding a second major or a minor)
Instruction is primarily in large (~200 person) lectures at beginning of degree, with some seminars/recitations. Later in degree, instruction is primarily in seminars/smaller classes (~20-30 people or fewer).
Evaluation is generally through regular quizzes and exams (midterm and final), which are often multiple-choice with some essay questions. Many classes also assign 1-2 term papers a semester, along with regular weekly problem sets/reading responses (1-2 pages each). GPA is calculated every semester, and the final outcome of your degree (GPA) is the average of all semester GPAs.
Oxford:
Year 1: Completion of required preliminary papers in your course. These examinations (“prelims” or “honour mods” [for "honour moderations"]) must be passed in order to move on to the “Final Honours School” (FHS), i.e., the last two years of the degree. Written examination on these papers at the end of the second or third term. (Oxbridge has three 8-week terms in an academic year.)
(There are no “general education” requirements at Oxford. When you apply to Oxford, you apply both for a specific course and to a specific college. Your application may be “pooled”, or transferred, to another college, depending on fit and the number of openings, but you will generally be accepted – or not – for that course. You may also be accepted onto a Single Honours School [like a single major] instead of a Joint Honours School [like a double major] if you have applied to a Joint School but the college believes you will be a better fit for the Single School. For example, I applied for Philosophy and Theology, but was accepted only for Theology, which ended up being a good decision. See this post for more about my experience applying to Oxford and choosing a college. Applying for a certain course at a certain college means that there is no way to apply “to Oxford”, and then decide what to major in later. You know your major going in, and apply to colleges which offer that subject [or make an "open application", in which you apply for a certain subject, but let an algorithm place you with a college, which does not affect your overall chances of admission]. See here for a list of which Oxford colleges offer which undergraduate subjects.)
Years 2-3 (+ 3rd term of Year 1 for courses that give prelims at the end of the 2nd term of Year 1): Completion of required FHS papers, plus completion of elective papers within subject. (For example, in Theology I had four required core FHS papers, and then my choice of a history paper, a theologian paper, an elective paper, and either a second elective or an extended essay, for four total papers beyond the core papers.) Examination on these FHS papers at the end of the third year. During final exams, students will sit 1-2 exams a day, each of which is 2-3 hours long, over a 1-2 week period, for a total of about 6-10 exams (depending on their course). (We also take exams in full academic dress – dark suit, white bow tie, and academic gown, often with a carnation in the lapel indicating progress: white for first exam, pink for middle exams, and red for final exam.)
That means there are NO examinations during the second year. However, students generally take “collections” at the beginning of every term. Collections are practice exams – usually copies of past exam papers – that are given under exam conditions to test you on the material you learned last term. They are scored, but the scores don’t “count” (i.e., they don’t apply to your degree) – they’re just to give you an idea of how you would have scored if this was your final exam, and to help you with revision.
Instruction is primarily in 1-2 person tutorials with a tutor. The tutor assigns you a reading list for each week (with about a dozen books and articles on it), along with a related essay question. You do the reading, and then write an essay to answer the question (usually about 2,000-3,000 words, or about 6-10 pages). Next week, you bring in the essay to your hour-long tutorial (or you send it to your tutor the day before). Then, you read the essay aloud (or skip this, if your tutor has already received and read it), and spend the rest of the time discussing the ideas in your essay. Your tutor will generally present objections to your argument, which you will have to answer, or ask you questions to encourage you to think more deeply. At the end, he’ll give you a new reading list and essay question, and the process begins again.
There are also departmental lectures every week, and at the beginning of term your tutor will generally recommend a few which you should attend. These are not technically required, and there is no attendance taken. However, since the faculty members who write the exams are aware of the content of these lectures, they may write exam questions based on them, so it’s in your best interest to attend at least the listed core lectures. There may be some instruction given in seminars/classes (especially language instruction) – your senior tutor will let you know if you need to take these, and how to sign up for them.
Examination is by written examination at or near the end of the first year (prelims/mods), and at the end of the third year (finals). Exams are in the form of essay questions, with some gobbets (i.e., written commentary on a written passage), translations, and/or problem sets included, depending on the course and the paper. There is also the option of a thesis for some subjects (and a few papers are examined by written coursework [i.e., a lengthy essay like a term paper], as well as exam). If there are questions about your written exam, or if the examiners feel they need more information in order to assess your ability, you may be asked to undergo a viva voce, or oral exam. (These exams are standard for postgraduate degrees.)
