Your Grades Are Not Why Oxbridge Rejected You | Master's and PhD

In today's episode, I explain why your grades are almost certainly not the reason Oxford or Cambridge rejected you, we go through the four things that actually decide a postgraduate outcome, and I debunk the idea that you need insider connections or a famous undergraduate degree to be competitive. I use my own record as the proof: 11 applications and 11 rejections without a single interview the first time around, then three Oxbridge offers and two fully funded scholarships the second, with the same degree and the same grades.

We also cover why you have to argue your fit rather than assert it, how to get someone in the department to know your name before you submit, why a scattered research direction sinks applications that look strong on paper, and how my student Vy went from 10 rejections without an interview to four years of Oxford funding with a CV that didn't change!

Plus, I read out the personal statement that got me rejected alongside the Cambridge statement that won me full funding, so you can hear the difference for yourself. Enjoy! ☺️

🗺️ The Oxbridge Postgraduate Roadmap: Start here to find out how competitive you really are for a UK Master's/PhD compared to previously accepted applicants → http://oxbridgeadmissionsclub.thrivecart.com/roadmap/?el=podcast

MY OTHER COURSES & GUIDES

🛠️ Oxbridge Application Accelerator Toolkit: Comprehensive, all-discipline application guide for top UK Master’s & PhD programmes (54.4% accepted) → https://oxbridgeadmissionsclub.com/application-accelerator/?el=podcast

🎙️ Oxbridge Interview Mastery Programme: Comprehensive interview prep guide for Master’s & PhD admissions → https://oxbridgeadmissionsclub.thrivecart.com/interview/?el=podcast

💰 Oxbridge Scholarship Success Course: How to fund your postgraduate offer (£2M+ secured so far) → https://oxbridgeadmissionsclub.com/ossc-eg/interview/...

Transcript

SPEAKER_01 0:00

If you got rejected to a master's or PhD program at a top UK university like Oxford or Cambridge and you thought it was because of your grades, I'm here to tell you it almost certainly wasn't. Now hearing that, you might say, whoa, Claire, that's a really bold claim. How could you know that? You've not even looked at my CV. At the same time as I got accepted to a D fill in clinical neurosciences at Oxford with a fully funded Clarendon scholarship, I also got rejected to the Medical Research Council Doctoral Training Partnership Program at Oxford. At the same time I won an MRC DTP offer from Cambridge, I got rejected to their M Res plus PhD program in stem cell biology. I was the same person with the same bachelor's degree grades with a completely different result. And that is what we're going to be diving into in this episode is what exactly is it that might have gotten rejected that's not your grades. Hello and welcome back to the Open Secret podcast, where we are discussing how people really get into top master's and PhD programs at UK universities like Oxford and Cambridge. I am your host, Dr. Claire Bergstrom Johnson. I am an Oxford D Fill graduate, a Clarendon scholar, and now a fellow at Oxford. The first time I applied to master's and PhD programs, I applied to 11 programs in total, and I got rejected to every single one. Now I didn't have perfect grades, but they were pretty good. I had a 3.84 GPA from the University of Michigan, and that's the equivalent to about a high second class degree in the UK or a low first. Now this was well above the minimum grade cutoff at institutions like Oxford and Cambridge, which typically require at least a 3.5 GPA, but I still got all of those rejections. Now the second time I applied, I got accepted to both Oxford and Cambridge a total of three times with two fully funded scholarships amounting to over 300,000 pounds. Now if you've been here for a while, you might say, hey, wait, Claire, didn't you do a semester of a master's degree in biotechnology at Johns Hopkins between those rejections and those acceptances? My answer to that would be yes. I did study for a master's degree for one semester part-time while I was working full-time in biotech, but I never completed the degree. I did get A's in both of those courses. However, when I then had those Johns Hopkins grades, I applied for PhD programs again and I got those acceptances to Oxford and Cambridge. I also got rejected to the Medical Research Council doctoral training partnership program at Oxford. So in this case, even when I applied that second time, and I was the exact same person between these applications, I had completely different results. And when I go back and I look at those applications, it really comes down to application approach. Now still, I might hear you, you might be saying, okay, Claire, that's well and good, that's what happened to you, but what about other people? I have seen this happen again and again with all of the students, over 2,000 of them that I have helped since 2023. For example, one of my very first students, Vi, she had a very similar story to me. She got rejected to all 10 programs she applied to without a single interview when she was already working at Cambridge after finishing her bachelor's degree.

