Ruby Granger #18 Still no deal with Waterstones but half her food was mailed from home

[Ilaariaa]

Re the study tubers not trying again, Jack Edwards has (three times?) but he seems obsessed and has wagered all his self-esteem on getting in. Jade got hooked by the Minerva scam's claim to be more exclusive than Oxford, and the brain stopped thinking right there. She paid a deposit upfront before finding how much it costs per year (cleverly hidden by Minerva on their publicly available Costs page) and that Minerva didn't do the courses she talked about taking (cleverly hidden by Minerva on their publicly available page about their courses. As for Ruby, I agree with those who say a gap year would have done her the world of good, but she probably wouldn't have taken advantage of it, and a second rejection would have been catastrophic.

Not getting into Oxford was the best thing for Ruby and her mental health. She would never have coped with the 2 essays + other work a week, the short terms and quick topic change, and the tutorial system. You don't have time to endlessly rewrite essays. You don't have time to turn all your notes into flashcards and drill them. You don't have time to draft and memorize what you will say in your tutorial. Your tutor will be trying to have get you to spontaneously think through criticisms of your arguments, which is where Ruby fell down in the interview. She took a massive folder of stuff she memorized but struggled to think on her feet when given an unseen poem. She was also at the height (or should one say the lowest point?) of her first year Hermione idealization and had only just published Erimentha...so I can (with a lot of cringing) imagine her approaching the interview as Hermione/Erimentha. Let us hope she didn't at one point say "Did you know...?"

As for Jade, I am ashamed to say I liked her a lot back then in the Oxford application days, before she fell for the Minerva scam and began lying to her viewers. But I don't think she would have done well at Oxford either. She said months before that she left a better performing sixth form and rejoined her old "big fish in small pond" school because of the top school's reluctance to help her when she was struggling in maths (I think). The impression I had, especially after she got all A*, was that she preferred to be spoonfed the material and memorize it, rather than puzzle through herself. And like Ruby's reliance on memorization, I can see that attitude revealing itself in interview and being a real problem if she got in.

I have zero experience with Oxbridge as I'm not British but from what I've read here about the selection process and from my own experience as a somewhat capable uni student, I think the way Ruby approached the exam was completely wrong.

She spent two years preparing by obsessively reading, annotating and memorizing everything and anything she could get her hands on, only to freeze when she was asked to comment on a poem. I'm sure she knew going on that one of the things she could be asked to do was comment on a poem she'd never seen before. That's not really something you can prepare for. I mean, of course you need to be knowledgeable about literature and poetry, but other than that, it's more about what you are able to come up with on the spot than remembering something you read six months ago and repeating that.

What I would have done (again, I'm talking completely out of my ass here, just sharing what my approach would have been) is I would have tried to practice analysing things I haven't seen before. Maybe tried to establish a rough outline of "where to start" to avoid the panic moment where you don't know what to say and your brain is racing in a million different directions. I find it's very important to be able to anchor yourself to some core elements you can talk about or handle first that will naturally lead you forward.

As people who have studied classics will know when you want to translate a Latin or Greek text you find the main verb first, its subject, and you go from there. You don't frantically read the whole text and panic because it's all gibberish and you don't know where to start.
I think that's what happened to Ruby, she read the poem and reacted like a chicken who's lost its head, did not know where to start, couldn't form coherent thoughts, could not remember anything she'd read because of course, it's too much information and none of it is directly relevant to the task at hand, and her brain just shut down. Complete panic mode. And the rest is history, she failed and all of her hard work lead her nowhere, because it was not contextualized to what she'd be asked to do.

 

[Magpie02]

As people who have studied classics will know when you want to translate a Latin or Greek text you find the main verb first, its subject, and you go from there. You don't frantically read the whole text and panic because it's all gibberish and you don't know where to start.
I think that's what happened to Ruby, she read the poem and reacted like a chicken who's lost its head, did not know where to start, couldn't form coherent thoughts, could not remember anything she'd read because of course, it's too much information and none of it is directly relevant to the task at hand, and her brain just shut down. Complete panic mode. And the rest is history, she failed and all of her hard work lead her nowhere, because it was not contextualized to what she'd be asked to do.

I couldn't agree more (fellow Latin nerd here )! What I find particularly tragic about this is that she doesn't seem to learn from her mistakes. She's doing the same thing with her dissertation. Instead of thinking critically and coming up with research questions and a hypothesis, she frantically reads every (dated) article she can find on Emily Dickinson's letters. I honestly can't believe that this is a final year English lit student who got all As.

 

[teflonpanda]

I couldn't agree more (fellow Latin nerd here )! What I find particularly tragic about this is that she doesn't seem to learn from her mistakes. She's doing the same thing with her dissertation. Instead of thinking critically and coming up with research questions and a hypothesis, she frantically reads every (dated) article she can find on Emily Dickinson's letters. I honestly can't believe that this is a final year English lit student who got all As.

