Test taken: History Admissions Assessment (HAA)
Number of interviews: 2
Time between interviews: A few hours
Length of interviews: About 45 min
Online interview: No

The first interview was entirely based on a text I had to read and analyse right before the interview. It was for politics. We went through the text paragraph by paragraph; I would be asked what the author meant and what I thought about it for every paragraph. Then, we discussed the concepts in the text in relation to examples I had studied (which was really open, I could just mention any period that would fit the discussion). Then we moved on to why I wanted to study History & Politics.

The second interview started with an analysis of a source, in the form of a 14th-century painting. It was for history. They asked me what questions I had upon looking at the source. Then they moved on to one of my essays, then to my personal statement. This quickly became a discussion on the concepts mentioned in my personal statement, based on examples from contemporary politics.

In both cases, at least one interviewer was very encouraging and showing signs of whether I was going in the right direction or not. If they thought I was going off-topic, they might interrupt me or gently redirect me to what they wanted to discuss.

They really appreciated it when I provided examples or illustrations when answering broad questions they threw at me; they won't ask for them, but they are quite necessary, in my view. It was way less intimidating than it had been before I came; the interviewers were really friendly and genuinely wanted me to do well.

I read over my personal statement and made sure I was ready to expand on any of its main points. I did the same thing with the two pieces of written work I had handed in; I revised a bit on the topics that my pieces of written work were based on.

I had a practice interview with a friend's father who went to Oxford, it was way harder and more stressful than the actual interview.

I prepared a basic idea for why I wanted to study my subject, what I found fascinating about it. I listened to a few podcasts on the news and subjects I find interesting, mostly from BBC In Our Time. I tried to relax.

All the past papers in timed conditions! Not necessarily all of the HAA - I could do a session on the first part, and another on the second one. For the first few, about 2 weeks before the exam, I went a bit overtime on the essays. For the last 1-2 past papers, about 2 days before the exam, I was much more strict with the time. No prior knowledge is required; only a clear mind and a method in mind to write the essay.

I didn't think I could do it, because I was never top of my class, or even top 5! I doubted my decision to apply many times between October 15 and the December interviews, but I'm so glad I'm here now–the interview was for me the first window into a system in which I can take the time to explore my intellectual interests with other professors to push me further, and I can have some space to be bold in my studies. That being said, I come from an educational system which is much more rigid compared to the UK's, in which professors are usually unkind.

For the interview, I would say that being able to answer questions about any material submitted before the interview is important, not least because it gives you some peace of mind for the actual day.

The most important thing, however, is to be as rested as possible to be able to answer questions with a clear mind. We're all nervous and paralysed at one point, don't worry; but the sooner you can get unstuck, the sooner you can have a fruitful discussion about your subject and show your genuine interest.

Interviewers just want to see how you'll do with the supervision system – show them your nerdy self, try to answer questions and listen to their guidance, and you'll be fine. Good luck!!