SPEAKER_00 2:54

I've spoken to some postdocs who had graduated from like either Oxford or Cambridge just because I was working at like a research lab in Cambridge. So most of the postdocs are like graduates from there who then just moved on and then worked in the same lab. So everyone kind of told me something like kind of vague. Yes, like you deserve a spot there. And I'm like, yeah, but like I don't know, like it's not really specific.

SPEAKER_01 3:19

But the advice you deserve a spot here is not super helpful. However, once we started working together and she used resources like my application accelerator toolkit, and she just changed her application approach, nothing else, her grades didn't change, her CV didn't change. She had the exact same job at Cambridge. She got accepted to Oxford with a fully funded scholarship for four years. And she won that funding offer at the same time as she got her acceptance, which is extremely rare.

SPEAKER_00 3:44

I think it was literally like the end of a workday. And then I was just like checking my personal email, and then I saw it and I was just like, I couldn't see past like the first few words. So I was like really nervous to open it. And I clicked it and I was like, congratulations, and I was like, Yes.

SPEAKER_01 3:59

So in all of these cases, if grades were the thing that decided these outcomes, all the outcomes would have been the same, but they weren't. Okay, so I promised you that we're gonna go over the things that really actually decide the outcome of your master's or PhD application that aren't grades. And the very first one is your fit with your chosen program and if relevant, your supervisor. Now it's important for this one throughout your application, you can't just say that you're a match and leave it at that. You don't assert it, you need to argue it, which means that you provide evidence and context, especially in something like your personal statement. For example, the first time that I applied, I applied to schools where I was interested in a lot of different things. However, I didn't tell them specifically what one project or one group I would like to work in once I was there. In fact, I didn't name a single supervisor in my personal statement when I applied to MIT because I thought that looking more versatile would make it more likely that they could slot me in somewhere. Basically, I said, throw me in, coach, throw me in anywhere, just please, please, please, please, please accept me. And as you can imagine, this gave off massive, desperate energy. Now, the second time I applied, especially to UK universities, I made the specific case for why specific groups. So, for example, the group that I ended up joining at Oxford, I could talk about how I not only had my degree in neuroscience, but I also had worked for multiple years with induced pluripotent stem cells, which is something that the group specialized in at that time and was publishing on. Plus, of course, my personal interest in inflammatory neuropathies, which is exactly what that group was researching. Interest is not necessarily enough, but it definitely helps build the picture, especially if you haven't been doing research in that specific area before. Now, I know some of you listening to this or watching this don't necessarily have to pick a supervisor, you might be applying to a master's program. The same holds true for you, especially for the program at large. Say that real-world experience and application to what you're studying is really important, but the program you're applying to is really just classroom-based when you would really love to have the opportunity to go out into the field and apply what you're learning. Making sure that you not only apply to programs that fit those personal goals, but also articulating that in something in your personal statement shows that you did your research, that your application is tailored to that program specifically, and demonstrates really quickly to the assessor that it really is a very good fit. So this fit question is the number one thing that an assessor is looking for, and you can make your case in about five seconds, but you can also sync yourself in about five seconds and get your application thrown to the side. And that is why it is very important to learn the skill of how to make that fit extremely clear right from the get-go. Now, the second point that I want to make here, and it's closely related to the first, is making sure that your application materials are actually demonstrating your achievements and your experience and not just listing them. If we go back through my very first applications, good chunks of my application, including my personal statements, was essentially just writing what I had on my CV. At the point that someone's looking at something like a personal statement, they've already looked through and they've screened your CV. And if they've decided to move forward with reading your personal statement, that means your CV looked good enough. They had that information. You don't need to just regurgitate what's on there. You need to provide context, and even more importantly, you need to provide examples. And again, those examples can either be making a case or they can just be a list of achievements. The former makes it much easier to accept you, the latter makes it much easier to reject you, or at least have a lot harder time standing out compared to other applicants. And the third thing that could have gotten you rejected that is not your grades is whether or not someone in the department knows your name before you even submit your application. Now, at first you might hear that and think, well, I'm screwed, I don't have any insider connections, but that's not my point because this is actually something that you can control. And there are a couple different clever ways to do this. One of the most important ones is you need to select a potential supervisor before you submit your application, even if your program says it's not necessarily necessary, unless they tell you overtly, do not reach out to potential supervisors, you need to go and do that outreach. Even if you're applying to a