BBC: Oxbridge entry 'dominated by five schools'

[growse]

I don't see how people cannot have the desire to go to one of the world's top universities? You get the opportunity not just to learn from and work with top academics in your field, but also get the opportunity to make lots of connections and contacts with important people both in academia and industry. A degree from any Russell Group university is always going to put you in excellent stead for the future, but I think that Oxbridge will always be the icing on the cake.

What you say is partly true, but isn't limited to Oxbridge. They're not the UK leaders in a lot of fields, so it's not the case that all purely academically driven people would put Oxbridge first above everything else.

There's also the fact that not all people want to go to university for the academic experience, but that's perhaps symptomatic of the state of higher education in this country

 

[TheCenturion]

I honestly don't understand why Oxbridge is used as the benchmark for academic success. It really ****ing annoys me actually.

I believe that if the student is good, they'll find success no matter where they go. As it happens, Oxbridge has very high entry requirements. So everyone who applies will likely be a good student, due to having high grades. They get in, and go and mingle among other good students, and flourish academically.

So the students aren't exceptional because Oxbridge is brilliant, but actually Oxbridge is brilliant because the students are exceptional.

It therefore goes without saying that a first class degree from another university is better than a 2:2 or something in the same degree from Oxbridge.

I'm definitely not going to apply to Oxbridge, sort of as a form of protest, but also because it's crap for what I want to do.

 

[dirtychinchilla]

In my experience the Oxbridge candidates from my private secondary school actually worked INCREDIBLY hard to get into either university. They had to do stuff far above what people like me, who didn't apply for Oxbridge, had to do.

 

[ps3ud0]

With all that opportunity it is far more likely that pupils leaving a Grammar/private school will be more rounded and confident than their equivalent state pupil.

100% agreed - if I have kids and have the means, Ill be sending them to a private school - not necessarily because of the greater chance to go Oxbridge (TBH I dont care) but more the fact they are likely to have the tools to go further in life as they wish...

I think you answered your own point regards why private school pupils with the same grades as state schools pupils are more likely to get into Oxbridge - they are just far more prepared...

ps3ud0

 

[TheCenturion]

Same grades? Well, firstly, if they just mean headline AAA/AAB/etc... don't Oxbridge get the UMS scores for every module an applicant's done... so that could mean they end up choosing the private school kid with a really high AAA, as opposed to a state school kid who scrapped AAA.

Cambridge looks at UMS, that's where the private school kids have an advantage because they're trained to work like dogs and get every last mark that they can.

That's why it makes me angry and makes me laugh when I see people in my school who probably aren't that bright but work incredibly hard.

I have an idea about something called an effort to results ratio. I use it to try to disguise the fact that I'm a lazy ******** . Essentially my idea is that if you can put in less effort than someone else to get the same grade, clearly they're a harder worker, but you're more gifted in that particular subject. People who just do waaaaay too much work to get grades annoys me, but I've spoken to them and they get annoyed by people who do no work and get good grades, so it works both ways

 

[ps3ud0]

I have an idea about something called an effort to results ratio. I use it to try to disguise the fact that I'm a lazy ******** . Essentially my idea is that if you can put in less effort than someone else to get the same grade, clearly they're a harder worker, but you're more gifted in that particular subject. People who just do waaaaay too much work to get grades annoys me, but I've spoken to them and they get annoyed by people who do no work and get good grades, so it works both ways

Lets just say your e/r with that idea is i . Unfortunately youll find in the world of business the other type of people generally have better success IMHO...

ps3ud0

 

[Tunney]

Why do people care so much about Oxbridge? I had no desire whatsoever to go to either. At the end of the day you're sacrificing a lot for a bit of prestige and a first/2:1 in a decent academic degree from any Russell Group university is likely to land you a fantastic job anyway.

Oxbridge isn't just about the degree. They both have a lot of extra-curricular activities that simply don't exist at other universities. If you want to get into a particularly over-subscribed career then those networks of people make a big difference.