The result of your final degree is not cumulative. Your final result depends entirely on your final examinations at the end of your degree (including a written thesis/coursework if applicable). Exams are marked on a scale of 0-100, and results are roughly equivalent to the following marks (which may differ depending on the degree course):
70-100: First-Class
60-69: Upper Second (2:1)
50-59: Lower Second (2:2)
40-49: Third
30-39: Pass (w/o Honours)
Below 30: Fail
Your final result is based on the average of your marks on your final papers, with a couple qualifying criteria: You will generally have to have an average of a certain mark or above, plus at least 2-3 marks over a certain number, as well as no mark below a certain number. So, for example, in Theology, in order to get a 2:1 as your final result, you need to have:
An average of 59 or above
At least two marks of 60 or above
No mark below 40
Whereas to get a First, you need to have:
(i) Average of 68.5 or above
At least two marks of 70 or above
No mark below 50
OR
(ii) Average of 65 or above
At least three marks of 75 or above
No mark below 50
In Theology at least, and I think in the humanities generally, about 10% of students receive a First, roughly 65-75% receive a 2:1, and about 15-25% receive a 2:2. It is uncommon for a person to receive a Third or below, though it happens. You need a high 2:1 (avg 66+) or above to be accepted into graduate study generally, and some employers will also require a 2:1 or above. (Though for graduate study at Oxbridge – Oxford or Cambridge – you should aim for a First.)
Glossary
Oxford “paper” = US “course”/”class”
(Oxford “paper” also means an examination, so “sitting a paper” means taking an exam. “Classes”, meaning instruction on a certain topic being given to a small group of students who attend weekly and receive regular homework, are rare at Oxford, since most instruction is delivered in other formats. Instead of saying, for example, that you’re taking a class on the Old Testament, you’d say that you’re doing the Old Testament paper, or, if you’re taking the exam, that you’re sitting the Old Testament paper. However, some papers at Oxford are given through a class, such as the special theologian papers within the Theology degree – although my class was 3 people, so it’s not the same thing as an American 20-30 student class. It’s more like a large tutorial.)
Oxford “course” = US “degree program”
(e.g., my course, i.e., my course of studies, was the Theology BA)
Oxford “subject” = US “major”
(e.g., “My subject is Theology” = “My major is Theology”)
Oxford “to read” = US “to major in” or ”to study”)
(e.g., ”I’m reading Theology” = “I’m majoring in Theology” or “I’m studying Theology”. A person who is reading Theology is a theologian, just as a person who is reading for a science degree is a scientist – no need to wait for the PhD to apply the appellation relevant to your field! One benefit of Oxford is that you’re treated as a colleague-in-training.)
Oxford “essay” = US “paper”
(instead of saying “I’m writing a paper on irony in the Gospel of John”, you’d say, “My essay this week is on irony in the Gospel of John”)
Oxford “revision” = US “studying”
(i.e., “I’m revising for my exams” instead of “I’m studying for my exams”)
Oxford “tutor” = US “professor”
(In the US, we generally tend to call all our faculty instructors “professors”, e.g., “my Intro Psych professor” to refer to the newly-minted PhD who’s working as an adjunct. At Oxford, a professor is a specific title for someone who has been awarded a chair in a faculty – so, for example, the Chair of Old Testament can be called Prof Bloggs, whereas another faculty member, who may have lectured and taught for 20 years as a member of the faculty but who is not a chair, is only Dr Bloggs. It is a faux pas to called a professor “Dr”, or a non-professor faculty member “Prof”. Oxford faculty members have other titles, such as “Lecturer” – which means that the person gives lectures in the department – or “Tutor” – which means that the person teaches tutorials, *not* that the person gives extra help to struggling students [though they may do that, too, out of the kindness of their hearts - Oxford tutors generally care a lot about the progress of their students]. However, you wouldn’t address someone as Lecturer Bloggs or Tutor Bloggs.)
Oxford “finalist” = US “senior”
(A finalist is a student who is about to sit finals, i.e., a student in the last year of his course. [During your last term, you no longer attend tutorials or receive essay assignments, as you are expected to spend all your time revising and attending revision classes.] Therefore, “finalist” is roughly equivalent to the U.S. term “senior”. English universities do not use the terms freshman/sophomore/junior/senior, not least because undergraduate degrees are often three years, not four. They do, however, use the term “fresher” for a new first-year student.)
