<p>Here's what the Oxford Chemistry interviews were like for me, across three rooms and a fair amount of thinking on my feet. If you're applying, the format can feel daunting, but the questions are less about what you've memorised and more about whether you can be taught something new in real time, which is a genuinely more forgiving thing to prepare for.</p><p><strong>Three interviews, three branches</strong></p><p>I had three interviews, one each on organic, inorganic and physical chemistry. It's a lot of chemistry in a short space, but it means whatever your strength is, you get a proper chance to show it, and whatever your weak spot, it's only a third of the picture. Walking in knowing that balance helped me relax.</p><p><strong>Estimate the air in this room</strong></p><p>One question was an estimation: work out the mass of air in this room, and then, what if we filled it with water instead? These aren't about recalling a number. They want to see you set the problem up sensibly and reason through it out loud, step by step.</p><p><strong>Working the estimate through</strong></p><p>The way in is to estimate the room's dimensions, multiply for a volume, then use the density of air, roughly 1.2 kilograms per cubic metre, to get a mass. For the water version, you swap in water's density of 1,000 kilograms per cubic metre and immediately see the answer is about a thousand times larger. Saying all of that aloud, "let's call the room five by four by three metres, so sixty cubic metres, air is a bit over a kilo per cubic metre, so roughly seventy kilograms", is exactly the answer they want: a clear method and a sensible order of magnitude, not a precise figure.</p><p><strong>Learning something new on the spot</strong></p><p>The hardest questions were the ones where I had to learn something in the room. I was asked why an amino acid has a high boiling point, without yet knowing anything about amino acids, and why fluorine might be considered similar to manganese. My approach was to say what I did know or could infer, intermolecular forces in the first case, periodic trends and oxidation states in the second, and then build on the hints the tutor offered. That's genuinely what they're testing: not what you've memorised, but whether you can take a new idea and run with it.</p><p><strong>What seemed to land</strong></p><p>Looking back, the thing that appealed most wasn't a slick answer. It was the excitement I showed when something finally clicked into place. The interviewers are choosing someone they'll want to teach for three years, and visible curiosity, that little "oh, I see!" moment, goes a long way. They'd rather teach an enthusiastic thinker than a polished reciter.</p><p><strong>How I prepared, and why Oxford</strong></p><p>In the two weeks before, I spent around eight hours a week working through past Cambridge Chemistry Challenge and Chemistry Olympiad questions, which are excellent for getting used to unfamiliar, applied problems. I didn't do a huge amount before that. I chose Oxford partly because you can study straight Chemistry there, rather than through Cambridge's broader Natural Sciences, and partly because I was drawn to the environmental side of the subject.</p><p><strong>Common mistakes to avoid</strong></p><p>The pitfalls I'd flag: freezing on an estimation question because you don't know an exact value, when a rough method is all they want; refusing to attempt a topic you haven't formally studied, when they expect to teach you through it; and hiding your reasoning, when the reasoning is the entire point. Keep talking, keep trying, and let your curiosity show.</p><p><strong>Final thoughts</strong></p><p>Chemistry interviews are really about being taught something new in real time, so let your curiosity show and keep reasoning aloud even when you're out of your depth. If you'd like to prepare, Oxbridge Solution can help.</p>