Oh my god, 5 As at A-level??? However could they reject such a genius??? Oh wait, no, pretty much everyone who gets into Oxbridge is able to achieve 5 As, and pick up plenty of 100%s in modules along the way. This really is not news.

Shaun Lazzari, Cambridge, UK

Our government out of touch again, being constantly in denial regarding the many years of steady dumbing down of British eduction of which the Chinese are rightly complaining.

'Pile 'em high, teach 'em cheap' and make the exams so easy eveyone can pass them and get a degree.

What a let-down. How can an 'education, education, education' government defraud so many students of genuine
quality scholarship.

So sad.

Sue D, South Cheshire, UK

I went to a state comprehensive in South Wales and am now a finalist at Oxford. I personally feel that the application process is fair - it tests not only an applicant's academic ability, but also their ability to flourish in the unique tutorial system. Not every applicant, regardless of how many A grades they have, will enjoy or benefit from tutorials. It has nothing to do with where the student came from - it has to do with how they learn, and not everyone learns in the same way.

Izzie, Oxford,

This is really no special case. Maths is a competetive subject and there are thousands of people rejected by Oxford every year who are predicted all As in 3/4 or more A levels and may well have full marks in some or all of their modules. Entry into Oxbridge requires more than good A level results, which incidentally are laughably easy to gain. It requires a true enthusiasm for your chosen subject and potential to excel in and benefit from the Oxbridge environment.

James D, London,

Bill Rammell, You are not living in the real world. England used to have the world envying its education system. Not anymore, It the PC brigade and to much government interference has seen to that. It is time the professors and educators got out into the real world to see how it really works.

ann, London, England

It isn't Oxford's fault that A-levels fail to discriminate between students at the top end. 5 As at A-level doesn't mean what it used to.

Peter, Oxford,

As far as Oxbridge (and other top universities) are concerned he is only doing 4 A-levels, as General Studies is not seen as a worthwhile subject. I was also interviewed by Oxford in December, and got an offer. I am doing 4 A-levels, plus general studies. Every other Maths applicant I met was doing 4 A-levels. If my experience is anything to go by a lot will also have 100 UMS ("100%") in many of those modules. Despite what this article tries to imply his exam results are not that special, by Oxford standards. That is not to say they are bad, but I would say they are fairly average.

What would be more interesting to know is how well he scored on the fairly hard (very hard compared to AS maths, which it is meant to be based on) Oxford maths entrance exam. The admissions tutors at interview said that this would play a large part in their decision, and people that had done well did not need to interview exceptionally to get in, just to meet a certain standard.

It would be interesting to know what his feedback from Oxford is, which includes his result in the entrance exam. If he got 100% in then I can see what the fuss is about.

James, Wales,

4 A-levels is extremely common for Oxbridge applicants (they don't accept General Studies, so that's irrelevant really). Most applicants for maths would (I imagine) have 100% in most of their modules anyway. As there are so many suitable applicants, who are all very similar, it basically comes down to the interview, admissions tests or STEP papers. I think the admissions policy is fairer at Oxbridge than at other universities, as it looks for potential rather than just grades. And I don't think it's suitable to play the 'I'm from a state school' card here, as a) so are the majority of Oxbridge students, and b) He's from a state grammar which is probably the most successful type of school in getting people to Oxbridge, aside from the very top public schools.

I'll admit there is a fair bit of luck involved in being successful to Oxbridge, but it's the same with other universities. Different places have different criteria, and I'm sure he'll be happy at Harvard anyway.

Laura Spence, Oxbridge, Ingland.

The Latin should have been the clue.
However Oxford tutors interview tens of thousands of hopefuls every year. It is quite impossible that everyone deserving of a place should get one, and not a single candidate not deserving of a place should sneak in. Nor is it necessarily desireable that an Oxford place be an infallible guide to a student's calibre and future career.

Malcolm McLean, Bradford, UK

"complaints in China about the “very poor quality” of some degrees taken by Chinese students in Britain."

Well duh. Chinese students come with fat juicy foreign student fees. The practice of prohibiting lecturers from failing these students is widespread, so they get awarded British degrees no matter how bad a student is.

Our universities are busy printing degrees and causing qualifications inflation.

Kay Tie, York,

My own field, Physics, is over-subscribed at Oxford by 8-to-1. Under no circumstances will it even be possible to keep all the excellent applications we receive.

Furthermore, all these quota arguments deny a simple fact. If you are not prepared properly for the Oxford or Cambridge course you will end up with a 2.ii, a third, or maybe even a pass. The 'problem' as perceived is one at the secondary school level and cannot be fixed by simply admitting more ill-prepared students to University.

The press should focus far more attention on getting government to let secondary school teachers teach their subject rather than file reports and prove they can hit meaningless targets.

Todd, Oxford, UK

Just to say that Mark Parker seems a genuine guy, and am just pleased for him to get into Harvard. So what's all this fuss about, be happy for the guy. Also he got a $200,000 scholarship to arguably the best uni in the world, so for all those who are putting him down, when you can get that, have a go, but until then pipe down.

In referance to George Ross about the deputy head, can you get 100% in 14 out of 15 modules???

I rest my case

Jason Damon, Yorkshire,

"It is high time interviews were abandoned (and outlawed) and places assigned exclusively on the basis of school results - this has to be fairer."
Wake up Mr Ward, did you not realise that Oxbridge is awash with A grade applicants? It is absurd to blame universities for not choosing the 'best' students when an A grade does not intrinsically indicate outstanding ability. The solution is to return to examinations which are taxing for all students.
I note also that the applicant is not offering Physics. Another problem of course is that unlike the situation before the destruction of the Grammar schools bright pupils were able to get an education equally as good as in the private sector and if they were scientists probably better. Now there are shortages of properly qualified teachers for A level students particularly in maths and numerate science as well as languages.
When will this country stop going backwards or are we destined to end up like Zimbabwe?

