this actually makes me feel more confident in applying! i was stressing about how the interviews would take place, but this is a far more comfortable setting to me than what i was expecting
@@hungryhog1 hi, did you watch this whole video. If this skeletal formula expression was popular for long time in the UK, why the professor needed to ask the student that did she happy with this expression? Also when they discussed the mechanism, they also switched to carbon symbols expression sometime instead of the skeletal form. My point was that professors/education department in the UK tried to teach/use skeletal formula in the early stage such as in A level not from university level in the recent decade I found.
@@dyiu38 Thats simply because students first learn non skeletal formular up to the age of 16 in the uk as it's simpler, as you only learn to draw things like methanol, ethanol. Then at 17 you start to learn skeletal formula, at the time of the interview, a typical candidate would have only first learnt about it in the last 6-8 months and only one simple organic module, therefore, not guaranteed to be properly fluent with it. However, for undergraduate degree skeletal is the only formula in use as this is the case for the whole scientific community, nothing to do with the UK starting to adopt it.
@@CP-lh2mn Are you familiar with the UK chemistry education in A level (age 17-18) in a longer period? Please check the past exam papers (such as edexel and AQA) in 2008 or before. They primarily used carbon symbols not the skeletal formula in the exam questions. In addition, are you sure the skeletal formula is the only one used in undergraduate level in the whole world?? Please check some organic college text books (such as Solomons and Fryhle Organic chemistry Eight edition), it is very common to see those carbon symbols for the mechanism demonstrations etc...in it. Of course I am pretty sure this skeletal formula that is used conveniently in the organic chemistry publications though and later undergraduate teaching after familiar with the basic carbon symbols expression.
Hello! The 'candidate' shown in this mock interview is a current student at Jesus College and so has successfully been through the interview process. We tried our best to make it as representative of a real interview as possible. In reality the decision to give a candidate an offer is based on their performance in 3 different interviews, usually in inorganic, organic and physical chemistry, as well as the other components of their application (grades, personal statement, admissions tests etc.).
I think it would be better to have an ice breaker for the first 5 minutes or so to give the candidate a chance to relax rather than going straight in with the questions about chemistry. Also, the candidates have progressed through to an advanced level so to explore ideas would have been a better approach rather than digging into knowledge they gained at school.
They absolutely did explore ideas, its just the tutor didnt state so out loud - electronegativity, mechanisms, reactivity, entropy, sterics, leaving groups, resonance
This appears to be an example of a knowledgeable don drawing out relevant knowledge from a bright student. Both such individuals are a rarity. I am slightly suspicious of what is going on here really though. It seems more like a well run Oxford-style session between tutor and student rather than an admissions interview. Judging by the parlous state of UK secondary education at this point in time, I am suspicious regarding the obvious depth of knowledge of the individual playing the part of the candidate for admission. I suspect she is already fairly we'll into a bachelor's program already and is playing the part of a candidate for admission.
@@ggbjhijgghj YES you are quite right to be censorious of my comment. I had omitted to ' read more ' above. That said, the suspicions I professed turned out to be on the mark. That now being out in the open so to speak, I'm left with the question as to why the college would go to such trouble in order to prove ..... what ? Amongst the material I failed to read is the statement : *Interviews do vary from year to year, and from college to college. Usually there would be two interviewers for Chemistry at Jesus, to give a gender-balanced panel." I'm trying to understand what ' gender balance ' has to do with chemistry.
As someone who just finished a level chem with no desire to continue chemistry I don’t think this is too out the ordinary I followed everything they were talking about comfortably
@@sjsnnsndxdnendnndd5939 Perhaps on a personal level I have bad memories of my time studying Chemistry at Grammar School 1952-54. The Chemistry teacher was one of the worst teachers I have ever encountered. He had the unique quality of confusing the straightforward and emphasizing the obscure. At no point was I ever able to discern any king of pattern anywhere, with the possible exception of homologous series in Organic chemistry. In 1953 I got 55% on the A level, the following year I got 50% at A-level and a miserable failure at S-level the same year. This experience at least was beneficial in that it killed off any residual interest I might have had in the subject. By contrast one of my fellow students at Grammar School went on the read chemistry at a redbrick university where he took a First, and a PhD three years later. After a brief period in industry he went on to eventually a full professorship at an Australian university. Having such a bad teacher in his case motivated him to private study which I am certain is the key to his success.
This is not an unrealistic level of knowledge, especially if you’re a chemistry student with Oxford as an aspiration. I’m only half way through my A-levels and followed it perfectly fine.
Obviously this relies on prior knowledge, this is common sense. The interview tests how solid your a level knowledge is and how you can apply it to abstract problems. Extra reading may help, and if you're applying to Oxbridge without doing extra reading then maybe you shouldn't be applying.
I wish i had him as my chemistry teacher!
I love the way he explains things.
I think if you have a 1-1 lesson it’s quite easy to seem like a great teacher because you can bounce off the student really easily
this actually makes me feel more confident in applying! i was stressing about how the interviews would take place, but this is a far more comfortable setting to me than what i was expecting
this is quite a nice representation of an actual interview
@@cat.oii23 yhh I had 2 acc
@@cat.oii23 I already got an offer from Exeter.. but my interview with Cambridge went alright
Thank you - I’m thinking of applying later this year!
Thank you as you have given me some reason to think I should have got into Oxford.
JML
idk why i’m watching this 😂
i have 0 knowledge of chemistry, i’m barely passing it for GCSE 😭
Hope your exams went well
Yeah, I noticed that this America style of organic molecular expression (skeletal formula) can be seen more in the UK in the recent decade.
really? I graduated 24 years ago (UK) and the skeletal formula was standard then for organic chemistry, and I believe a few years before that
@@hungryhog1 hi, did you watch this whole video. If this skeletal formula expression was popular for long time in the UK, why the professor needed to ask the student that did she happy with this expression? Also when they discussed the mechanism, they also switched to carbon symbols expression sometime instead of the skeletal form.