Oxford “postgraduate” = US “graduate”
(Postgrad:undergrad as graduate student:undergraduate student)
And there you are! Feel free to write me if you have any questions about Oxford or study in the UK (or study in the US, if you are not American). Feel free also to share this document with others – I ask only that you don’t modify it without permission, and do credit me and link back to this blog.
Radcliffe Quadrangle (Harvard)
Dominus Illuminatio Mea!
Cole Matson
BA (Hons) – Theology – University of Oxford, 2011
BFA (w/ Honors) – Drama/Psychology – New York University, 2006
PhD candidate – Divinity – University of St Andrews, 2011-present
Hi Cole, thank you for this informative blog post! How would you differentiate the US and UK PhD programs? I am currently working on a MS in the US, and have been considering a PhD in the UK. Most of what I have found on the Internet demonizes PhD advisers in the UK, criticizes the low retention rate of PhD students, and calls out universities on the few funding opportunities available. Would you concur?
Katherine,
Thanks for your comment. I obviously chose to do a PhD in the UK over the US, and I’ll give you some of my reasons below. First of all, to address your questions, I understand that PhD advisers in the US are more “hands-on” than PhD advisers in the UK. That’s probably at least partially due to the biggest difference between US & UK PhD programmes: length. In the US, PhD programmes are 5-7 or so years, with the first 2-4 years spent on coursework before becoming ABD (All But Dissertation). In the UK, the ENTIRE PhD is ABD. There is no coursework, only dissertation (and perhaps a project to turn in the first year to show that you know what you’re doing – I had to submit a 10,000-12,000 word draft chapter, 2-3 pg dissertation proposal, and 10-12 pg bibliography 6 months into my first year). American PhD programmes often allow you to earn a Masters en route. In the UK, you are already expected to have a Masters (and some students may have two – a taught Masters like an MSt/MLitt and a research Masters like an MPhil, which requires a thesis that can often be upgraded into a PhD dissertation). The UK PhD is roughly equivalent to the ABD portion of a US PhD, so expect to go through the coursework through an advanced Masters before entering a UK PhD programme.
(Though there are exceptions – I entered directly into a UK PhD programme with a BFA in Drama/Psychology [NYU], a BA in Theology [Oxford], and a little less than half the completed coursework for a Masters in Clinical Psychology [completed as part of the first year of a PsyD programme I was in at Loyola Maryland - I had a good GPA, but decided the field wasn't a good fit]. I probably would have benefitted by doing the 1-year MLitt at my Institute and using that as an entrance into the PhD. As it is, I do not have a Masters. However, I completed an optional thesis at Oxford as part of my BA in my subject area of theology & the arts, which was about the same length as the MLitt thesis, and submitted that as my writing sample, so I guess they figured that meant I didn’t need to do the MLitt. One of my friends just completed the MLitt, applied to the PhD programme, and was accepted directly into the second year of the PhD, with his MLitt thesis counting as his 1st-year PhD project.)
All this is to say that you should not expect to enter a UK PhD straight out of undergrad – you’ll need to get a good Masters degree first, or apply to a UK MPhil that may allow you to upgrade your thesis into a PhD. However, that’s not your situation, as you will have an MS.
So, to return to the question of supervisors: I expect that UK supervisors are known for being more “hands-off” because UK PhD students already enter with research experience, and are expected to know how to do research on their own. The guidance of your supervisor is to suggest books/articles you might not know about, provide feedback on your written work, and basically help you make connections in your field and get done. They are not there to teach you how to do research, or provide direction for your work. They’ll expect you to enter with a clear direction. Students who would prefer to have a more directive supervisor, who will act as a teacher-mentor, will probably fit better with an American supervisor. On the other hand, students who just want to be left alone to do their own work, and want to be as independent as possible, will probably fit better with a UK supervisor. I’m in the latter camp, and have nothing but good things to say about my academic supervisor. He’s very encouraging, makes suggestions of references I might want to look at and conferences I might want to get involved in, and believes whole-heartedly in the mission of our field, in which he is a leader. He’s also a good guy, and very laid-back, so he’s easy to talk to. He doesn’t feel the need to give me a lot of unnecessary assignments, but gives good feedback on the work I give him when I have something ready to hand in. He has a positive approach which is helpful to me in building my confidence and actually becoming more independent with my work. (On the other hand, of course, not all UK PhD supervisors are the same. There’s another member of the department who, I understand from friends, is very sparing with praise, rips apart work with a red pen, and requires his students to submit work monthly. The good side of that is, his students will really know their stuff by the time they’re done, if they didn’t before. My risk with my supervisor is to allow myself to become lazy, since he takes a light hand. However, I do think my supervisor’s approach is the better fit for me, although both are good men and good academics – they’re just helpful in different ways.)
