Gina and Oxford PPE

[Possiblynotever]

My DD is in year 12. She is currently thinking about a History degree and her State school is (heavily) pushing her towards Oxbridge and a double honours. She is giving her best and her results are very good, so she probably will have the marks (although this is no guarantee). She chose a Maths A level and she is finding it hard - she reached an A but with a lot of sweating which in my mind is quite normal. She has decided not to do anything at Uni requiring further maths. Apparently, some of her classmates are amazing, especially those who want to apply for PPE at Oxford, which seems to be the achievement of all achievements. Those who get in are the best of the best, at least in my DD mind. Now, Gina Colandangelo gained an Oxford PPE which means she must have been bloody talented. The only thing she will ever be remembered for was snugging the Health Minister in his office.
What a waste. Why? AIBU in thinking that there is still a cohort of women who work bloody hard to get into the most difficult jobs and then just sit on their achievements? And why do they do this?

If your daughter wants to do history she should do history. Critical thinking skills, learning to identify bias and both allow for and understand why it has occurred, being able to read and process a lot of information very quickly, ability to construct a logical argument supported by evidence. There are an awful lot of transferable skills. Historians go into law, teaching, consultancy, journalism, civil service, politics....

She shouldn't do a joint degree if she doesn't want to and she should do a subject she is interested in and keen to study. Oxbridge is hard enough to get into when it's a subject you do want to study. And doing a degree in a subject you are good at but don't really like is painful.

People like Johnson and Cameron are perfect illustrations of the fact that you can get an Oxbridge degree without being particularly bright.

@Zzelda

People like Johnson and Cameron are perfect illustrations of the fact that you can get an Oxbridge degree without being particularly bright.

Precisely!

Just to be clear: I think her school is pushing her towards a double honours as she does not seem to have the full grades to get into a History degree and her school probably thinks it would increase her chances. I do not understand the system, and I just assume this is correct.

I can see why she does not have many chances as her friends at the same school who want to get into Oxford ( PPE) are simply naturally academically amazing. There is no other way to describe them. They certainly impress me more than the current politicians in charge.

@Zzelda

People like Johnson and Cameron are perfect illustrations of the fact that you can get an Oxbridge degree without being particularly bright.

Of course BJ is academically bright! I'm not sure why that's so threatening to people. He got academic scholarships all the way through his education. If you think he's an arse then that's fine you are in good company. But in the context of academia he is very bright

What a wierd post. Hundreds of people do PPE and you latch onto Gina?

I don’t think Boris Johnson is bright. An ability to throw out the odd Latin phrase obviously dazzled the folk at Eton and Oxford but scratch the surface and there isn’t much to impress.

@Possiblynotever

Just to be clear: I think her school is pushing her towards a double honours as she does not seem to have the full grades to get into a History degree and her school probably thinks it would increase her chances. I do not understand the system, and I just assume this is correct.

I can see why she does not have many chances as her friends at the same school who want to get into Oxford ( PPE) are simply naturally academically amazing. There is no other way to describe them. They certainly impress me more than the current politicians in charge.

I would do some more research than just the school then!

PPE at Oxford is a slightly different beast as you can't take any if the subjects as a single degree. But in general joint honours is not the easy way in. You have to meet the requirements and satisfy the interviewers in two or three subjects not just one! At least in a joint history and English for example you could be offered one of the single honours degrees if you impressed the interviewers in one subject not both but that is not an option with PPE. You do joint honours because you want to study both subjects and are interested in the interaction between the two (you do extra papers about this).

She should apply for PPE if she wants to study politics, philosophy, and economics not because the school thinks it's an easier way into Oxbridge. And if she wants to do history but won't quite make the grades then Oxbridge is really not the be all and end all. There are other good universities for history.

(Disclaimer I say Oxbridge but the above is more about Oxford. The Cambridge courses are structured slightly different it the principle still remains- don't try and game an 'easy' way in by taking a subject you don't want to study!)

Also academically amazing does not an Oxbridge place guarantee. Hundreds of academically amazing students get turned down every year because they can't take everyone!

Stop thinking about what her friends want to study (and why) or how other people may or may not have wasted their education. Concentrate on your daughters strengths and interests and what is best for her.

@Jahebejrjr

I don’t think Boris Johnson is bright. An ability to throw out the odd Latin phrase obviously dazzled the folk at Eton and Oxford but scratch the surface and there isn’t much to impress.

Oh don't be silly!

I think there is a difference between being able to perform well academically and actually being bright, especially in subjects where you can do quite well just by memorising things and being willing to add your own comment. To me, real intelligence is about the ability to think things through, to understand, interpret and interact with information. I know a lot of people who have done well academically but aren't particularly bright. There is that Einstein quote; 'You have to learn the rules of the game. And then you have to play better than anyone else.'. I wonder what would happen, and who we would see succeeding, if we changed the rules?