My point was that professors/education department in the UK tried to teach/use skeletal formula in the early stage such as in A level not from university level in the recent decade I found.
@@dyiu38 Thats simply because students first learn non skeletal formular up to the age of 16 in the uk as it's simpler, as you only learn to draw things like methanol, ethanol. Then at 17 you start to learn skeletal formula, at the time of the interview, a typical candidate would have only first learnt about it in the last 6-8 months and only one simple organic module, therefore, not guaranteed to be properly fluent with it. However, for undergraduate degree skeletal is the only formula in use as this is the case for the whole scientific community, nothing to do with the UK starting to adopt it.
@@CP-lh2mn Are you familiar with the UK chemistry education in A level (age 17-18) in a longer period? Please check the past exam papers (such as edexel and AQA) in 2008 or before. They primarily used carbon symbols not the skeletal formula in the exam questions.
In addition, are you sure the skeletal formula is the only one used in undergraduate level in the whole world??
Please check some organic college text books (such as Solomons and Fryhle Organic chemistry Eight edition), it is very common to see those carbon symbols for the mechanism demonstrations etc...in it.
Of course I am pretty sure this skeletal formula that is used conveniently in the organic chemistry publications though and later undergraduate teaching after familiar with the basic carbon symbols expression.
Did this "candidate" perform well enough to get an offer? Is this an example of an exemplary interview performance?
Hello! The 'candidate' shown in this mock interview is a current student at Jesus College and so has successfully been through the interview process.
We tried our best to make it as representative of a real interview as possible. In reality the decision to give a candidate an offer is based on their performance in 3 different interviews, usually in inorganic, organic and physical chemistry, as well as the other components of their application (grades, personal statement, admissions tests etc.).
@@jesuscollegejcroxford9646 I rather do chemistry in a garage
@@Fevor-x4l lmao, is that what you think chemistry actually is?
@@dusscode Wait, you're telling me that Chemistry isn't just cooking meth in the back of a van?
God Is Great, May God Bless you all and your families
Very good video.
I did very well at this but then I do have a chemistry PhD 😅
My pemrboke interview is in 2 hours!!! So stressed 😥😥😥
Gods Grace Everybody will succeed
I have a question. Is this the A-level course, or extra school topics?
a level
This is for which course,I mean UG or PG?
Undergraduates
Wow
Is this undergraduate program?
Yes, it is for UG.
Obviously one would expect a PG level candidateto be quizzed a lot more more rigorously than this.
I think it would be better to have an ice breaker for the first 5 minutes or so to give the candidate a chance to relax rather than going straight in with the questions about chemistry. Also, the candidates have progressed through to an advanced level so to explore ideas would have been a better approach rather than digging into knowledge they gained at school.
They absolutely did explore ideas, its just the tutor didnt state so out loud - electronegativity, mechanisms, reactivity, entropy, sterics, leaving groups, resonance
A
This appears to be an example of a knowledgeable don drawing out relevant knowledge from a bright student. Both such individuals are a rarity. I am slightly suspicious of what is going on here really though. It seems more like a well run Oxford-style session between tutor and student rather than an admissions interview. Judging by the parlous state of UK secondary education at this point in time, I am suspicious regarding the obvious depth of knowledge of the individual playing the part of the candidate for admission. I suspect she is already fairly we'll into a bachelor's program already and is playing the part of a candidate for admission.
read the description!
@@ggbjhijgghj YES you are quite right to be censorious of my comment. I had omitted to ' read more ' above. That said, the suspicions I professed turned out to be on the mark. That now being out in the open so to speak, I'm left with the question as to why the college would go to such trouble in order to prove ..... what ?
Amongst the material I failed to read is the statement :
*Interviews do vary from year to year, and from college to college. Usually there would be two interviewers for Chemistry at Jesus, to give a gender-balanced panel."
I'm trying to understand what ' gender balance ' has to do with chemistry.
As someone who just finished a level chem with no desire to continue chemistry I don’t think this is too out the ordinary I followed everything they were talking about comfortably
@@sjsnnsndxdnendnndd5939 Perhaps on a personal level I have bad memories of my time studying Chemistry at Grammar School 1952-54. The Chemistry teacher was one of the worst teachers I have ever encountered. He had the unique quality of confusing the straightforward and emphasizing the obscure. At no point was I ever able to discern any king of pattern anywhere, with the possible exception of homologous series in Organic chemistry. In 1953 I got 55% on the A level, the following year I got 50% at A-level and a miserable failure at S-level the same year. This experience at least was beneficial in that it killed off any residual interest I might have had in the subject.
By contrast one of my fellow students at Grammar School went on the read chemistry at a redbrick university where he took a First, and a PhD three years later. After a brief period in industry he went on to eventually a full professorship at an Australian university. Having such a bad teacher in his case motivated him to private study which I am certain is the key to his success.
This is not an unrealistic level of knowledge, especially if you’re a chemistry student with Oxford as an aspiration. I’m only half way through my A-levels and followed it perfectly fine.
Jesus Christ Is Lord and Is The Only Way To Heaven🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽❤️❤️
lol
Very ineffective way to judge a student's ability to learn new knowledge because it relies on a certain set of prior knowledge.
Obviously this relies on prior knowledge, this is common sense. The interview tests how solid your a level knowledge is and how you can apply it to abstract problems. Extra reading may help, and if you're applying to Oxbridge without doing extra reading then maybe you shouldn't be applying.