To ask why two London boroughs send more kids to Oxbridge than the entirety of Sheffield, Leeds and Manchester combined?

[nickymanchester]

I was reading an article in The Guardian today which claimed that more children from the London boroughs of Richmond and Barnet go to Oxbridge than all of Sheffield, Leeds and Manchester combined.

For context, the population of Richmond and Barnet combined is about 540k (Barnet actually has quite a lot of people living there) according to the ONS - so about the same population as Sheffield.

David Lammy says England is failing those who don't go to university

This is the quote:-

He noted that university access data reveals that geography is as much of a fault line as class or race. “Two London boroughs, Richmond and Barnet, send more kids to Oxbridge than the entirety of Sheffield, Leeds and Manchester combined,” he said.

So, is it just down to all the private schools in London? Or is there something else affecting these figures as well?

It's not, you know, grace.

Some students stay up for a whole term, but plenty will go home at least once.

I don't know if this is something that's perhaps changed over time, as it's become more common for students to expect to be able to go home during term.

I too grew up in one mentioned and laughed at some of the comments and then remembered about more than just my little immediate postcode.
If your wealthy you can live near the best school, have additional tutors, pay for private schools, it is also believing it’s accessible and “for me”.
It’s having engaged educated parents with the time to push and encourage and parents that probably went themselves.

It’s also why white working class boys are statistically likely to perform the worst.

As someone else says it’s not rocket science.

I dont know a single person who felt socially excluded or looked down upon by those from more privileged backgrounds

Whereas in contrast, being financially excluded from social events and being looked (down) upon as an oddity has been a reoccurring theme amoungst all the Oxbridge undergraduates from lower middle/working class backgrounds I know. Including the one sitting opposite me at work now. Postgraduates tend to fair better ime.

It may not be everybody, and some may not care, but lets not pretend it doesn't happen. And the % of privately educated twats still seemed alarmingly high during my last visit (January).

I was meaning for any universtity or higher education provider, Grace. Perhaps that could be a selling point for Oxbridge - awkward expensive journey? Yes, but you don't have to do it very often!

YY, I've read the Sutton Trust reports, and I'm definitely in agreement they need to do more.

But A Level grades aren't the point. Every years, loads of candidates with excellent grades don't get in.

And sure, 'clever' is a start, but you'd also want someone who'd actually do well. Some people are brilliant, but they'd hate to be put on the spot in a small group teaching situation, and they'd do it badly. Is it right or fair to accept a student who's in that category? I'm not sure it is.

As state educated pupils at Oxford are now a clear majority and 22% are from abroad, there is no reason to be offended by any other student. Wherever they come from and how they have been educated. The state school tribe is easily the biggest so who cares what others think or do? People should just get on with their own lives and it really won’t be hard to find like minded students.

The Said business school in Oxford teaches business and management. It would be laughable if a recruiter in this area of work didn’t know this!

I also don’t think students from a northern background evaluate courses outside the north. They are convinced they are a better fit at say, Leeds, and stay north. I’ve looked at the destinations of DC from my DN’s school in Sheffield. It’s one of the best and outstanding. No one has gone to London, Exeter, Bristol, Bath or Oxbridge. The biggest number by far went to the two universities in Sheffield. I bet they will live and work in Sheffield after graduating. They will probably afford a flat fairly soon and will enjoy life. If they go to medical school they will soon be buying a decent house. What’s not to like? Leeds and Nottingham were popular plus Manchester and Liverpool. Not Scotland and one brave soul went to Durham. One suspects a few could have made a stab at Oxbridge but I suspect staying north in your own bubble was more important. It’s not travel really, it’s being northern and too proud (or stubborn) to look at somewhere that might be better. Or indeed to accept a challenge.

Ambition might play a part too. If you are ambitious to get a certain job, especially in London, you might need to act strategically when choosing a course and university. If you love Sheffield, want to stay in Sheffield, all your mates are in Sheffield and a good enough job is in Sheffield, why not go to university there?

Part of it is their parents, not only are the kids in private schools but their parents are likely to have high flying jobs, and crucially the parents are likely to be clever themselves to have got such a good job. As much as people hate to think about it intelligence is partly genetic.

I can’t see why you’d go to expensive oxford or Cambridge unless you REALLY wanted to

I'd be really interested in the state school data fot oxbridge.

How many from "leafy comps" and selective schools etc.

Just for further analysis.

Some of us went to open days and didn't want to spend a languages degree doing one on one tutorials on medieval literature! I went to Durham instead from a very good non-private 6th form (that sends about 30 to Oxford each year).

I can’t see why you’d go to expensive oxford or Cambridge unless you REALLY wanted to

What do you mean expensive? In what way is it more expensive than any other top university? If you want to go on to do something highly technical (STEM) or highly competitive then the fact is that having gone to Oxbridge is a massive advantage. These companies/PhD programs have hundreds of applications for each place and are much more concerned with accidentally hiring someone sub standard than throwing away a good candidate so will often use the undergrad institution to whittle down candidates. The top firms will expect a top degree (i.e. you came top ten in your year from the very top institutions - usually if it's the UK they'll expect to see Oxbridge).

How can you get a sense of the entire social structure during a visit BarbarianMum? Perhaps the twats are just more vocal/visible? Twats are everywhere. That doesn’t mean that their very existence leaves everyone else out in the cold. There are plenty of other social options, it’s not all pressing your nose up against the windows of the Bullingdon Club.