This is such an odd thread. Why the bragging about your daughter, what does she have to do with GC? Also no-one would have heard of GC aside from this affair so what is the news of the affair overshadowing. OP you do know that thousands of people have graduated from Oxford with a degree in PPE, and no-one has heard of the vast majority of them.

For what it's worth I worked alongside GC years ago and she was incredibly clever and talented, (as well as beautiful and a really nice person). She may have been privileged but she worked very hard as far as I can remember and her career shows she's made the most of her achievements. Plenty of people fuck up and affairs happen everywhere, it won't stop her working. There are lots of super clever people around, I agree it's annoying sometimes when it seems like it's been easy/easier for them somehow!

I suppose the moral of the story is that getting a degree from Oxford doesn’t stop you being a homerecker.

@Mandarinette

For what it's worth I worked alongside GC years ago and she was incredibly clever and talented, (as well as beautiful and a really nice person). She may have been privileged but she worked very hard as far as I can remember and her career shows she's made the most of her achievements. Plenty of people fuck up and affairs happen everywhere, it won't stop her working. There are lots of super clever people around, I agree it's annoying sometimes when it seems like it's been easy/easier for them somehow!

I doubt Mrs Hancock and her kids think she is a “really nice person”

I'm just saying how she came across to me at the time. Of course if I'd known she was having an affair with a married man I'd have felt differently.

To be fair she might be a really nice person. A person who’s made a massive mistake, like we all do.

[quote DarkMatter731]@Blossomtoes

researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-7483/CBP-7483.pdf

Table 9 on page 13.

Not sure where this idea is coming from because the data doesn't really support it.

70% of Conservative MPs were Oxbridge-educated in the 1970s.

Conservative MPs were always a majority of MPs (although you had the odd Labour stint from 76 to 79) and they were disproportionately Oxbridge-educated. The Liberal Democrats/Liberals also had a higher percentage of Oxbridge-educated MPs compared with today. Similarly, Labour had the same percentage that were Oxbridge educated back then as they do today.

Therefore, a far higher percentage of MPs were Oxbridge educated back in the 1960s and 1970s. I remember interning with my Conservative MP back in high school and he was around back then - he remarked that back then, it was pretty much all Oxbridge-educated while today, it's gotten a lot better.

A slightly higher percentage of MPs have gone to university today but back then, it was nearly as high. Among Labour, it was around 59% while today, it's around 84%. Among the Conservatives, it's gone from 68% to 83%. But that's also down to the expansion of higher education rather than MPs becoming more privileged - back then, very few people went to university.

I would actually argue that MPs have gotten a lot less Oxbridge-focused. Just look at the government statistics on this which show that Oxbridge is now only 24% of all MPs compared with a much higher percentage back then.

Look at Table 10 as well. 45% of MPs worked in professional jobs back in the 1970s while today, it's around 31% of MPs. Manual workers have declined in percentage of MPs but that's because manual workers don't really exist in the economy to the same extent as they did back then.[/quote]
You said an Oxbridge education was “synonymous” with being an MP. You’ve just provided the evidence that it wasn’t.. 🤷‍♀️

You make a fair point, womencanlift. Apparently they are/were friends. Lucky Mrs Hancock to have such friends. Absolutely the lowest, about as low as shagging the downstairs maid. Proximity is all. How lazy.

This is interesting. Didn't BJ dad work for the Europan Community? If so, all his children had free education ( that means all expenses paid by the EU) wherever they wished to go and study.

Is this the "scholarship" you are referring to?

@Blossomtoes

In a country where 1% of the country went to Oxford in the 1960s/70s, if 60% of MPs had an Oxbridge education in the 60s/70s, that's pretty much synonymous.

The definition of synonymous is: closely associated with. I said being an MP was synonymous with being an Oxbridge graduate in the 1960s/70s. I've demonstrated this was true as 60% of MPs went to Oxbridge in the 1960s/70s. I've provided evidence to support this statement.

Of course there will always have been MPs who didn't go to Oxbridge but in the 60s/70s, over half went to the two universities.

Therefore, I fail to see where I've been proven wrong. In fact, I've demonstrated that you were wrong with your claim that Oxbridge graduates are more represented today than they were back in the 1960s/70s.

@Possiblynotever

This is interesting. Didn't BJ dad work for the Europan Community? If so, all his children had free education ( that means all expenses paid by the EU) wherever they wished to go and study.

Is this the "scholarship" you are referring to?

No. He was awarded an academic scholarship to Eton,, and to Oxford.

OP what are you on about?? PPE is a good course, not everyone is from a wealthy public school background (I wasn’t) but it really doesn’t have much bearing on your marital choices some years later.

Clearly our perceptions of “synonymous” differ @DarkMatter731. Mine is almost all, not just over half.

Synonymous means two things that are associated with each other