To have told my niece she won’t make it into Oxford uni?

[Awfulaunt]

Hi all,
first off sorry if there’s typos I’m typing this on my phone.
for context, I’ve been a private tutor for years, mainly English and History. Over the years I’ve helped with lots of UCAS and applications including a few oxbridge ones. My niece is at the age where she’s thinking about uni and her parents asked me to tutor her for English and History, I agreed. She is bright, gets Bs and the occasional A or C. She asked me if I think she should apply to Oxford and I said “No not for your undergrad. Maybe if you work really really hard at uni and do extracurriculars and things while you’re there and come out with a first you could try for your masters if you want to do one, but it’s not really an option at this moment in time.” All seemed fine, we carried on and she seemed okay. Fast forward to now and I just had SIL on the phone shouting at me that I crushed her dreams and that she was going to apply and get in and show me (etc). I said I’d love it if she did, I’d be absolutely thrilled if she got in to spite me.
I don’t think I was harsh when I told her, I don’t think it was cruel. I think it’s kind of my job to tell her. I didn’t rule it out in the future because I feel like once she’s at uni she will flourish academically because she will have more freedom etc and I’ve told her this many times. I feel horrible that I’ve upset her but I genuinely think it was the right thing to do.
I sent her a message saying I am sorry if I came off harsh or anything I just want what is best for her. Also spoke to DB who said SIL was just angry because niece was upset and that he thinks I did the right thing. Bit miffed that he let her speak to me like that, but also when she goes off best thing to do is stay out the crossfire.
Am I in the wrong and just blind to it?

Realism is being sensible, far too many young people have unrealistic ones. I think you did the right thing OP.

I know right, 'uneasy is the head that wears a crown'. The privileged or should we refer to them as the 'poor unfortunates', discriminated against, all in the name of, 'diversity'.

You did the right thing.

If she's looking at uni applications and looking at oxbridge she should already know her grades aren't though!

If she didn't already know this, then she doesn't have a clue about oxbridge.

Um, my (female) best mate was at Churchill and the daughter of a coal miner!

(Also a NatSci, 1980s vintage.)

@Awfulaunt how are things OP? Have you spoken to your nice or SIL?

Thing is- as I tried to explain before, focusing on Oxbridge while you would be better suited elsewhere is a waste of actual time and energy. You are better spending time thinking about your subject, where is good, looking up league tables, visiting on open days, finding out about extra opportunities (e.g. places where employability or placements are great, such as Bath), and working out where it makes economic sense to plough your efforts.

That's what's sensible to do.

Most of the examples of people on here limiting 'dreams' are real- many people are dismissed or not encouraged and that's an awful thing to do to a child or a teen. But in this instance, the OP's niece is already getting every advantage, she's having personal (possibly free?!) tutoring in two out of her three A levels, and is hitting good but not outstanding grades. Giving specialist advice, knowing the undergrad market, is not pouring water on dreams, it's valuable sensible advice that could help orient this person to getting into the best uni they can for their grades/wanted outcomes (e.g. getting into a RG uni, getting into somewhere in the top 5 for her subject, getting on a placement 4 year course or year abroad).

That's not the same as saying to a small kid 'you won't achieve this' for no particular reason.

Its also not incompatible with the Oxbridge desire to increase diversity. They are looking for those students who haven't got families full of uni grads and aunties who can tutor them in two subjects. They are looking for precisely those students who don't have those advantages and would be getting A stars if it weren't for their severe disadvantages (lack of family going to university, impoverished living conditions, living in poor area, experiencing discrimination etc).

Ah, the cherry pie test! That was All Souls, wasn't it? I went there once by mistake, ducking into a random college doorway when I was being followed and harrassed by a pervert on the High Street. A tweedy type walked through the quad, looked me up and down contemptuously, and asked me whether I was lost.😂Luckily by the time I was finally ejected and/or unable to withstand the embarrassment any longer, the pervert had gone.

Happy days.😀

This is very true . It’s just a lot easier said than done, especially as they need to be mindful of the impact on the students themselves in a course which for which they are not ideally suited. That latter concern actually equally applies to students who are in the right channels but not really hitting the results/ of the right intellectual style.
Oxbridge gets a lot of negativity directed at it, from absurd stories about dining etiquette being a basis of inclusion to angry denouncement from people who have struggled with the demands of the course, but much effort is directed at getting it right. Sadly there is no Hogwarts style “ sorting hat”; but for the right student it is a fabulous education ( though NOT necessarily a shortcut to a high paid job). It is for the genuinely academically inclined, and for the ambitious and exceedingly “rounded” there are lots of other options that may feed much more efficiently into the type of career they desire. It is a case of the applicants themselves being truly honest with themselves about their motivations and the draw and their real aspirations, as well as the university itself determining suitability in terms of intellectual approach. It really isn’t the rosiest path for all and the fact that the university is sensitive to that doesn’t make it elitist or any of the other tosh levelled at it .

