To be pleased most of the cabinet are Oxbridge graduates?

[sagerosemaryandthyme]

That's it really. Surely we want the brightest and best in the cabinet.

YABU, a primarily Oxbridge cabinet is not representative of the population it's serving. It's representative of privilege, elitism and private schooling.

I happen to believe quite strongly you can be bright determined and successful without academic qualifications, this whole habit of placing an individuals worth on which Uni they went do/degree achieved is something i find particularly distasteful and is no more apparent than here on mumsnet.

It's one of the reason I left lecturing stupid academic snobbery and competitiveness with no actual awareness of real life and real people. And SO So disparaging towards me for my limited research output (despite getting fantastic feedback for my teaching) .

the 2 most successful people and cleverest i know left (state) school at 16 with a handful of GCSEs. they earn more than the rest of us put together.

aquavit thanks for a really helpful and informed contribution.and legallyblonde too - some good points, well made.

I'd like to add a bit, and, ask Aquavit a couple of questions - I'd be really interested to hear your thoughts.

do you know what...I started off writing something about how I didn't work that hard (in response to legallyblonde). but I started to work it out and realised that 2 essays a week, nearly always involving all-nighters is hard. I reckon I frequently did a 50-60 hour week, which completely shocks me - because I thought I was a slacker. amazing what you can do on fags and pro-plus.

and finals?? omg the very word sends shivers down my spine. don't know what it's like these days but when I was there my entire degree depended on 8 exams, taken over the space of 7 days. no amount of money and family connections is going to buy you through that.

aquavit - the two things i wanted to ask - what do you think of the view expressed in places on this thread, that if a person can't surmount the hurdles that unsupportive school/parents present then they're possibly not well suited? and secondly - if less kids from state schools are getting in why do we blame this 100 per cent on Oxford, rather than apportion at least some of the responsibility to the schools?

oh and thirdly what on earth is an Oxford tutor doing going to night clubs and coming on Mumsnet? are you trying to tell me you have a life outside academic journals...

I think the reverse holds true. If you succeed academically (and with life skills too) with no support from parents or school then you are less likely to find the demands of university terribly difficult, whereas if you have had a great deal of support you will find it more difficult. Although the college structure and higher level of demand at Oxbridge might actually be an easier transfer than the more sink or swim approach of many institutions. I get the impression that although there is no doubt that Oxbridge works you harder than many places, they might actually care more about undergraduates given their higher level of investment. At my university the lecturers/professors thought undergraduates were a terrible nuisance to be avoided whenever possible so that they could continue with their world class research with the minimum of distraction.

nooka, hatwoman, you're right: Oxbridge undergrads are supervised more closely than in many universities and the requirements made of them are, for the most part, greater. Therefore most of them probably work harder than many students at other universities. I've taught elsewhere and while there are plenty of students in other universities who choose to work hard, they aren't under the same pressure so to do, and the requirements (e.g. how many essays they are supposed to hand in, presentations to give, etc.) are not in the same league.

hatwoman you'll be pleased to know that we have moved on (a bit...) from depending entirely on final exams taken in a very short space of time! So there is more coursework (e.g. extended essays, thesis) required in most subjects. It's still very heavily exam-based compared with many other universities though.

On your questions: No, I don't think that failure to surmount the very serious obstacles of unsupportive (for whatever reason) schools or parents necessarily indicates lack of suitability - certainly it doesn't indicate lack of academic potential. There is a real barrier here, based not least around (mis)perceptions about Oxbridge, and it is emphatically not a good way to filter out people who are not suitable for a place.

There is a limit to what Oxbridge itself can do to challenge these obstacles: we cannot take people who do not apply. But we do a lot: there are outreach programmes to try to get people to think about applying (what you said about your dh's school legally is very sad and rings all too true), and to try to get them to see what opportunities there are. We work alongside organisations like the wonderful Sutton Trust to give people in weaker schools the opportunity to spend time in an Oxbridge environment on summer schools etc. And we try very hard, when people arrive from different educational backgrounds, to level the playing field in the first year (e.g. help people who aren't used to writing essays, something on which the arts subjects rely heavily in Oxbridge, to get used to doing it).

Why do we blame this wholly on Oxbridge rather than in part on the schools? Ummm...because it sells more newspapers? And, less cynically, because no matter which way you look at it, our state schools are struggling desperately with inadequate funding while Oxbridge is relatively speaking rolling in cash (yes, I am aware of the nuances here)?

Finally, good god, I haven't been to a nightclub in about fifteen years

I agree nooka in that the students who seemed to struggle the most at my college where those who had had a very cushioned life, often at boarding school, where they had never had to plan their own time or deal with people who weren't exactly mirror images of themselves (eg, boys! Seriously, this was clearly an issue for girls who had been to all-girl boarding schools and found shouty male students in tutorials difficult to deal with).

I thought the pastoral care at Oxford was way above that of my siblings' universities, eg, I had a college 'buddy', a moral tutor with whom I met regularly. Small residential colleges where you are often living alongside your tutors means it is difficult to get lost in the system.

