Sheena

I really liked the sound of PPE and seeing as Oxford was the best university for it I was quite keen to apply. Moreover, I really liked Oxford because of the tutorial and collegiate systems, and the location.

My school was quite used to helping Oxbridge candidates prepare so all the PPEists had weekly sessions where we discussed relevant articles and topics. We also took a look at Bertrand Russell’s ‘The Problems of Philosophy’. Independently, I attended talks held at school that related to the three disciplines, and looked up some of the recommended readings. In general I found that maintaining an interest in current affairs was useful preparation, as well as trying to develop an introductory appreciation of Philosophy through reading.

I had two interviews: the first was with an economics tutor and a philosophy tutor; the second with a philosophy tutor and a politics tutor. The first began with a couple of general questions that you would expect at any university interview, and then we moved on to consider/discuss a game theory problem. I didn’t get the answer for a while – the purpose was to talk through it and see how we thought and rationalised the problem. The second interview was a lot more related to questions and much more clearly divided. The beginning focused on a chat with the philosophy tutor, and we looked at a section of the test that I had taken previously that concerned moral vegetarianism. I then had a discussion with the politics tutor, talking about a variety of issues beginning with the 2005 elections, but moving on to various political issues such as the UN and constitutions. I had only very elementary knowledge of these, so in some ways the conversation was quite flexible, but it was still quite guided.  I studied Economics for A-Level but didn’t really make an effort to go over the course when I applied. Although nothing came up in my interview, a friend interviewing at another college was quizzed on some of the material, so in retrospect it would have been a good idea to have revised a bit.

The first morning of interviews involved a test that lasted just over an hour. It was mostly related to critical thinking and reasoning, with a bit of Maths – not anything that could have been prepared for as such. Looking at past papers was a good way to get a feel for what to expect. One section I particularly remember was the definitions section, where we had to compare and define three words within the same ‘family’.

Meeting other interviewees was a highlight of the experience – I spent a lot of time in the JCR, just relaxing or watching Neighbours. I spent my first evening trying to read all the things on my Personal Statement that I had mentioned looking at but barely remembered. But I quickly realised that that didn’t matter and it was a much better idea to take the opportunity to see what Oxford was like as a student. I spent the next night hanging out in the college bar and the final night we went for dinner and spent a couple of hours in town.

Despite an unwillingness to believe what I read before I came up, it really was what I had heard it would be. The interviews were not intense and knowledge focused, they were designed to get a better feel of the applicants as people and students and how their minds worked. I enjoyed myself immensely – if nothing else, it was a great opportunity to see Oxford and find out for myself how much I like the town and university.