John Gartside, London, UK

I submit that a deputy head capable of uttering the sentence " We had a pupil last year who gained 100% in 14 of their 15 A-level modules but Oxford turned them away too” is unfit to judge the competence of his pupils. In fact, he should not be anywhere near pupils!

George Ross, London, United Kingdom

Oxford will only admit people that they feel they can teach. If Mr. Parker wasn't deemed "teachable" by the admissions tutors, they wouldn't admit him. His 100% module scores do not make one iota of difference.
Oxford and Cambridge reject thousands of worthy applicants every year, many of whom go on to score AAA or better at A-Level. No need to kick up a fuss about one of them, who is most probably better suited to the American higher education system anyway, as shown by his acceptance by Harvard.

Simon , Newcastle,

Good state schools and grammar schools will soon be a thing of the past. In a political campaign from the present Labour government, grammar schools are unfair. Any grammar schools left, that offer Latin for example, will be phased out. Read the small print of the coming Education bill.

jane, Whitttlesey, cambs

Student reactions from UK's top student forum

http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=563131

Most people say "get over it".

Alice, Poole,

This is, all said and done, just one applicant. Getting 100% in 5 Maths modules, out of 10, really isn't quite as much of an achievement as is being made out.

As an Oxford offer holder, I can say that my experience of the Oxford admissons system is entirely fair. I am from a below-average comprehensive school, and am predicted 6 A grades in English Literature, French, German, Maths, Further Maths and General Studies, and have scored 100% in several of these modules.

I did not, at any point, feel as though Oxford were biased against state school applicants. This boy clearly didn't particularly shine in his interviews, which at Oxford are paramount, seeing how good grades will you only get you that far.

The press just need to stop Oxbridge bashing, or more specifically, Oxford bashing. I'm surprised at The Times.

Stephen G, Liverpool,

When I taught at a very prestigious UK university in the 1970s we kept a record of final degree results against A level scores. There was a very low correlation between A level achievements and the class of degree of the individual. What was rather more determinative was motivation and for this the interview is essential. I still reflect on one of my students who arrived with 3 As at A level when this still meant something, who skated through lectures practicals exams etc and who disappeared because he had no interest in completing. With drop out rates as they are the interview must be retained, if for no other reason than to protect the students from themselves.

George Lyndley, Epping, England

"It is high time interviews were abandoned (and outlawed) and places assigned exclusively on the basis of school results - this has to be fairer."

I very strongly disagree with this. Interviews give candidates the opportunity to show how they think and respond to a teaching situation, something which simply can't be shown with a piece of paper containing 42 lines of self-hype and a string of grades. Oxbridge look for people who think in a certain way and who respond to their very particular method of teaching. They can't take everyone, thousands get rejected each year, including a staggering percentage who go on to achieve numerous A grades.

As a Cambridge offer holder with good, but by no means the best, AS module marks, I am very grateful for the opportunity that the interview system gave me. And I also go to a state school.

ZP, London,

"The problem with our universities is that they assess on predicted A-grades and interviews. American universities put students through five different tests.”

No- that doesn't apply to Oxford. For Maths, they make you take a 3 hour entrance paper just over a month before you have the interview with them. The test is based upon AS-Level but it's not easy- you don't get guided through questions like at A-Level, you have to figure everything out for yourself. This test is a huge factor for the colleges in making offers, so why has it missing from the article?

PS... I'm predicted AAAAA in Maths, Further Maths, Physics, Chemistry and General Studies and am from a state grammar school, yet have an offer from Oxford for Maths and Computer Science. :-)

Austin K, Glos, UK

In response to Arnold Ward, "It is time interviews were abandoned (and outlawed) and places assigned exclusively on the basis of school results- this has to be fairer."

The problem is that so many students are getting straight As at A-level that it is impossible to differentiate in any other way. It seems to me that interviewing applicants to really get a feel of their grasp of a subject is much fairer than choosing based on a 1000 word personal statement.

The majority of complaints about the application process that I have heard (as an A-level student myself) is that applicants don't feel they have the opportunity to show their skills and to stand out rom the crowd.

Chris Gross, Cambridge,

Laura Spence (mentioned in the article) was actually admitted to Cambridge medical school following her stint at Harvard. She was given a place despite not fulfilling entry criteria, unlike some other rejected applicants. This was because of political considerations.

michael, london, uk

The Chinese are saying what Britain will not acknowledge; we no longer rule the world in Higher Education and students have the option to pursue degrees elsewhere.

The Oxford interviewing system creates the impression that you have to be liked to be admitted. American universities use objective criteria that rely less on the opinion of teachers. Once you have proved yourself in the standardized tests and are identified as a star in your cohort, then further enquiries are made. Personally, I was a beneficiary of this system; when I expressed concern at not being able to meet the cost, financial help was forthcoming. It didn't matter that I had been accepted at University College London, I got on a plane.

American college alumni are expected to actively participate in the life of the school and mentor new graduates in their country of choice. Many alumni also contribute to their universities financially. Levelling down is not the way, find more creative solutions.

Diane Martin, London,

It is high time interviews were abandoned (and outlawed) and places assigned exclusively on the basis of school results - this has to be fairer.

Arnold Ward, Weybridge, Surrey, UK