FWIW, clearly Oxford has a problem with access that it could do a lot more to address but, as has been said, schools need to raise expectations. I was told repeatedly by my state comp that I wouldn't be accepted, and that my application was a waste of time, that students brighter than me hadn't got in (which was true!). When I did get in, they were the first to shout it from the rooftops and since then many more students from my school go to my college.

oh this is so interesting.thanks Aqua

It has to be said that imho the 2 essays a week/tutorial system can't be beaten. It manages to combine close student-tutor contact with a high level of independence. after many years away from university I went to LSE to do a Masters where you are pretty much given a reading list for the year and expected to get on with it. Oxbridge students (and, of course, some others) were fine with this. But some - who had been to universities where you get a lot of lectures lecture notes, seminars etc and are not really expected to do much independent study - didn't know what had hit them.

and the pastoral care was very good. In my first year I was the only person doing my subject so my tutor often used to take me to the cafe for tutorials and buy me tea and cake and take time to chat. The same man was college chaplain and was always to be found on the sidelines of college football, rugby and hockey matches. I swear he knew the name of everyonein college. He married dh and I in 1995 and when I saw him a couple of weeks ago he greeted me with a huge smile saying "Fifteen years". What's amazing is that I know I wasn't exceptional. He was/is like that with everyone.(all of which is only anecdote of course and says nothing about other colleges, but it's lovely anecdote).

I found the one to one tutorial system rather uninspiring and craved group discussion. And felt pastoral care almost non-existent, but maybe it has changed. I hope so.

I'm really intrigued to know now where we all went and when and what we read... but I really dislike giving out personal details on mumsnet so will have to keep guessing...

aquavit - get thee to a nightclub woman - we need updated information

Actually, where are the "grown-up" places to go in Oxford - my mother has just realised an ambition she has held for about 45 years (since she left Oxford) and bought a flat there. I have plans (as soon as I find where she is hiding the keys )

One of my DC is there now and it doesn't seem much different to me. Its sort of 'eternal' - I find that kind of nice.

I know it is unreasonable but I do find a sort of odd feeling of bond with the cabinet people - despite severe misgivings about their policies - I would also like to say that I emphatically do NOT believe that Oxford has a monopoly on very high intelligence.

I don't know if I'd like to live there again - but I'm going to eights week though.

I don't feel any kind of bond with the cabinet people at all. couldn't stand those types whilst at oxford still can't stand them I'm afraid.

And that is to do with the sense of entitlement many very wealthy public school educated people seem to feel.

You are DNBU!!
The other lot had their chance and Muffed it (anyone seen Doctor in the House??)
For all the people who have a problem with the whole elitist thing - take a look at the people who have steered us (the British people) through our darkest hours and weigh up whether you'd trade your short range principles for our long range freedom.

stealth - thanks, I will email you.

LRD - I'd like to take up your last points, but teh discussion has moved on - maybe another time!

tolalola - yes, I do feel strongly about the general arrogance and crapiness of oxford tutors. Of course there must be good ones, by the law of averages, but imo, from my experience across a 3 year course, they are rare. As a don yourself, you clearly disagree - but I am voting with my feet, and not giving any money to my college - if they want my money now, they should have provided a better service then.

What a stupid thing to say OP. Do you think that people like Alan Sugar went to Oxbridge? Yet he's successful. Formalised learning is great, but it's not the be-all and end-all. I work in an environment where peole are highly educated, and some of them are total prats - mainly the ones with no life experience outside education.

The two cleverest people I know, one of them a businessman, did not go to university.

However, if the alternative is John Prescott, then maybe you have a point

Actually I really like John Prescott. I find him straightforward and easy to relate to. I don't think I'm alone there.

Re Oxbridge/'Duxbridge'/Russell Group/University in General - nothing in life comes with a guarantee really does it? People develop differently and are equally bound and entangled with their circumstances and attitudes - there are lots of ways to do anything, it's what is available and what suits you; well thats what I think anyway.

Ah yes, John Prescott. What a blessing he has been for the country - the countryside, allowing housing estates on floodplains, on appeal, after local council has turned it down (I live near one)and retrospective planning permission for traveller sites in unsuitable locations while locals can't have satellite dishes in their conservation areas (ILS ditto). .

Oh and London, the John Prescott who has despoiled our lovely capital (IMO) by slapping up the London Eye with no say from Londoners and spoiling the skyline from the Thames with a huge office block soon to be built behind the Houses of Parliament (kept that one quiet but it was in the Telegraph). That John Prescott. The down-to-earth Trades Union regular bloke who thinks with his fists and cheats on his wife yet plays croquet on the lawn given a whiff of priviledge. That John Prescott.

Haha, oxford and cambridge = the brightest and the best.

What about all the thickies whose parents bought the college a library and subesquently got in despite having D grades?

You do know that happens, right?

Sweet that you think it's meritocratic though.

they are a tiny minority....very tiny. Otherwise, all the colleges would have 1000 libraries by now.

I went to oxford and was a coeval of George Osborne. I wasn't impressed

oh and for the person who asked, I read Russian and polish