As for retention rate, I can’t really comment, since I don’t know how the rates compare, or what any explanation might be. (There are so many factors.) There are much fewer funding opportunities in the UK, that’s true. Partially that’s because US PhD programmes generally require students to teach, and their funding is partly compensation for their teaching. In the UK, it’s only the minority of students that teach, and there aren’t enough positions for all the students that would like to teach. (Students who want to work in the US are especially keen to teach, because the US universities will require teaching experience.) The focus is on research, not teaching. That can be both a blessing and a curse, depending on your goals and priorities. Another reason for the discrepancy, at least for international students, is because UK students have their tuition heavily subsidised by the government. One of the ways universities help close the gap between what UK students pay, and how much it actually costs to teach them, is by charging overseas students fees that can be 5 times what home students pay. Universities aren’t going to be too keen to give out too many scholarships to international students, though they do give out some. (I have one of these scholarships, which would have provided me with free tuition plus a living expenses stipend, if I were a home student. Since I am an international student, I have to pay the difference between home tuition and overseas tuition. I receive the same amount of money, but instead of covering my tuition plus a surplus, it instead covers just about half my tuition. It also requires me to work 20 hours/week in a teaching or research assistantship during the second and third years of my PhD [which actually helps in terms of teaching experience, as I have a leg up on other applicants of my department wants me to teach instead of assisting in research].)
I think, actually, that I’ve covered the major differences between US & UK PhD programmes in the above paragraphs. I’ll sum up with giving you the reasons I chose a UK PhD programme instead of an American:
1) The best programme in my field was in the UK. So that’s where I applied.
2) 3-4 years vs. 5-7 years. ‘Nuff said.
3) More independence, and fewer teaching obligations. I could theoretically spend 3 years holed up in my office if I wanted to. (I don’t particularly want to.)…
4)…but it is nice to have an office. My programme provides an excellent private office building for our PhD students in a medieval stone castle-y looking building, right by the sea, overlooking the majestic ruins of the medieval cathedral and monastery. Where could I find that in the US?
5) No coursework, no comprehensive exams, no required languages. These are great if your work requires it. I don’t think mine does, and therefore I didn’t want to spend a few extra years going through these hurdles. (I’m also not trying to land a tenure-track full-time academic position, so I have more freedom to avoid hurdles than do folks whose primary career goal is to become a professor.)
I hope this comment was helpful, and let me know if you have any further questions.
Cole
Cole, thank you so much for taking the time to write up that comment. It was very informative and helpful. Here are a few more questions:
- how selective are UK PhD programs? In the US, GRE scores are golden as well as strong letters of recommendation. I haven’t seen anything like that on the university websites I have visited. In fact, the London School of Economics doesn’t even have a deadline. It almost sounds like as long as you can demonstrate research skills and a solid writing sample, you’re good to go.
-Is the term “research student” synonymous to “PhD student”?
-I am earning my MS within a research-intensive department with the required completion of a thesis at the end. Would that “count” as a MPhil?
-US PhD students are expected to be very active within their field of study, participating in conferences, presentations, workshops, etc. Anything less comes across as a lack of motivation. Is it similar in the UK?
Katherine,
Thanks for the questions.
1) I wouldn’t conclude from the shorter laundry list of requirements that UK PhD programmes are less selective. They do appear to me to be more “casual” in their application procedures, and rolling admission (which in the US is associated with less selective degree programmes) is more common. However, I understand that LSE is a top programme, and I would expect it to be more selective than most. Oxbridge (Oxford and Cambridge) basically requires a First-Class degree (roughly equivalent to a 3.8-4.0 American GPA) to be accepted into PhD-level study. They will base their admission decisions more on your research proposal, writing sample, letters of recommendation, and previous degree qualifications, and less on standardized tests like the GRE (since you won’t be taking tests). The key will be writing a really strong research proposal (tailored to the faculty at your programme), and have a strong writing sample and letters of recommendation, as well as getting top-level grades in your current MS programme.