Yes this! I'm honestly just so baffled by the way Ruby seems to be approaching this task, it doesn't make any sense to me. Surely the sensible thing to do would be to spend some time just reading the primary text you want to write about, think about it, jot down some notes and preliminary questions and THEN go into the secondary literature to sort of get a feel for the waters? And then refine/change your questions, do some more thinking, then do a bit more focused reading, maybe talk to your (potential) advisor about your ideas, etc etc.

What Ruby is seemingly doing (tons and tons of random-ass secondary reading before she has even settled on a question and topic) is just a complete waste of time imho. It's like buying multiple cartons of milk and buckets of flour each day and putting them in your kitchen and when you're asked what you're doing you're like "Oh I'm baking a cake". But that is not how you bake a cake! First you need to decide on what type of cake you want to make, then figure out a recipe and then start making it!

Sorry that was a weird metaphor lol. And not like Ruby even eats cake nowadays.

 

[CatCafe234]

What I would have done (again, I'm talking completely out of my ass here, just sharing what my approach would have been) is I would have tried to practice analysing things I haven't seen before. Maybe tried to establish a rough outline of "where to start" to avoid the panic moment where you don't know what to say and your brain is racing in a million different directions. I find it's very important to be able to anchor yourself to some core elements you can talk about or handle first that will naturally lead you forward.

It’s a very long time since I was at school but I’m sure that when I did my English Lit A Level one of the papers was unseen poetry and prose, and as part of our course we spent time practicing how to analyse text and formulate a (fairly …) coherent response to something that we hadn’t seen before. I had assumed that this was still part of the course but if it’s not, it would explain why Ruby found this difficult at interview.

 

[lupanda]

One thing that really annoyed me was that she said society expects you to socialize as a form of self care and I feel like I’ve never hear that??? Even as a biased introvert I have never heard that you must spend time with people as a form of self care. I feel like she just says stuff with such complete certainity that make no sense whatsoever.

I hear the complete opposite far more often, actually…

 

[Griftwood]

Well, she’s back at AXE-ter. And she’s been #gifted a new ”broach” (a piece of jewellery the rest of the world spells ”brooch”) It makes her feel autominal, because there’s absolutely nothing about November that would accomplish the same.

 

[3calico3]

I think that's what happened to Ruby, she read the poem and reacted like a chicken who's lost its head, did not know where to start, couldn't form coherent thoughts, could not remember anything she'd read because of course, it's too much information and none of it is directly relevant to the task at hand, and her brain just shut down. Complete panic mode. And the rest is history, she failed and all of her hard work lead her nowhere, because it was not contextualized to what she'd be asked to do.

Yes! I remember her talking about her Oxbridge rejection as though she would have been offered a place if only she'd remembered to read a certain article in the New Yorker a few months prior and cite it... except that wouldn't be her original thoughts or ideas, just parroting what someone else had talked about, so it wouldn't have helped her case as much as she thinks it would have.

 

[whatamievendoing]

Yes! I remember her talking about her Oxbridge rejection as though she would have been offered a place if only she'd remembered to reference an article she'd read in the New Yorker a few months prior... except that wouldn't be her original thoughts or ideas, just parroting what someone else had talked about, so it wouldn't have helped her case as much as she thinks it would have.

I also think her school really let her down here, was there no one that really understood the interview process to advise her? Or was there and she just didn't listen to them? I've mentioned before that I also went to private school and the teachers were very on it with doing practice interviews for Oxbridge/medicine/vet-bound students so they could prepare for unseen stuff/formal interview questions etc. I would've assumed Ruby's school had the same/similar access to resources but maybe not

 

[sleepypasta]

Yes! I remember her talking about her Oxbridge rejection as though she would have been offered a place if only she'd remembered to read a certain article in the New Yorker a few months prior and cite it... except that wouldn't be her original thoughts or ideas, just parroting what someone else had talked about, so it wouldn't have helped her case as much as she thinks it would have.

I also remember her getting upset because she found an article a few days later that would have helped her with the interview. I wonder if thats why she continues to do an excessive amount of work… maybe she’s scared she’ll miss something again.

 

[LucyOos]

I also think her school really let her down here, was there no one that really understood the interview process to advise her? Or was there and she just didn't listen to them? I've mentioned before that I also went to private school and the teachers were very on it with doing practice interviews for Oxbridge/medicine/vet-bound students so they could prepare for unseen stuff/formal interview questions etc. I would've assumed Ruby's school had the same/similar access to resources but maybe not

Adding to this, I think any school that doesn't prepare you for failure or makes you feel like you're Gods gift to earth constantly is letting their students down.The same goes for parents really. Most people are just ordinary and not brilliant, and that's totally fine. Ruby's the result of someone only realising this now and she can't cope.

