to regret having looked at further education threads

[butterfliesandladybirds]

and feel envious of all the people who have DC getting such excellent exam results and offers of places at Oxbridge?

I agree. I don't think we need all degrees to lead to jobs which pay pensions and for the NHS etc although we need a certain number of people paying tax otherwise the country will fall over. I am hoping they have done their sums right and the new fee system means that enough will actually repay the loans that we are not in an even bigger mess than we are now.

Plenty of those who get degrees will never earn over the threshold to pay any of the debt back. Some of those will work hard and others will plan never to do a day's work in their life and those latter ones may be idle.

Xenia, as I said, only one branch of my 'Oxbridge educated' family is in any way wealthy.

Those of us who are not wealthy studied, for example: Law, Physics, Metallurgy, Biochemistry, Classics, Theology, Engineering, History and Education.

Those who are wealthy studied: English.

Perhaps not what you would expect for 'degrees which will earn them no money' vs 'degrees that seem to make it likely that those who study them might go on to become wealthy'?

They're all pervasive and very effective in dissuading state school candidates from applying. I had to fight a tide of "Ooh, it's very stressful. Are you sure you'll cope?" "Ooh, there are a lot of anorexics there," "ooh, everyone will be from public school and they won't speak to you", "Ooh, my friend's granddaughter's dog's second owner went there and they committed suicide"

What morons said that to you? What exactly were they basing it on? Talk about crabs in a bucket, sheesh.

Interestingly, I know one or two young people who have postgraduate degrees and work in call centres! They were unlucky enough to have vocational degrees and emerge from their studies just in time for their chosen area to be ravaged by the recession, so no jobs at all.

Sometimes things are just out of the control of ordinary people.

And of both my DCs, it is the one who is doing the degree at the 'second/third rate institution' who is the most likely to actually use her subject in the future. My son is very up-front about the fact that he will not pursue a career in his high-flying top-University subject.

Also, having had mental-health issues myself over my lifetime, young people who have their heads together at 18/19 have a head start on others who may be mixed up about themselves for all sorts of reasons. It took me until I was late thirties to be able to study for my degree.

There are so many issues at work for each young person, and what is the right thing for one is totally wrong for another.

Parents have to just keep encouragement going, and be interested. But certainly being from a poor family per se should not be the defining factor in going to a good university.

I won't be recommending ds (7) goes to university unless he chooses a career where a degree is necesssary. Too many students doing too many pointless degrees that has devalued higher education. I'm surprised at my change in attitude as I'd always thought I'd want my children to be better educated than me (traditional degree plus professional qualification).

Well yes, in fact you are much much better reading English at Oxford say for many many careers which hire the best graduates than "business studies" or accountancy at some ex poly where anyone can get in with CCD.

If the institution not the subject determines your career prospects then you can use that knowledge and apply accordingly. This was known 30 years ago - people would appyl for XYZ at Oxford because it was easier to get into than something more popular at Oxford because itw as the Oxford bit which would get you the career.

Oh, if only everyone was super academic and could get A's at A Level and a First at Oxford/Cambridge

As said previously - more than one way to skin a cat. Only snobbery tells you otherwise.

Never more true than in this economic climate. I would rather my DCs were entrepreneurs than city drones.

But an A at A level is something rather different to what it was 20 or even 15 years ago, I have the impression.

I also think, and have observed, that state school young people who do well enough to get into a top university have proved that they can compete with the very best, just by their achievements in getting those good grades.

So many public school pupils are hot-housed and taught to the test, that when they do get to higher education institutions they find it difficult to cope and self-start.

I know this as one of my jobs is as a private tutor, and most of my students are from private schools, (Eton included), who require intensive exam preparation, which costs their parents a lot of money! Poor families just cannot do this.

My (state-educated) son had one grade less in one A level than most of the (public-school) students on his course, but his results in the pre-course exam designed to test the individual's actual aptitude for the discipline, and their innate, raw ability was one of the highest in the country.

With parental involvement (not necessarily financial), all young people should be able to achieve their potential. Universities now have all sorts of ways of finding the cream.

But of course not everyone can be the cream. And that does not really matter, as long as every young person achieves their own potential, and is happy.

The wealthiest people I know, apart from those that inherited their wealth, are entrepreneurs and trades-people who have their own companies. Several of my son's friends have gone to do apprenticeships with a view to working in the family firm, and their earning potentials are huge, as evidenced by their parent who started the company.

Due to the area in which I live, the hobbies of my children, and my private tuition I know many very wealthy people, and I can't think of one who got their wealth due to their university or degree. They all work very, very hard though, so probably that is the key to success. Along with a bit of luck. And no mental or physical health issues.

quirrel...an A at A level is very different now, but not necessarily inferior, which is what you are inferring I think.

This notion that Oxford and Cambridge is still quad to quad Hoorays is complately out of touch. As is the idea that state schoolers are discouraged in some way. Oxford and Cambridge have many strategies in place to attract them and retain them. Life has moved on.

The support services for those students in difficulties at Oxford are extensive; they recognise the peculiar pressure of the life there and the fact that their constituency will take a larger proportion of students prone to depression etc. than elsewhere.

I've had to watch that side of Oxford life with some care.

MN is obsessed with Oxbridge, Russell Group, and "top university" status. I find it bewildering and extremely out of touch with the rest of Real Life.

I don't agree that students from families earning less than 25K will get more money than they know what to do with. They will get a non repayable grant plus a repayable loan as well as the 9k tuition fee loan. Some unis will offer bursaries of around 3k a year but not all do and recently they have been told to offer it as fee waivers rather than cash which is imaterial due to the ridiculous was these so called loans are to be repaid.