SarahandQuack I accept that it’s a long time since I was at Cambridge but the terms are still the same length and there is a lot going on at weekends (including Saturday labs for some science students I think), so I’d be really surprised if more than a minority of people had time to go home during term. Has someone currently studying there told you that is what they all do now? Personally I had to be dragged away kicking and screaming at the end of term, it was just such a beautiful place to live.

Go over to the higher education section and ask this question (then duck!). My Dd doesn’t want to go to Oxbridge and is Northern. She hopefully has got v high grades and will go to a very good northern university.

If you look at the higher education boards, you will find the Oxbridge boards full of stressed parents and children, trying to get in, hand-wringing because they couldn’t get in/ got the wrong college, or if they do get in, anguishing over intense terms and exams afterwards. Doesn’t sound much fun.

Dd wants to study hard but also be happy. She wants to cook, go clubbing, do some voluntary work in her chosen field. Her cost-benefit analysis doesnt add up for Oxbridge.

As pp said beforehand - in the end they just don’t want to go.

Well, I didn't teach a lab subject, so I accept that may make a difference.

I generally found out when my students asked permission, or when (if they weren't at my college and therefore didn't need my permission) they happened to mention it.

I wouldn't have said it was 'very unusual' based on that experience. And why shouldn't they go home?

Medieval literature is a tiny part of any MFL degree there. Interestingly my 17 year old daughter thought that too. In her final year at university, having done medieval French, she was asked if she’d stay and do further research into it. What a difference maturity makes! Nothing ventured, nothing gained! I’m never sure why people cannot try something new. It says something about you.

SaveKevin: Oxford and Cambridge are cheap for students. Many colleges offer rooms for three years and they are very reasonably priced. London, Bristol and a few other cities are more expensive when students have to go into the private market.

Btw, I was teaching there a year ago - this isn't ancient history. I do wonder if students at all universities feel keener on being able to get home these days, because the internet lets you stay in touch with friends elsewhere so easily, and you find people make plans to meet up with old friends more, I think.

I doubt anyone who had their heart set on Oxbridge would choose not to go just because it was far away, but if you weren't that fussed, I can see it might be one of the pros or cons, mightn't it?

It has to come from choice as well though, there’s plenty of wealthy educated people outside those boroughs are they not choosing it?

What do you mean expensive? In what way is it more expensive than any other top university?
Housing.

I think you are spot on Zanda. It’s up to the young people to choose. All this gnashing at the subject won’t make much difference, other than where DC are undecided and can possibly be persuaded. Others have evaluated the options are are going elsewhere.

Interesting coal-face experience Sarah, thanks. Perhaps the snowflakes who go back home to Mummy once a month are the same ones whining about social exclusion. In my day we just did our own washing and spent our weekends shagging the public schoolboys . Students are so serious nowadays.

The university accommodation at both universities is at the cheap end. No one much will but a house whilst they study. Even if you live out it’s cheaper than London. It just shows how misinformation sways people!

I used to volunteer at a secondary modern (i.e. a comprehensive in a grammar area) that was deemed "requires improvement". I used to take small groups of bright students off to do additional work. There were a few I met who had real talent and I used to try and encourage them to be ambitious but it was difficult for a number of reasons. Firstly they were much less fluent than they would have been had they been regularly stretched at school - maths is a bit like sport in that the more you practise the quicker and more able you become - they hadn't got that practise. They were used to do doing work they found easy and tedious so they weren't particularly interested and also weren't confident when presented with a challenge. Prestigious universities just weren't on their radar. They didn't know anyone who had gone and it was very much out of their comfort zone. At a top school you might get 60 applying and 20 getting in. I'm sure the 40 who weren't successful would be disappointed but they're in good company. To put yourself out there to apply takes much more courage when you'll be the only person in your school's history to have even considered it.

A few of these students had they been put in a top grammar or private school at 11 might well be applying to Oxbridge and have a shot of getting in but by the time I saw them at 15-18 they were years behind their equivalents at better schools and wouldn't have a chance to catch up and wouldn't think of trying.

Some DC are just clingy! My DD had a friend who went home to see their horse. Others just to touch base with siblings and have a Sunday roast! The majority stayed out at university though. Some travelled to stay with friends at other universities.

They're not snowflakes.

Why is it you feel this need to put down people who don't share your experiences? You were equally unpleasant about people who didn't apply or get in. I don't understand the need for it.

For what it's worth, I had one student who went home to see her disabled mother and brother, for whom she had been a carer through her teens, despite having a version of the same disabling condition herself. And she was bloody excellent, and one of the brightest and least 'snowflakey' students I've ever met.

Zipee
I do know black students who have chosen not to apply to Oxbridge because they are uncomfortable being in such a minority having come from very multicultural London schools.

This may make it difficult for Oxbridge to have a higher proportion of black students, of course. If peopel don;t apply they certainly won't get offered places!

I can't find any figures for Oxford in the same year, but at Cambridge university last year "22% of UK students admitted as part of the 2017 admissions cycle identify themselves as having a black or ethnic minority background."

The UK is a country where the demographic is 87.1% White, 7.0% Asian, 3.0% Black, 2.0% Mixed and 0.9% others (no idea what counts as "others": Sami? Polynesian? too cussed to say on a form?)

Anyhow: if 22% of UK students at Cambridge identify as not-white, and 12.9% of the population as a whole identify as non-white, doesn't that mean that Cambridge has a higher proportion of not-white people as students than the proportion of not-white people in the population as a whole? (To do this properly one would need to know the proportion of not-white people aged 18 in the population as a whole, obviously, but I don't know whether that data exists.)