3 x 25 min interviews
Maths and economics problems, the relationship between democracy and equality, authority in a political context, how we can evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of different ethical systems, different Christian conceptions of God
‘Very Short Introduction’ to Economics and Microeconomics, Wolff’s Intro to Political Philosophy
Timed practice papers from the Oxford website
Being able to go back on yourself and admit that you’ve maybe done something wrong demonstrates an ability to be open-minded and self-critical, both of which are important traits that the interviewers are looking for
Remember this advice isn't official. There is no guarantee it will reflect your experience because university applications can change between years. Check the official Cambridge and Oxford websites for more accurate information on this year's application format and the required tests.
Also, someone else's experience may not reflect your own. Most interviews are more like conversations than tests and like, any conversation, they are quite interactive.
Test taken: Thinking Skills Assessment (TSA)
Number of interviews: 3
Time between interviews: Two were a few hours apart on one day, and I had the last one the next day
Length of interviews: 25 minutes
Online interview: No
For my Economics interview, I was given three different problems on paper which were predominantly mathematical along with some elements of basic Economics. I was most nervous for this interview as it was my first one, but I found both of the interviewers to be really friendly and were very reassuring when I had a maths brain-blank whilst responding to the first problem. Next I had Politics, which was a bit of an intimidating setup as I was sat on a sofa about 5m away from the desk behind which the two interviewers were sat. The interviewer consisted of two parts (one conducted by each interviewer), the first being two graphs which then led into further discussion loosely based on the relationship between democracy and equality, and the second being a paragraph presenting an opinion on what ‘authority’ consists of, which then prompted a discussion of this in a political context. By the end of both parts I definitely felt like I was out of my depth a bit, but I think that this was done deliberately by the interviewers as opposed to me not having done enough prep. My philosophy interview was by far my most comfortable one, partly because I had already studied it in reasonable depth and also because I essentially allowed to speak about my favourite parts of the subject! This was again done in two parts (one by each interviewer), the first being on ethics and how we can evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of different ethical systems. The second was about the different Christian conceptions of God and which ones I found the most appealing as an atheist. Again, at the end of both parts I did feel like I had been pushed to my limit in terms of depth, but it was actually quite an enjoyable discussion and I felt at ease with both of the philosophy tutors. Overall, I have to admit that I didn’t feel very confident after all three had been completed, but I didn’t feel too intimidated or heavily underprepared at any point and that looking back I can see that the topics of the discussion were clearly tailored to how much I had previously studied each of the subjects.
I’d studied Philosophy for A Level and so that filled up a lot of my personal statement. Because of this, I didn’t really do any wider reading but just went over the content I had discussed on my personal statement again before the interview. For Economics, I actually just bought the Oxford ‘Very Short Introduction’ to Economics and Microeconomics and read through them (as well as watching a couple of YouTube videos on Game Theory, something which apparently comes up in interviews a lot). For Politics, I simply read Wolff’s Intro to Political Philosophy (as this gave me a starting point for political theory which was linked with content I was relatively familiar with because of my philosophical background) and watched a couple of videos on Aristotle’s political theory (nothing with too much detail).
Timed practice papers from the Oxford website
Don’t feel like you need to compensate for not having studied a subject at A level - while it is definitely useful to read one or two introductory books to give you the basic understanding which enables discussion of a subject, they don’t want you to have a load of content ready to go for any question they throw out you (they are trying to make you think on your toes). I actually found all of the interviewers to be friendly and far less intimidating than I expected, so don’t worry too much about that; obviously, it’s a pressured environment, but they don’t try to bully you to see how long you last until you crack or anything like that. Also, don’t worry about going back on yourself if you realise that your thought train has reached a dead end/a wrong answer, as you are essentially thinking aloud in an interview and they do not expect you to always go down the ‘right’ line of thought immediately. In fact, being able to go back on yourself and admit that you’ve maybe done something wrong demonstrates an ability to be open-minded and self-critical, both of which are important traits that the interviewers are looking for.