master's program, reaching out to a professor that you would ideally like to learn from, take a class with, work with on your thesis project, it's a good idea to reach out to them and initially make that connection. Now, of course, it needs to be genuine. You need to do things like demonstrate that you have actually read their work and you've understood it. You're not just having an AI summarize that work, but this can really help you already start working those unofficial paths, which can work really in your favor for places like Oxford and Cambridge and don't require you to have grown up in these systems or have been attending Oxford or Cambridge for your bachelor's degree. There is a way to catch up. I had no insider connections before I applied, but when I got accepted, I did that supervisor outreach and I did it systematically, which is why I now teach that method inside my courses and guides, like the Oxford Application Accelerator Toolkit. Because once you really know how this works from the inside, it is pretty simple the process that you need to follow. And the fourth thing that could have gotten you rejected besides your grades is your research direction or your direction of your study and whether that is coherent or scattered. And this is why it's really important to consider why you are pursuing a postgraduate degree. You don't have to do a master's or a PhD. So why are you doing one? When you set out to study for a bachelor's degree, you don't have much education at that point. So of course your interests are going to be broad and you won't really have honed in on something, especially in the beginning. But for a master's or PhD, especially a PhD, this will be expected. So you cannot approach your application in the same way. And so what you want to study at that particular university, in that particular program, with that particular supervisor, needs to be very coherent and tight. Not only does this show that once again you did your research and you tailored your application to that program specifically, but it also demonstrates very quickly why you are the right fit for that program. And this is the difference between the first time I applied when I said I'd be interested in researching the connection between music and emotional activation. Now, while that sounds very interesting, it's really not very precise at all. And the best way that I can illustrate this point is really concrete examples from my first and second application. So in my first applications, for example, when I was applying to PhDs in cognitive neuroscience, I wrote, especially as I have had the opportunity to explore a wide variety of areas both inside and outside of the sciences, I have learned that my mind yearns for and thrives off of the mental stimulation and challenge that rigorous scientific research provides. And there's a whole bunch of other things that are wrong with that first sentence, but earning a PhD in the cognitive neurosciences would provide the solid foundation I need to eventually direct my own laboratory at the intersection of affective and neuroimmunological pathologies and cognitive interventions to relieve the psychological symptoms of such pathologies, helping individuals just like my twin sister lead happier and healthier lives. With this kind of degree, I will have insight into lesser-known areas of cognitive neuroscience, auditory neuroscience, mindfulness and meditation, hypnosis, that will allow me the knowledge and credentials to expand the field of research and programs in these fields at other institutions in the future. Now, besides this being just a word salad, it's not precise at all. I'm actually disgusted reading this. I haven't looked back at this in a long time. But effective in neurominological pathologies and cognitive interventions. There's nothing about hypotheses, specific research questions. Even for a master's degree application, this wouldn't be good because I'm not identifying any potential courses I would like to take, what I'd like that master's degree to help me do. Now contrast this with my second application round, and I'm going to read the career goals excerpt from my Cambridge application for the MRC DTP, which I got accepted to, and that's a fully funded program. Since my twin sister was diagnosed with chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyredicular neuropathy when we were seven years old, I've held a keen interest in neuros. A PhD from the MRC DTP program at the University of Cambridge is a critical next step toward achieving my career goal of advancing disease-modifying therapeutics for disorders like CIDP. To achieve this goal, I aspire to become a faculty member at a research university, directing a laboratory and teaching future scientists. In this role, I desire first to utilize knowledge of the underlying immunology to develop reliable in vitro models of CIDP and similar inflammatory neuropathies using patient-derived autoantibodies and stem cells. I will then use these models to investigate novel regenerative mechanisms to restore loss of function. See how different that is. It is hyper-specific with an idea. And it also, by the way, was a good approach because inflammatory neuropathies is actually not something that Cambridge specializes at the moment within their clinical neurosciences department, which is another good way, just as an aside, that you can get a proposed project like this because it fills a gap in the department. But I digress. Okay, so to summarize thus far, the four things that will get you rejected that were probably not your grades is one, your fit with your program or supervisor. You need to argue that with examples, don't just assert it. The second is whether your materials actually make a case for your fit or they just list your achievements. The third is whether anyone in the department even knows your name before you submit your application. And the fourth is whether your research direction or your direction of study, your topic of study is coherent or scattered. Now, this is all to make the point that a strong second class degree, an imperfect GPA that have wrapped around an application that