I knew someone who got into Oxford with BCD A levels in the 90s but he'd done really well on their own admission exam and interview. He went to to graduate with a 2:1. Is it purely about A levels these days?

personal achievement and aspirations are powerful motivators, wanting to attend oxford can help to inspire someone to see what they can achieve and then strive for further improvements, and then pushing themselves academically and personally to achieve this,

setting such a goal as oxford can drive them to improve their grades, engage with more extracurricular activities and refine their essential soft and hard skills.

besides even if they do not ultimately make it to oxford the journey itself towards that goad can at least lead to various improvements in personal achievements,

sometimes what matters more is aiming high and then trying to achieve as much as possible.

this comment puzzles me "to angry denouncement from people who have struggled with the demands of the course,"
mainly its because its oxford, what do people expect its party then just write a few essays etc, if i was to study at oxford i would presume i was there to be apart of the best of the best.

I think then an offer with 2 Es at A level was the norm, if they got through the entrance test.

So that meant that there was no pressure at A level so some people took the foot of the accelerator.

Now the standard offer for Oxford is 3 As and higher at Cambridge I believe.

They still also have to do the entrance tests / submit written work/ interview and also get the grades at A level.

An excellent question. I have wondered this myself.

First, B was the equivalent of an A back then, so it's the equivalent of ABC these days, but you are right, once you got in, often your grade expectations were lower. Mine were ABB back then, but had passed the interview and ended up getting higher anyway.

Grade inflation has meant the things aren't equivalent and so that's why most colleges are looking for A stars and As across the board, as even those don't distinguish the brightest students any more (a lot of students get quite high grades) which is why they set prior tests and exams and interview tests on the day.

The people to convince if you want to try for Oxbridge are your teachers, as you need high predicted grades. If they don't predict high, you won't even make the first sift. I would much prefer a post-grade application process, make it much fairer as well as it's then not down to prediction but actual grades achieved.

Re extra curricular, an Oxbridge admissions officer of my professional acquaintance told me he 'couldn't give a monkey's what students do in their spare time'. Of course that's just one man but I've never seen or heard anything to make me think that wasn't a common attitude.

Also interestingly Oxbridge aren't the sporting powerhouses that people think they are any more. Possibly that belief comes from people watching the Boat Race (contested very much by post-graduates) or Varsity matches.

Neither university finished in the top 10 of the sports league tables either for men's, women's or mixed sports last season.

There have been a couple of comments on this thread echoing comments I’ve heard before that Oxbridge doesn’t provide enough support for those who are not finding it easy. It does happen that some struggle and, while I wouldn’t lay all the blame at the feet of the pastoral care per se, it’s an awful thing for a young person to have to go through and, on occasion, can be a tragic consequence of the “ fit” not being right.

Not sure that it is such a fabulous education. DNiece did a humanities subject at Oxford and got a first, but has never been impressed with the teaching. She then did a Master's at a Scottish university, Oxford were begging her to come back to do a PhD but she's decided again to do the PhD at a non-Oxbridge university.

At Oxford, it does not matter which college you apply the offer you recieve will be the same as everyone else applying for the same subject across the university, for example for English that is AAA.
I would expect that a student who was good enough to get into Oxford or Cambridge would not need to convince their teachers to predict them high grades. (Especially given the amount of post covid inflation there has been in predicted grades).

Whilst superficially attractive post qualification applications, or post qualification offer making is fraught with problems, and has been discussed at length in recent years. To name a few. How do regulated courses interview candidates? Would pqa apply to overseas students as well? Watch the UK's competitors enjoy taking those students if it did. Analysis that suggested that it would harm widening access to universities.

If that man is Mke Nicholson (Director Undergraduate Admissions and Outreach at Cambridge, formerly in a similar role at Bath and Oxford) then I would suggest he is worth listening to. If it wasn't Mike, then it could easily have been, and he has said similar in his time at all 3 universities.

@JessS1990 you might be right, although my understanding was that private/grammar tend to overpredict and other secondary schools underpredict and that was one of the things perpetuating inequalities, as once (not Oxbridge) most unis have given an offer, if it's within a grade of a drop, they often take the student. So, overpredicting tends to pay off.

I agree it would be very complicated, put us out of step with other countries etc.

Over predictions across all school types was a topic of discussion at the UCAS conference last week. I have not seen any evidence that there are patterns by type of school.

I was told I shouldn’t bother to apply to study veterinary medicine. I went to a comprehensive school and then to the local college.
The teacher said I may not be capable of getting the 4 A grades at A level (many years ago they were one off exams).
I went ahead anyway and got the four A levels grade A.
I’m so grateful to her because she spurred me on.
Moreover, she taught me a vital lesson. Trust your own instincts and let the naysayers prattle on. Believe in yourself.

On my classroom wall is "Do not say you cannot do it, say you cannot do it YET".

Surely that's exactly what OP DID say though @ftp ? She said that she thought her niece wasn't ready for Oxbridge at the moment, halfway through Y12, but that she might well be in a position to go there in a few years' time as she expects her to thrive at university.

Some people peak at school while others find they prefer university-style teaching and learning, which is often very different. But to say it's not really an option yet, based on the girl's academic achievements to date, is perfectly reasonable.

@JessS1990 https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2020/aug/predicting-level-grades-accurately-near-impossible-task

High achieving comp students are more likely to be underpredicted than grammar and private students, exactly the ones Oxbridge and other top unis are targeting in their diversity work.