If you are from a family that has no assessable income e.g. non working then they will also waive 6k off your first years fees, which isn't much help in the long run.

One person from DD's state school has got into Oxbridge this year and that's one more than previous years. I know that their cashed in AS level grade was a fair bit lower than an A too so I do think that they take into account the fact that some schools results are far higher than others. This student is from a very academic family and is the type who will really fit in.

What Yellowstone says about Oxbridge is right. Perhaps it's true that students there are more prone to depression, because of the pressure placed on them, but the support system is fantastic. The Colleges place a lot of emphasis on looking after the students' psychological well-being. At other universities you can miss lectures and classes without people noticing; at Oxbridge problems are noticed quite quickly and tutors, deans, etc get involved to try to to help. I experienced this first-hand as an Oxbridge undergrad (a foreign student) - the university counselling centre was first-rate and I got help for my untreated mental health problems for the first time in my life.

And Oxbridge is also trying hard to recruit students from state schools and to support them once they arrive. This is partly because state school students, if they are strong enough to get in, often work hard and succeed better than students from independent schools who are used to coasting along and leading lives of relative privilege. I was involved in admissions this year and although policies at different colleges vary according to the tutors, at my college in my subject we accepted every state school applicant who seemed to have a good chance of thriving. Independent school applicants we only accepted if they seemed well and truly stellar.

To reassure the OP, though, Oxbridge is not the be-all end-all and there are many other unis out there where your DC may be happier. Some subjects are not even taught at Oxbridge. Certain subjects may be (gasp) better taught at other universities, depending on what kind of degree the student wants to do. Also, I do believe that Oxbridge caters to geeks - to get the most out of it, you have to love studying. So your DCs might well have a more rewarding experience elsewhere. I love Oxbridge and I feel fortunate to have ended up with a post here, but fetishising it is stupid IMO. I have taught at less "elite" universities before and the best and brightest there were as bright as any students anywhere.

Oh, and for what it's worth, my partner and I have 1 1/2 (one full-time and one part-time) prestigious academic jobs between us. And while I'm not complaining about our financial situation, we're not wealthy. We rent instead of owning our home, for example. So Oxbridge geekery does not equal riches.

FWIW, I remember thinking when I was at Oxford that it would probably bring out any tendencies towards mental health issues that an individual has. It's just because it's a different world, really. It has its own language and is effectively a subculture, its very self contained and like a whirlwind, and there's so much going on. The terms are comparatively short, so a lot gets packed in. Most people tend not to go home that much because of the terms being so short- very few go back every weekend. I had a couple of terms when I didn't go home at all. And people tend not to have cars because there's nowhere to put them. This was in 2002-5, so I doubt it's changed that much.

Don't get me wrong, I loved it. And the stuff about the support systems there is true as well. I also suspect that anyone with a tendency towards anxiety, panic or whatever is probably going to feel that way at some point in a higher education course. And I know people who had mental breakdowns who weren't at Oxbridge. But I do remember thinking, when I was there, that it wasn't a positive place for someone who might have mental health issues.

I also felt, and I'm ready to be disagreed with by others here, that being from a non-traditional background actually made coping with the pressure easier. I'm from a council estate in a northern city, so even if I'd got a 3rd, I would still have been considered a massive success in my own community. And it meant I was there on my own terms more than some others, and had a strong sense of a different community and different set of values too. Whereas there were some there from backgrounds where going to Oxbridge was merely what was expected, and they had to also get a 1st and take a particular career path in order to be considered anything other than underachievers.

That said, I wasn't really close to any of the type of people I mention, so I may be generalising through utter ignorance. And I was very gregarious and confident before I ever went near the place, which also helps. Most of the people I knew there were pretty sociable and confident too- hard to be a wallflower in that environment.

...an A at A level is very different now, but not necessarily inferior, which is what you are inferring I think.

It's inferior in that 20yrs ago there were far fewer 'A' grade A-Levels achieved by students and hence they're of far less value now than they were back then.

That's not the fault of the students - all they can do is to achieve the best grade they're capable of - but it has definitely devalued the 'A' grade.

My old history teacher went to Oxford... She worked in a public school :L However I do think having a degree from Oxford does make you stand out from the crowd t job interviews.

It's bound to because it is harder to get than a degree from Middlesex ex poly.

I agree that confidence matters a lot both in terms of university but almost more importantly after that in work.

HolofernesesHead Sat 07-Jan-12 10:17:25
"Can't help thinking, if you add up all the students who graduate from Oxbridge every year, that's a whole lot of leaders, or a whole lot of fields, or something like that"

Not to mention that if you add up all the students who graduate from non- Oxbridge universities every year, that is an awful lot of call centres...

My goodness I turn my back for a bit and there are so many messages here! Much food for thought, too thanks. It does seem that there are many opinions on this and I do agree that there are other ways to skin a cat ( As a cat lover I must think of an alternative to this!)

However it still seems clear to me that it is an advantage to be educated at Oxbridge whether this advantage is purely educational, social or occupational.

It is poignant for me to feel that my DC's ability to realise their potential (which seemed almost limitless when they were born) is decreasing with every stage in their lives especially as they are now sitting exams that will narrow their choices and opportunities further.

C'est la vie, of course and I know we are by no means alone in this. I know they can be happy and healthy and achieve much in life anyway but it doesn't stop me being a bit wistful!