Oxbridge Interview Advice

As much as I’d like to help every single young person who asks for help with Oxbridge interview preparation one-on-one, the game won’t permit it. As the mentor says “Unlimited love, limited time.” This won’t be applicable for many of my regular readers but it may be to a young person you know, so please share! Creating opportunity is at the heart of everything I do, so I’ll always work to find a scalable way to offer solutions to as many people as possible. This Oxbridge Interview Guide is what I can do.

For context, if you don’t know me. My name is Toni Fola-Alade, First Class graduate from the University of Cambridge in Politics and International Relations. This should be useful for anyone applying to a Humanities subject at Oxford or Cambridge.

I was in the same position as you 4 years ago, anxiously awaiting the big day. It felt like failure would confirm to me that I wasn’t as smart as I had always thought I was. It just wasn’t an option I was prepared to process. I tried to control every variable. I went over my personal statement. I did every practice interview.

The truth is a lot of the interview process is up in the air, plenty of variables. 2 or three interviews make the difference to the dreams of thousands of academically pressured 17 and 18 years old. In that way, it’s remarkably similar to real life at Oxford and Cambridge. If you’re accepted, you can look forward to three more years of that. Finals are even worse, on the bright side.

That, ironically, is what takes the edge of interviews. They’re three intellectually stimulating conversations on topics you should be passionate about, because they’re what YOU wrote about in your personal statement. Get used to the process because if you don’t enjoy it, you’ll likely not enjoy Oxbridge. Try and take yourself out of the process (nearly impossible but try), take your self esteem out of the equation and just enjoy the exchange of the ideas. That‘s what the interview is about: your ideas and your articulation of them. Not you, they’re not one and the same.

In summary; Confidence with teachability, accuracy and fluency are the key traits you want to demonstrate in an Oxbridge interview.

Confidence as a thinker is necessary to display because humanities subjects are about arguing something that can't be scientifically proven to be right or wrong. You’re there to make reasonable arguments and defend them (for more about argument structure, check out the last article). Be confident in your beliefs, as long as you can find an example to back it up. Know when you're in the wrong, accept it and confidently try again.

However, you must also be genuinely interested in the professor’s responses and take what they say on board. Adjust your answers in light of their response - the primary thing they're looking for is how open you are to learning and new perspectives. Confidence is key but never arrogance; an interview is a test of how teachable you are.

The people who interviewed me are the same people who supervise me one on one every week. They are going to be working with you for the next three years. One of my Tutors reminded me of this when I was slacking off towards the end of my second year. “I chose you at interview, you had potential. We could’ve given your place to someone else”. Still gives me chills but it’s the truth, they’re looking for potential and potential can only be moulded if it’s open to direction. They want to know that you won't be stubborn and that you'll actually learn. An interview is a dialogue, so ensure you're bouncing off what they're saying. Take their perspective into consideration and lookout for hints, which they’ll often provide. Be aware of when you might be going wrong but don't confuse that with when they're pushing you because you're doing well and they want to see you keep up. Most of the time, an interviewer will continue to push you to see your current intellectual limits, not to see you fail.

Accuracy - whilst you're not expected to be a pro, strong candidates will have a certain degree of accuracy in the way they argue. They'll define the key words they're using, have a clear structure to an answer and be very careful of the words they use. Make sure you are clear about any assumptions you are making and why. Don't make the mistake of making general statements or saying anything assertively that you can't back up. If you say "inequality is bad" you have to ensure you can explain why, what type of inequality you are referring to and how you came to that conclusion etc. You cannot assume anything. Words are all you have at interview and poor choice of wording or inaccurate use of a phrase can be the death of you. They'll pick up on your inaccuracy and force you to accept you were wrong. Therefore, be as tight and accurate with your language as possible.

Fluency is maybe the least important but you want to seem comfortable in the academic environment. It's obvious but you want to respond in a composed manner and give an answer that is thought out and flows nicely. I figure this might be what sets people apart, I can't be sure, but it's as much how you deliver the answer as it is the answer itself.

Actionable tips:

-Most important thing - most of your interview will be explaining your personal statement (PS) and defending it from criticism. Read your personal statement again clearly and ensure you've read everyone you said you did and understand every concept . It will be embarrassing if you don’t understand their argument or, at least, have read the book. Be aware of possible criticisms and objections. Identify the weaknesses in your argument or statements that can be easily attacked; there will be an obvious list of broad topics that could be asked from each individual PS and just ensure you're ready for them. Know the thought process which led you to make each statement and be able to repeat it. Furthermore, changing your argument since you wrote your PS is absolutely fine and actually a sign of development as a thinker. Be able to justify these changes and what influenced them. Lastly think of historical, scholarly, scientific or personal examples to back up any points you've made. Maybe have a statistic or two on the broad topics present in the PS.

- Don't worry about trying to predict interview questions - just identify the key topic areas you've brought up and be up to date on those. Interviews don't have a set path, they have a few starter questions and then go with the flow based off of what you've said. You actually have a lot of power to direct the interview.