 

[3calico3]

Adding to this, I think any school that doesn't prepare you for failure or makes you feel like you're Gods gift to earth constantly is letting their students down.The same goes for parents really. Most people are just ordinary and not brilliant, and that's totally fine. Ruby's the result of someone only realising this now and she can't cope.

Maybe private school leaders tell their teachers that they can't be realistic with their students, in case of complaints. A friend of mine went to one of the top private schools in my region, and a student in their class complained about their tutor for suggesting *dun dun dun* that some students may choose to work in a trade business (e.g. be a plumber/electrician/carpenter etc.) rather than go into a more desk-based 'elite' job like banking. The tutor wasn't even addressing a particular student, just saying it as an example, but the student still took offense and the tutor got a disciplinary for it.

 

[iglie]

Well, she’s back at AXE-ter. And she’s been #gifted a new ”broach” (a piece of jewellery the rest of the world spells ”brooch”) It makes her feel autominal, because there’s absolutely nothing about November that would accomplish the same.

not to defend her, cause like English is her native language after all, but wow English pronunciation/spelling doesn't make any sense. I've just learned that even though 'brooch' is pronounced /broach/ it's still spelled as 'brooch'..

 

[Griftwood]

not to defend her, cause like English is her native language after all, but wow English pronunciation/spelling doesn't make any sense. I've just learned that even though 'brooch' is pronounced /broach/ it's still spelled as 'brooch'..

I know, I’ll admit it was a bit of a BEC moment on my part But she really doesn’t seem to be able to go a day without misspelling or mispronouncing something.

 

[teflonpanda]

I also wonder whether Oxford already had the information page about admissions interviews back when Ruby applied? Because that page is really clear about what is expected of candidates there: A tutor is quoted as saying that they want to "see candidates think, not merely parrot information".

Then it says that "Depending on what is relevant for the course you are applying for, you may be given a text, a poem, a graph, or an object, and then asked to answer questions and comment on it" and that the interviews are mainly "about applying skills that you already have to a new scenario, text, or problem, so we want to see how you set about it".

There's also a whole paragraph about how it's not a big deal if you don't know the answer to something and how you shouldn't sweat it and just try to talk about possible ideas because interviewers don't expect you to know the right answer to every question.

So I guess this information wasn't publicly available when Ruby applied? Or else it was but she just completely ignored it.

 

[ECH]

I also wonder whether Oxford already had the information page about admissions interviews back when Ruby applied? Because that page is really clear about what is expected of candidates there: A tutor is quoted as saying that they want to "see candidates think, not merely parrot information".

Then it says that "Depending on what is relevant for the course you are applying for, you may be given a text, a poem, a graph, or an object, and then asked to answer questions and comment on it" and that the interviews are mainly "about applying skills that you already have to a new scenario, text, or problem, so we want to see how you set about it".

There's also a whole paragraph about how it's not a big deal if you don't know the answer to something and how you shouldn't sweat it and just try to talk about possible ideas because interviewers don't expect you to know the right answer to every question.

So I guess this information wasn't publicly available when Ruby applied? Or else it was but she just completely ignored it.

If it wasn't on the website, it was still common knowledge. My sister knew to expect to 'think' when she applied to Oxbridge, and that was the late 2000s and she was the first person in the 50+ year history of my school to go to Oxbridge. I'd be shocked if Ruby's pretty well off school that has a much better Oxbridge progression rate didn't know the same info.

 

[snom4444]

I also wonder whether Oxford already had the information page about admissions interviews back when Ruby applied? Because that page is really clear about what is expected of candidates there: A tutor is quoted as saying that they want to "see candidates think, not merely parrot information".

Then it says that "Depending on what is relevant for the course you are applying for, you may be given a text, a poem, a graph, or an object, and then asked to answer questions and comment on it" and that the interviews are mainly "about applying skills that you already have to a new scenario, text, or problem, so we want to see how you set about it".

There's also a whole paragraph about how it's not a big deal if you don't know the answer to something and how you shouldn't sweat it and just try to talk about possible ideas because interviewers don't expect you to know the right answer to every question.

So I guess this information wasn't publicly available when Ruby applied? Or else it was but she just completely ignored it.

I applied for Oxford the same year as Ruby, and I can confirm that there was some really good information on the website and around the Internet in general; there were example interviews on YouTube, lots of pointers from Oxford students and interviewers, etc. No one I knew went into Oxbridge interviews thinking it was a matter of how much you can cram - it's the ability to think on your feet, as mentioned upthread. Of course it isn't a walk in the park for anyone, but she could have been so much better prepared than she seemed. Especially if she'd tried to adjust to the idea that it's still possible to do well in the interviews while saying that you're not certain of the answer to a question. I was told that they want to hear you think out loud and see how you arrive at your conclusions, and she probably struggled with articulating herself about such unfamiliar literature, with the worry that she may not be 100% right or come across as the smartest person in a hundred-mile radius.