2) “Research student” and “PhD student” are not synonymous. There are both taught and research Masters degrees. Taught degrees included classes of formal instruction. Research degrees do not, and just involve the writing of a thesis. A taught postgraduate would not be a research student. A research postgraduate would. Therefore, the term “research student’ can include some Masters students, as well as all PhD students. (In addition, at least in Scotland, a PhD student is admitted initially under a “general research ordinance”, as a research student. Admission to full PhD status is made after the successful completion of a hurdle such as, in my programme, the GRO (for “graduate research ordinance”) project, the draft chapter/proposal/bibliography submitted during the first year. So technically, since I have not yet received formal approval of my submitted GRO, I am still a research student, not yet a full PhD student (though the distinction makes no difference in the day-to-day).
3) Your research-intensive MS may count as an MPhil. (And in any case, an MPhil is more important in some programmes – such as Oxbridge – than others.) I would check with the individual programmes you’re considering whether your MS work would satisfy their admission requirements.
4) Yes, at least based on my experience at my programme. People are forever giving papers and attending conferences. My supervisor requested that I submit papers and attend two conferences in the coming months with which he is involved (both of which are good fits for my work). Presence at conferences and publications may actually be more important for future academic positions over here, because teaching experience is less of a requirement.
Do you mind if I re-post these questions/answers as a separate blog post?
Of course not, go for it. Thanks again. Very helpful. *round of applause for Cole*
Great, thanks!
Hi Cole,
What an interesting article! Does a gret job of illuminating the Oxford world for those unfamilliar with it. I was wondering if I could ask a question about being an Oxford undergraduate.
I am currently preparing to enter an esteemed American university as a freshman, and while I love the school I will be attending, I have an interest in applying to Oxford as an undergrauate. I understand that I would have to begin the course from the begnning, should I be accepted. I heard a while ago that most American undergraduates at Oxford have completed coursework at an American school before coming to Oxford to start another degree there. Is this true? And do you have any advice for a student in my sitution? Would I have a significantly greater chance of being accepted to study at Oxford if I have already completed one year at a top American school? I also have numerous America qualifications all in the range of successful Oxford applicants – many, many APs, top SATs and SAT IIs, and ACT. I am familiar with the UCAS application process… When I applied to colleges last year I applied to and was accepted to St Andrews, UCL, Durham, and Royal Holloway. I am more interested in applying to Oxford as an undergrad after a year at American uni.
Any advice would be much appreciated!
John,
Thanks for your comment. It has not been my experience that most American undergraduates at Oxford have been in your situation of starting a degree at an American institution, and then coming to do a degree at Oxford. In my experience, most American Oxford undergraduates are either doing their first degree at Oxford without having been enrolled in a previous American programme, or are completing a second undergraduate degree after completing an American undergraduate degree (my experience and that of a few of my friends). There are also many JYA (Junior Year Abroad) students. However, my selection sample is largely drawn from my experience at Harris Manchester College, the undergraduate (and postgraduate) college for mature students (i.e., students 21 and over), where we were known for having American (and other) students doing second BAs. I don’t know the average experience of American undergraduates of normal undergraduate age (18-21) at the other colleges. It may very well be as you were told.
I should think you would have a very good chance of being accepted, especially since you already have qualifications in the range of successful applicants, and have already received several acceptances to top UK universities (including my own current university, St Andrews!). I do not think that completing a year at an American university would itself improve your chances at earning a place at Oxford. However, completing a year with top grades should help. In addition, you should aim to take as many courses as you can in the field which you intend to study at Oxford. Oxford undergraduates study their major subject only – there is no liberal arts core curriculum. So, for example, if you intend to study history, I would take as many history-specific courses as your university’s first-year liberal arts core curriculum allows you, and aim to do as well as possible in these courses. You should also plan to use work in these courses as your writing sample(s), and ask these professors for letters of recommendation. If there is any extra academic work you can do in this subject, such as the ability to write a term paper in place of a final exam, or the opportunity to serve as an assistant on a research project in your field, I would take advantage of it. Also, ask your professors in the subject for reading recommendations, as you may be asked your opinion of arguments in the field as part of your admissions interview (though these will be basic, as they know you haven’t yet begun the in-depth study your undergraduate degree will provide – however, this is your opportunity to impress the interviewers).
Good luck, and let me know if you have any other questions. Do you know which subject/college you would be looking to apply to?
Cole
Oh, and do you mind if I include your comment and my response in a separate post?
I would not mind at all if you used our conversation in a separate post.
My passion is psychology, and I’d love to read Experimental Psychology at Oxford. I’m uncertain as to which college I would apply to… I actually have a question regarding that:
I applied to Oxford in the last admissions cycle with an open application, and I was invited to interview at Pembroke College. I also interviewed at a second college, though ultimately I was not offered a place at any college. Will my chances of earning a place be impacted in any way, positively or negatively, by my having applied, interviewed, and been rejected before? Would it be wise of me to apply to a different college this time around? And are there colleges where competition may not be as rigorous, or which might be more accepting of American students?