- Take time - the interviewer isn't asking what you had for lunch. There is lot at stake with each question. Do not be in a rush to answer questions. You can ask them to repeat, seek clarification, try and gain extra info(don't take the piss though). My go to line was “I want to ensure I’ve understood correctly, could you reframe the question or perhaps give an example please?” Take 20-30 seconds, at least, before you dive in so you can give a methodical answer. Feel free to ask for time to think, it shows maturity.

- Answer the question - obvious statement but ensure you're directly answering the question. Not the one you wish you were asked.

- 🔑🔑🔑Think aloud - the final answer isn't necessarily the thing they're looking for. They want to see if you're rational, systematic and methodical. So show them that, use your structure and show them how you got to your answer. Treat it like GCSE maths where you need to show your working but verbally. This way even if you mess up and say something dumb they can understand how you got there and help you fix your argument or give you credit for the bits you were doing well.

- 🔑🔑🔑structure - Oxbridge academics  love structure. State you are aware of certain objections or weaknesses to the argument if there are any first and then quickly dismiss them, this can be very impressive if done right. Otherwise, define the key words, state any assumptions you're making and why and then answer the question step by step, again like maths working. "I have assumed this and defined it as this, therefore I would expect this to happen.  It is then quite likely this will happen." I was even taught to say "this answer has 3 parts. Give a quick summary of each of those 3 parts(1 sentence each) and then actually explain each part in depth"

. This is so impressive because you look like you know what you're doing and conveys confidence, fluency and accuracy but also helps you because you know what you're doing and feel comfortable, kind of like an essay plan. If you just say an unstructured statement which is partially wrong your whole answer is kind of worthless versus someone who said the same partially wrong statement but showed them Step 1,2,3,4 and 5 of how they got to that mistake. Therefore it was clear they made a mistake at step 4 which means they still got credit for the first 3 parts and then the interviewer can also show them where they made the mistake and let you fix it.

- State assumptions - there'll be certain things you're taking for granted when you're answering a question. We don't have time to prove everything our answer is based on before we answer the question. Just show the interviewer that you are aware of this and that you're aware the answer may be different if you assume different things. Also be aware that answer can change based on the context of each society, the answer might be different in a different country. Show you understand all these nuances.

- Define things - power can mean different things to different people. Make sure it's clear how you are arguing it and in what context. Don't just say inequality, for example, because there are many kinds: gender inequality, racial, social, housing, economic, global. The clearer you are on the definitions the more impressive you look but also the more likely you are to give a good answer or have them see where you're coming from. Arguments are essentially a war of words and when you choose your definitions it's an opportunity to give yourself the advantage to win.

-  Reference scholars but not for the sake of it - don't mention Plato just because, you look like a mug. If it's useful, relevant and correctly applied then bonus points, if not don't. They’re likely experts and it canget embarrassing quickly.

- Bring in personal experience but with academic validity

 - Feel free to use your life as an example but do it in the context of academia and to prove a point. You need to tie your example to wider society so that it's clear it's not an isolated incident.

- Don't worry if the interview is hard, sometimes interviewers push really hard because you're actually doing well and they want to see what you're really capable of.

-  Don’t be afraid to seek clarification or ask them to repeat a question even if you're just buying time, it gives you more time to think.

- Don't mumble, speak clearly and slowly. Breathe. You're going to be nervous but you want to come across as fluent so relax. Don't waffle on for too long and don't talk for the sake of talking. If you're done talking, you're done talking. The longer you talk unnecessarily, the more open you are to making a mistake. Keep your responses directly relevant to the question, do it justice (however long that takes) and keep it moving. 


Bonus: Be interesting and charming - make jokes - if you can as I said, these people are going to teach you for 3 years. It helps if they like you. Interviews should be completely objective but people aren't robots, they don't work like that. A very small aspect of decision making, on a subconscious level, might come down to what vibes you gave off. I had a notoriously difficult woman but I tripped up at the start of the interview and she laughed and it broke her cold exterior and made her far more receptive for the rest of the interview.

Another Bonus: Take a risk and take things in new directions - I made a point about how power dynamics are contextual, even between the same people. I explained that the professors were very powerful within the context of the room because they could define my future by accepting or rejecting me but the very same academics would be powerless in an MMA cage because, as a trained martial artist, I'd knock them out. It wasn't particularly profound but it was a very risky move because it was random and a bit cheeky but it paid off. It made a sociological topic about politics and power dynamics more real and interesting. They interview many people who are all smart, you might consider distinguishing yourself and making yourself memorable if you feel you're comfortable enough to take those risks.


Follow these tips and you’ll be in the best possible position to ace your interview. I know the pressure is immense but no sweat. It doesn’t define your life. You made it thus far because, on paper, you have what it takes. Now you’ve just gotta deliver the goods in real life. You got this, I trust you.

Best of luck,

T