One of the biggest problems is that many of the interviews are biased towards public school leavers. Questions are thrown in on subjects like Latin and classics that are rarely taught at state schools.

 

[TheCenturion]

Lets just say your e/r with that idea is i . Unfortunately youll find in the world of business the other type of people generally have better success IMHO...

ps3ud0

The square root of -1

I suppose it depends what you're doing. If you become someone who works really hard etc, you become a very process driven person. Therefore you'd naturally excel in an office environment or any environment which requires a process driven approach.

The flip side is that everyone has their limits. I've been told countless stories of people working hard and then getting completely burnt out and flopping. There's a Canadian teacher at my school who had a couple of friends who worked RIDICULOUSLY hard, and ended up getting brilliant scholarships to the top Canadian universities. So they'd have been regarded as the top people in the country. Once they got there, they dropped out of their degrees, they'd just worked too hard already in their lives and alcohol got them.

I'm glad my work ethic hasn't peaked yet

I always say: variety is the spice of life (not my phrase ) and it's true, it's all about striking a balance. That's why I don't hold Oxbridge in very high regard.

One of the biggest problems is that many of the interviews are biased towards public school leavers. Questions are thrown in on subjects like Latin and classics that are rarely taught at state schools.

I don't think that's true. If anything, Oxbridge are trying to get MORE state school pupils in, so they're not going to purposely disadvantage them. Like I said earlier, a lot of red brick universities are being actively biased against pupils from private schools.

 

[Greebo]

Same grades? Well, firstly, if they just mean headline AAA/AAB/etc... don't Oxbridge get the UMS scores for every module an applicant's done... so that could mean they end up choosing the private school kid with a really high AAA, as opposed to a state school kid who scrapped AAA.

Sorry I should have made it clear. They actually said they studied kids who acheived the same scores - 850 to 900 points between the state and private schools. I presume this is what you are referring to?

 

[Hellsmk2]

The reason the article "blabs" on about A-Level results is there is a stark contrast in the number of places given to students from state schools compared with independent schools (and especially the Big 5).

Why are these interviews resulting in more rejections for state school pupils? Is it because, as I suspect will be the popular opinion here, that state school pupils are thicker than their richer, independent school educated peers, and this becomes apparent at the interview? or is it perhaps that the interview process is biased (very probably unintentionally) toward "people like us"? There are probably plenty of other potential reasons as well.

It does mention in the article that much of it is to do with the subjects that people choose rather than the resuts.

An A* in Business Studies, Mickey Mouse and Dolly Parton is never going to be worth as much as an A* in Chemistry, Maths and Physics.

 

[GTRacer]

Private schools give A LOT of support for Oxbridge applicants - when I applied I had extra tutorials every week (to prepare for the test), a practice interview with my Head of Sixth Form, then the Head of school, then external interviews at another private school and a session where you had a class with other Oxbridge applicants in the area. You don't get that level of preparation at state schools, although my school also ran a program to help Oxbridge applicants from state schools.

 

[Greebo]

100% agreed - if I have kids and have the means, Ill be sending them to a private school - not necessarily because of the greater chance to go Oxbridge (TBH I dont care) but more the fact they are likely to have the tools to go further in life as they wish...

I think you answered your own point regards why private school pupils with the same grades as state schools pupils are more likely to get into Oxbridge - they are just far more prepared...

ps3ud0

I agree with you. If I ever have kids they would go to private school as well, just for the opportunites it opens, not necessarily to get better exam results (we had pupils at my Grammar school who left with one O level depsite the fact we sat 13 of them) so there were plenty of "thickies" at our school too (although open to debate as to whether thick or just plain lazy as all pupils had to sit 3 entrance exams English, Maths and Intelligence to gain entry and there were always more pupils applying than places)

 

[alx]

Seems like a lot of people have missed the point in this thread.

I was listening to it on radio 4 this morning and the research showed that for pupils with the exact same grades that 50% were accepted from private schools versus 32% from state schools.

So all pupils have the same level of intelligence so what makes the private schools have a better acceptance rate then?