Since I last applied, I will have considerably more AP credentials (10 in all, including those relevant to psychology) and a year at a top US institution (preferably with top marks in my classes, including psychology). And of course, in no way do I mean any disrespect towards my American school; I love my university, and would be honored and privileged to spend my whole undergraduate education there.
Oxford, however, offers a lot of great things that no other school can, and I am determined to apply again and make the cut. Oxford’s a long way from home (Texas), but I’d love to have my education there.
Thanks for your great insight, Cole! I hope I am not overwhelming you with questions.
John,
I would apply open application again. I took a look at the list of colleges that offer Experimental Psychology, and I don’t think you’ll have a significantly better or worse chance of being accepted if you apply to a specific one. I should think that your application will only be strengthened by having more AP credits and a year of psychology coursework under your belt, plus your acceptances to the other UK schools and your current US school. I think they will look favourably on a re-applicant. Many students who do not get in at their first attempt re-apply and are accepted.
Have you thought about applying for a Rhodes Scholarship?
Btw, I’m from Texas, too! (Houston.)
Good luck,
Cole
Cole,
I have thought about applying for a Rhodes scholarship, and I’m sure I will if I remain in the US. I’m a little unfamiliar with the process, but I think that I would have to apply as I finish my undergraduate years at an American institution, correct?
If you think that the tutors would look favorably on a re-applicant, might it not be wise to apply to a college I interviewed at? Or would the university as a whole remember me through some sort of filing system? Or would it be advantageous to mention it in my personal statement?
I also have a question about my referee that I hope you can shed some light on. The person that provided my recommendation last time was a teacher at my high school, and I feel she is the person who could best write my recommendation this time as well. I don’t think that a college professor who has known me for a month is able to write me a proper recommendation letter – a month is not much time. Do you think it would be acceptable to have my high school teacher be my referee again, even though she wouldn’t be my current teacher?
Very cool about Houston – I have a few friends going to Rice University next year. I myself am from Dallas.
Thanks so much!
John
John,
I’m not sure about the Rhodes details myself – just wanted to make sure you had considered it. (I wasn’t eligible due to, if I remember correctly, age and doing a second BA.)
I don’t think it would hurt to re-apply to a college at which you previously interviewed, if it’s a college you like. If they don’t see you as a fit before interview, they’ll just pool you to another college – your overall chances of gaining a place won’t be affected. I wouldn’t mention the specific college in your personal statement, since you might get pooled to another college. I would, however, mention that you obtained an interview at two colleges during your last application to Oxford, which shows that you made it through the first cut. I don’t think it would hurt to mention at which colleges you received interviews, since if you’re interviewed at the same colleges it will jog their memory, and if you’re interviewed at different they can contact those other colleges for feedback if they’re on the fence. However, if you have any doubts about your performance at the previous interviews, I probably wouldn’t mention the colleges. I would, in any case, mention all the acceptances you received at other universities, since they’re top-flight.
I see nothing wrong with having your high school teacher provide you with a reference again. However, I would supplement it with a reference from one of your college professors. You’re right, the professor is not going to know you as well, but having a reference from a professor will show that you are doing well at university, even if all the professor can say is that you’re doing well in his class, are keen to learn and a pleasure to teach, and show potential. It would be good to have both. (There’s nothing wrong with including an extra reference in applications, in my experience.)
Here’s to more Texans at Oxford!
Cole
Cole,
I wholeheartedly agree with that sentiment! I hope I can be one more Texan to the mix.
I’d love to be able to include references from my high school teacher and my college professor, but the UCAS allows only one reference per application. Would it be wise to contact the university to ask which reference they would prefer, or whether it is possible to send them an additional reference outside of UCAS?
I’d also like to mention the other acceptances from the previous admissions cycle, but I’d hate to come across as arrogant or full of myself. Should I just try to mention them, maybe as an indication that I am indeed passionate about psychology? And I imagine it would be helpful to mention coursework at my American school, as this would be something that would help me stand out as an applicant.