makes a very strong, clear argument for fit is going to beat out every single time a very strong first class degree or 4.0 GPA from a famous university that has a very big and general application. And I have seen this play out so many times, not just within my own students that I have taught, but also friends that I have at the University of Oxford. For example, I even have friends who did their master's degree at Oxford and then they applied for a PhD and they did not get in. Now there are a number of factors that can go into that, but one of them is certainly not making a strong enough case for fit. So just because you didn't go to a fancy university does not mean you don't have a shot at these places because, especially at the postgraduate level, your case for fit is far more important than what your grades are. Now, of course, I do need to put the caveat in here. Your grades do matter. There are minimum grade cutoffs for these programs. They vary from program to program, so always check the specific web page for the program you're applying to. Generally, it is a 3.5 GPA or equivalent. Sometimes there are exceptions to this as well. For example, if you've undergone extenuating circumstances, you can actually reach out to the department and ask if they will still consider your application. And they often do respond. So yes, there are these minimum thresholds and you do need to pay attention to them. But honestly, once you're past those minimum thresholds, they don't really matter so much. They can be a tiebreaker for things like funding decisions, but for getting accepted, your grades don't matter past that minimum threshold. It's your fit in arguing and demonstrating that fit, which you have complete control over that really makes the difference. Now I also have to mention, some rejections are not about you at all. They are what I call structural no's. So for example, I got interview invitations to fully funded programs such as the Neuroimmune Interactions and Health and Disease Program at King's College in London, which is funded by the Wellcome Trust, as well as the PhD in translational neuroscience at the University of Edinburgh. So I was interviewed for both of these programs. I was waitlisted and then ultimately rejected simply because these were programs, since they were fully funded, they were capped the number of international student places. Sometimes that can happen for automatically fully funded programs like this. Plenty of other fully funded scholarships do not impose caps like that. By the way, so don't let this make you think that it is harder to get funded just because you're an international student, because that is a common misconception. But I can tell you largely it is not true. But, anyways, these programs only ended up having two or three spots for international students out of about 12 to 15 people interviewed. So there was just not a spot for me simply because I was an international student. So this is a structural no, but it can really stop people from applying simply because the structures are in place. But of course, you can't find out if you don't try. And if nothing else, having those interview experiences really strengthened me for interviews that I ultimately did get accepted to. For example, my two Cambridge interviews and my interview at Oxford. Now I did get a third Cambridge interview, which I tanked and I did deserve that rejection, but we can talk about that another day. One of the things that really stuck out to me that I didn't fully appreciate until I actually came to Oxford was what a difference being in the rooms of places like Oxford and Cambridge do for the impact you can have on the world. These places give you the rooms to be surrounded by other people who are going to go make an impact in the world, and that is one of the best ways to accelerate that impact that you want to make. Alright, that is enough inspiration for now. Okay, so what I want to close with is grades are not the entire picture. If all that determined your application outcome was grades, there's nothing you could do right now that would matter. But that is not the case at all. And that is why I have actually created a resource called the Oxford Postgraduate Roadmap, which is where I put together seven key factors that I have found across all of the accepted master's and PhD applications that I have seen over the years. In this roadmap, you score yourself on these seven factors, and in an hour or less you know exactly where you stand on a score of 35. And then I also outlined for you exactly which pathway of three is yours to start building your application and exactly what to start doing to fill in any gaps, because each of these factors is actually completely within your control and not focusing on something that might already be in your past, like your bachelor's degree grades, because you have way more control over the outcome of your application than it might feel like right now. And that is exactly what I teach you in things like the roadmap. So if you would like to check that out, you can click the link down below this video if you're watching on YouTube or look at the link in the show notes if you're listening to the podcast and get on your way to scoring yourself and finding exactly where you stand compared to previously accepted applicants. So that doesn't have to be an outstanding question for you when you apply. So that is all I have today for you from the Open Secret Podcast. If at any point this episode really resonates with you, I would really appreciate it if you could give this a like and a subscribe if you're on YouTube. And if you could rate the podcast if you're listening to it, whether that's on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or something else, I would really appreciate it. Ideally, five stars. That will help other people find the podcast too and help deliver on my mission of making elite postgraduate admissions advice more accessible to everyone. I will be putting out videos weekly for you, teaching you how to get accepted to Oxford and Cambridge and other top UK universities for masters and PhDs. I will see you in the next video.