They had a guy on from Oxford/Cambridge and his theory was that although all the pupils were equally intelligent, he feels that pupils attending private school have more confidence and a greater belief in their worth than ones from state schools which comes through at interview which is why they get a higher proportion of the places.

I can relate to this and I do beleive it to be true. I went to a Grammar school and my brother went to a Comprehensive. I can;t pass judgement on the quality of the teaching at the Comprehensive and I am sure there were kids who were as intelligent or more intelligent than ones at the Grammar school.

However, at the Grammar School, discipline and respect was instilled into us and we had access to do a far greater range of non academic things. We had our own swimming pool, library, computer room, 18 rugby pitches, hockey pitches, indoor and outdoor tennis courts, squash courts, cricket pitches, assault course, firing range, airfield for gliders, photography, film making etc.

Also there were far more trips to places than the comprehensive school offered.

With all that opportunity it is far more likely that pupils leaving a Grammar/private school will be more rounded and confident than their equivalent state pupil.

As it was I turned down Oxford

I also think that extra curricular activities play their part. Not that Oxbridge would select someone based on extra curricular activities over academic ones, but that by doing them you can become a more rounded person and have greater knowledge of subjects away from your academic area (for example a science student partaking in theatre productions and hence having a good knowledge of english literature).

Sort of backs up your comment about grammar/private school students being more rounded and confident.

 

[Disco Boy]

Sorry I should have made it clear. They actually said they studied kids who acheived the same scores - 850 to 900 points between the state and private schools. I presume this is what you are referring to?

900 points means the grades. He's referring to the actual marks they got. There's a long way between someone who gets an A and someone who gets full marks.

Grades are not that relevant when it comes to Oxbridge admission, so many people get straight A's that it doesn't differentiate so it's left to looking at actual marks and to interviews and entrance tests.

 

[TheCenturion]

I also think that extra curricular activities play their part. Not that Oxbridge would select someone based on extra curricular activities over academic ones, but that by doing them you can become a more rounded person and have greater knowledge of subjects away from your academic area (for example a science student partaking in theatre productions and hence having a good knowledge of english literature).

Sort of backs up your comment about grammar/private school students being more rounded and confident.

Admissions tutor at Oxford said when looking applications, he really didn't give a **** about an extra curricular activity. Unless it was academic, AND related to the subject of study.

 

[Xelene]

Oxford and Cambridge have a level of prestige to them. I wouldn't put too much weight on the standing of some other institutions in the Russell Group.

 

[ironman]

End of the day it's the parents fault if they can't afford to put their kids in better schools. It should be a priority to give their kids the best rather than spend the money on another pointless holiday to Benidorm.

 

[ps3ud0]

Private schools give A LOT of support for Oxbridge applicants - when I applied I had extra tutorials every week (to prepare for the test), a practice interview with my Head of Sixth Form, then the Head of school, then external interviews at another private school and a session where you had a class with other Oxbridge applicants in the area. You don't get that level of preparation at state schools, although my school also ran a program to help Oxbridge applicants from state schools.

WOW - I had nothing like that, might have had a mock interview with the Head of Sixth Form - thats about it

Admissions tutor at Oxford said when looking applications, he really didn't give a **** about an extra curricular activity. Unless it was academic, AND related to the subject of study.

...or a sport the University competes in

ps3ud0

 

[TheCenturion]

End of the day it's the parents fault if they can't afford to put their kids in better schools. It should be a priority to give their kids the best rather than spend the money on another pointless holiday to Benidorm.

£2,000 holiday to benidorm versus £70,000 education?

 

[Xelene]

End of the day it's the parents fault if they can't afford to put their kids in better schools. It should be a priority to give their kids the best rather than spend the money on another pointless holiday to Benidorm.

You'll get the lefties up in arms at this, but my parents worked all bloody hours to afford a house inside the catchment area of the best state school in my home city. Private was never an option. I appreciate the sacrifices they made for me, and I will do exactly the same - although I'll probably be able to afford a private school for my kids.