Thanks,
John
John,
You could just mail the college reference directly, along with any other items you might have to mail (like a transcript). Include a cover letter saying that you could only update one reference onto UCAS, and that you included your high school reference because you’ve just started university and your high school teacher, having known you longer, is better able to speak to your abilities. However, you wanted to have a reference speaking to your ability to do university-level work, so you decided to send this second reference. (I did something similar with my doctoral applications. I also sent in an application update after the application deadline, when I had my first conference paper accepted and was invited to give a paid lecture. I sent in an updated C.V. with these new items on it. I don’t know if it helped, but I got in, so it didn’t hurt.)
I agree, mentioning the coursework is good. I would mention the acceptances, though, as well, something along the lines of: “I am re-applying to read Experimental Psychology at Oxford. During my first round of applications to universities last year, I received interviews at Pembroke College and Ye Olde Oxford College. I was also accepted at the Universities of St Andrews and Durham, University College London, and Royal Holloway, the University of London, as well as Prestigious U.S. University, where I am currently reading for a B.S. in Psychology. However, Oxford is still my top choice for study for X, Y and Z reasons, and therefore I am re-applying this year.” Then go on to list the qualifications (APs, etc) you have gained since your last application to Oxford, why you want to go to Oxford, something about your experience in your university psychology courses and how it fits with/prepares you for Oxford, etc.
Cole
That clears up a lot for me, thanks Cole!
One last question… the Oxford interview period coincides with finals at my university. I have no idea if I would be able to take my finals late or early, or if I will need to have a telephone or Skype interview (of course, assuming that I would be lucky enough to be summoned for interview). Do you have any thoughts as to what I could do in this situation, should it arise? Instinctively, I am not too keen to have my interview over Skype or over the phone. I think it’s a fairly well accepted fact that interviews in person often better allow the persons involved to get to know one another. Do you have any tips about these types of interviews?
Best regards,
John
John,
Oxford does do earlier interviews in NYC and possibly 1 or 2 other cities, for Americans who aren’t able to travel to Oxford for interview. I think you have to sign up ahead of time (i.e., when you are told you will be given an interview, I think you are asked whether you will be coming to Oxford, which they recommend, or will be attending a U.S.-based interview [for which they give you the dates], or will be interviewing by phone [during the normal Oxford interview period]). I was not able to travel to Oxford, because I was performing in a play during the interview week, and I had a similar commitment during the NYC interview dates, so I did a phone interview (in my pajamas, no less – I wanted to be comfortable, and it helped me relax).
If you’re not able to travel to Oxford, or to the U.S. interview location, I don’t think it will lower your chances significantly if you do a phone interview. There may be a slight advantage to interviewing in person (and, of course, you’ll be able to see the colleges again, or new ones if you receive interviews at different colleges), so I’d say it’s worth checking to see if you can take your finals early. But if you can’t, Oxford won’t think any less of you for interviewing in the U.S. (if you can make it) or by phone – they know that their interview period conflicts with many American students’ finals, so they’re used to that as a legitimate reason for a phone interview.
Cole
Cole – apparently we did Theology together at Oxford (I was also ’11, BA Oriel). Found this via the magic of google. Are you doing the PhD in Theology/Imagination/Arts at St. Andrew’s? If so, how is it?
I found out about its existence long past the deadline for applications – but it looks phenomenal! (I do Theology and literature, so…). Looks like I’ll be staying on to do my DPhil here in Ox, though…
Isabella,
Nice to e-meet you! I am doing the PhD in Theology, Imagination & the Arts at St Andrews, and am loving it. It was my first choice (above Oxford), because it’s the perfect place for the work I am doing. I now mainly blog at my programme’s academic theology and the arts blog, Transpositions, if you want to check it out. It’s a mix of theologians interested in artistic metaphors and imagination in theology, and artists interested in the theological questions attendant on art-making, so it’s right where I want to be, especially since I consider myself in the latter category.
Who are you planning to work with in Oxford, and what are you planning to do in Theology & Literature? Did you just do the 1-year MSt in Modern Christian Doctrine with the Theology & Literature focus?
Dear Cole,
I’m curious about the reverse side of the story. I just finished my BA in History in Oxford and I am thinking about applying for a master’s in the US with entry from 2013. I’m planning to do a master’s in Middle Eastern studies and I am basically wondering what sort of universities I should be aiming for given the different grading system between the US and UK, as well as whether an Oxford classification would be viewed differently from a non-Oxbridge degree?