If nothing else, at least she got on with her life at Exeter after being rejected. Jade's still travelling around the world yelling about Minerva - a very low bar, but at least Ruby clears it

 

[buflesse]

BTW not getting into Oxford doesn't mean you just parroted information in the interview. They have a tiny number of places compared to number of applicants, and every year they reject very good candidates. I imagine Ruby did just memorise a lot of stuff (knowing what she's like) but I do wonder how people who didn't get into Oxbridge may feel reading these threads.

 

[xoxoxo13]

BTW not getting into Oxford doesn't mean you just parroted information in the interview. They have a tiny number of places compared to number of applicants, and every year they reject very good candidates. I imagine Ruby did just memorise a lot of stuff (knowing what she's like) but I do wonder how people who didn't get into Oxbridge may feel reading these threads.

I feel like people understand we're just talking about Ruby here.

 

[Auga]

If it wasn't on the website, it was still common knowledge. My sister knew to expect to 'think' when she applied to Oxbridge, and that was the late 2000s and she was the first person in the 50+ year history of my school to go to Oxbridge. I'd be shocked if Ruby's pretty well off school that has a much better Oxbridge progression rate didn't know the same info.

Absolutely. I got into Oxford a couple of years before Ruby (a different subject to Ruby's but still arts) and while I didn't know exactly what to expect, I knew the interviews were about showing how you thought rather than what you know. A little bit of knowledge is good to show you are genuinely interested in the subject, but that's really for the personal statement. Tutors/interviewers tend to try to steer the conversation away from areas you have some knowledge in or try to prompt you with an angle you haven't considered. The best ones will try really hard to coach some independent thinking out of you. But always responding with reference to something you've read, or worse - with a clearly memorized answer - is going to mean rejection.

I have a tiny bit of sympathy for Ruby because like her, I've struggled with being articulate - especially under pressure - and prefer writing down my thoughts. But memorization is a crutch that makes things worse because you're not practising thinking under pressure. I didn't memorize a folder for my interview - instead I did timed logic puzzles and sudoku the hour before to get my brain working.

But I also think Ruby's main reason for memorization is that she believed that is what makes a child prodigy/genius like Hermione, Matilda, and Lisa. Spouting off memorized chunks of textbooks is the way to show you are intelligent. She obviously believed that when she wrote Erimentha at age 17 and didn't recognize that Erimentha was being obnoxious, even veering into being a bully herself at times. Ruby thought "that is how an intelligent child behaves". Instead of what we all see, which is an attention-seeking child desperately trying to portray herself as intelligent at the expense of her classmates and teachers and sibling.

And so Ruby approached her Oxford interview the same way. She did a lot of research and was obsessed with getting into Oxford for years beforehand. So there's no way she wouldn't have come across the advice about not showing off what you know. She would have seen it. But it contradicted what she had built her entire identity on for years, and so it stood no chance of getting through to her.

Ruby is fooling herself if she genuinely believes she would have got in if she had cited a New Yorker article as her answer. Moreover, she wasn't pooled/sent to other colleges for an interview. While you definitely shouldn't read anything into pooling while you're there for an interview (it can mean different things), my understanding is that if you were later rejected after not being pooled, the probability increases that you weren't a borderline candidate. And it's worrying if, over four years later, Ruby still believes her mistake was not citing an article. It's a personal tragedy for her to live her life in this mindset, but what's not acceptable is that she has encouraged her followers to adopt her approach and given them terrible advice, e.g. memorizing quotes for a philosophy exam...

 

[space.cat]

I also wonder whether Oxford already had the information page about admissions interviews back when Ruby applied? Because that page is really clear about what is expected of candidates there: A tutor is quoted as saying that they want to "see candidates think, not merely parrot information".

Then it says that "Depending on what is relevant for the course you are applying for, you may be given a text, a poem, a graph, or an object, and then asked to answer questions and comment on it" and that the interviews are mainly "about applying skills that you already have to a new scenario, text, or problem, so we want to see how you set about it".

There's also a whole paragraph about how it's not a big deal if you don't know the answer to something and how you shouldn't sweat it and just try to talk about possible ideas because interviewers don't expect you to know the right answer to every question.

So I guess this information wasn't publicly available when Ruby applied? Or else it was but she just completely ignored it.

I think she must have known and was advised well but chose to ignore it and instead do it her way - memorize every piece of literature she can get her hands on because the interview question must be one of those, right? Why use your brain when you can just focus on memorizing and reciting everything that was ever written? lol