Best,
Simon
Simon,
In terms of universities, I don’t know which are the top in your area, but I’d aim for those, the Ivy Leagues, and other “name” universities. An Oxford degree will only help you. (In the US, the names “Oxford” and “Cambridge” carry an added mystique, even on top of the Ivys.) Good universities will probably be aware of the differences between US and UK grading and classifications, and if they aren’t, it’s easy enough for you to add a note to your application explaining how yours compares to a US classification. (I’m sure that either your department or the Admissions Office at Oxford can help you with this conversion, if needed.)
I’d make a list of the programmes you’d like to attend, take a look at their requirements, and if they do not address international students or degrees, contact their admissions staff to see how your degree compares. (I would probably also check with Oxford first, before contacting US admissions staff, as they will probably be more fluent with US/UK degree conversion than many American universities.)
Note that Oxford BAs are closer to American MAs in many ways, most importantly the degree of focus. American BA students will generally spend the first two years of their degree doing general education courses in the humanities and sciences (history, English, science, maths, foreign language) and starting the introductory courses in their major focus. Most of their classes in their primary subject will be taken only in the last two years. Some MA programs will be more general, and will include introductory courses in Middle Eastern studies that you may have already taken as papers at Oxford, whereas others (e.g., the program at Harvard, from what I see on the website) will be stepping stones to PhD-level work, and will build on your History degree rather than repeat parts of it.
Simon,
I am currently considering a bachelor’s at Oxford and was wondering, is it a readily accepted degree like one in America would be? Also, is it hard to apply to two separate college? I am interested in a bachelor’s in Political Science and Journalism. Thanks for all your help.
Shauna,
A bachelor’s at Oxford would be highly valuable in the eyes of American graduate schools and employers. It’s like getting a bachelor’s at Harvard or Yale. So yes, it’s very much a readily-accepted degree.
You cannot put two colleges on your application. However, you can put both a college and a permanent private hall (PPH), which are like colleges, but generally smaller, and all are religiously-affiliated (3 Catholic, 2 Anglican, 1 Baptist). By putting a PPH on your application, you are agreeing to the possibility of being “pooled” to a PPH. (You may be “pooled” to any college regardless of what you put on your application.) Students interviewing in person often receive interviews at two colleges, or a college and a PPH. The two colleges may or may not include the college listed on one’s application. If you put a college down (and you don’t have to – you can make an “open” application, without naming a preferred college), it will be considered by that college, though they may pool you to another college for interviews (which is what happened to me – I put down Keble, but was pooled to Harris Manchester for interviews). Regardless of whatever college you put down, or if you make an open application, your chances of gaining admission to the University will not be affected. If your preferred college doesn’t take you, but thinks you’re a good candidate, they’ll pass you on to another college they think might have more room for you.
However, I would familiarize yourself with Oxford courses. One doesn’t “double major” at Oxford. You can apply for a course that’s joint honours (e.g., Philosophy & Theology), and there are some other limited ways to combine related courses. But, for example, Oxford doesn’t offer Journalism. Your best best would be Philosophy, Politics & Economics (PPE – you pick 2 or 3 of these to specialise in during the latter part of your course), or History & Politics. PPE is one of the most competitive courses at Oxford in terms of admissions, so be warned. History & Politics is about as competitive (15.1% vs. 15.2% acceptance rate last year, respectively).
Click here to see which Oxford colleges and halls offer either of those courses. (Balliol is the hot college for PPE, but it’s also the most competitive; I think your best shot at getting in would be to go for PPE at Blackfriars Hall, which has relatively few PPE students, if you’re fine with a) being taught by [extremely knowledgeable and friendly] Catholic Dominican friars, and b) not having the normal residential Oxford college experience [Blackfriars has no housing or dining hall for students, though they do help students find housing together]).
Click here to see the latest admissions statistics (including, in the sidebar to the page’s left, statistics for each course).
Oh, and I just saw you have a Harding e-mail address. If you’re considering doing a second BA, I highly recommend either Blackfriars or Harris Manchester. (As a matter of fact, I think Blackfriars, like Harris Manchester, only accepts students over 21.) Both are for mature students only (21+), and specialise in students doing second BAs. I’m particularly partial to HMC, since it’s my college, and it’s one of the smallest, and the friendliest, of the Oxford colleges. It is also a residential college with dining hall, unlike Blackfriars, and is also non-sectarian in its tutors. More info here: http://www.hmc.ox.ac.uk. If you’ll be over 21 when you start your degree, you’ll probably be pooled to HMC for at least one of your interviews anyway. For your best chances at getting in (as well as getting an extraordinary education from a small college/hall with more room to focus on each student), I recommend putting down Harris Manchester as your preferred college, and adding Blackfriars as your hall.