Getting into Oxbridge with average A'level results via 'connections'?

[Cortina]

Reading with interest, that this did happen in the late 80s. A case of a (very) well connected lad who got a
BCC (and fell short of his conditional offer by a distance). His family had been to Oxford for generations. His father insisted he was 'Oxford material' and in the end he was accepted.

I imagine this happens rarely if at all now?

cortina there's not really one entrance exam anymore. Instead there are various interviews and many colleges will set some sort of test. There are some university/country-wide tests such as LNAT for law (but I understand that that is treated as essentially a literacy test as there's no way for teachers/parents to "help" with spelling etc).

Now, you go to interview and are ranked against all the other candidates interviewed. They know how many they can take in a year, so if you fall below the cut off (i.e. you are number 8 and they can only take 7), you don't get in. If you were just not quite high enough you are then put into the pool (so other colleges can pull you out if they have room. There's simply not enough space for all the ones they think would be "good enough" sadly.

Perhaps in the past people could put pressure on/pay their way in, but now people take it as an insult to their integrity if someone tries to buy a place.

Sounds like the current system is more water tight/fairer. Good news.

I would have thought that people would take it as an insult to their integrity in the past too? That said as Rae puts it he would have accepted a 'donation' for the school rather than himself - he was prepared to put any personal principles in his pocket for the greater good.

It bothers me enormously, Bonsoir, because anything like that contributes to a collective perception that application to Oxbridge is not worth it unless your background is 'right'. So, lots of kids from less privileged backgrounds who DO have the academic aptitude to get in, simply don't apply - because they, their teachers, and/or their parents don't believe that the dice aren't weighted against them.

And it is a vicious circle - the fewer applicants we get from less privileged backgrounds, the more disproportionate our intake is, and so the illusion is perpetuated.

So year after year, we don't get the opportunity to interview bright kids because they haven't applied.

That's why it matters - much more than because there is an individual case of disparity.

Cortina - I can well believe it happened in the past - but I do want to emphasise that scrutiny is much better these days, and it just doesn't happen any more. Of course, if schoolteachers are prepared to seek to deceive the universities, there are so many other ways they could do it...you can't JUST go on the interview alone because that would be unfair to (e.g.) someone who found it terribly intimidating, but nearly every other means of testing ability could be interfered with by the school.

Benign - that's interesting - haven't come across them, but then, circumstances under which you think an obviously able student wouldn't achieve the grades must be pretty rare.

Hmmm. I don't think anyone would get a place who was clearly not sufficiently academic.

However, I suspect there may be a few who are borderline who get pushed over that borderline due to donations/connections etc.

There is also the fact that schools and families with years of Oxbridge experience know how to "work the system": they know which colleges are easier to get into for which subjects. And there are some schools which have "special relationships" with some colleges and I believe those colleges will take a borderline pupil from those schools over and above a borderline pupil from elsewhere.

Well, Cortina, in terms of schools rather than Oxbridge - it is definitely still the case that you can buy a place through a donation to the school even if your child has not initially been offered a place.

In fact, I know a child who will be starting a local school shortly in just such circumstances.

minipie, I don't see how donations or connections could work in the case you suggest. The decisions are made quickly, over the course of a few days, and are regulated by the faculties. So there really isn't the opportunity to offer donations or apply pressure - except perhaps at the stage AFTER an offer has been made and the student fails to achieve the required grades (but in this scenario, s/he has already demonstrated themselves very able across a number of other tests, which is why some might still be given their place).

But being able to 'work the system' is potentially something that puts students from experienced schools at an advantage. The increasing tendency to 'pool' and assess students across the university (i.e. to rank all those applying for, say, English in the whole year, not just those applying to each college) does help to counter some of this. More of a problem is the dedicated preparation that some schools give their students - for the tests, for the interviews, etc - but we do try very VERY hard to account for that. Of course, we don't always get it right, but that's the near-universal aim these days, and a LOT of work has gone into the new admissions systems and criteria to tackle the unfairnesses that used to permeate the system.

My DW got in with very poor A levels having passed the entrance exam. She had no connections and came from a rough working class area.

In our college there were wealthy Amercians doing Masters degrees who clearly were not as academically able as UK masters students but they paid a lot more.

I think there may well be a lot of misnderstanding and misinterpretation of what happened in the case highligted by the OP. In general people misunderstand a lot of things about Oxford and Cambridge.

Tell me more about "degrees for Olympic-standard rowers", please!
DS is quite bright but not astoundingly so. He is on the school's list for 'maybe' for Oxbridge but his main passion is Rugby. I phoned them a while ago to ask about "special" degrees but they said that they don't exist. I know that Oxbridge degrees are very intensive and I don't see how anyone can do serious amounts of training and a full-on degree. Is there a way-in for sports types?

ruggermum - again I think you need to look at Masters degrees. Colleges have far more discretion with those.

ruggermum - I did uni-level rowing and there is no 'special degree' way in I'm afraid - certainly not any more. A remarkable percentage of the people I knew were just very very hard working - training about 40 hours a week and then doing their degree on top of that, and it's surprising how many of them went on to get firsts. You just don't have much of a social life apart from with your sporty friends.

I'm afraid that if your DS isn't academically up to scratch, they won't make an exception. It can seem as if there are particular courses for rowers/rugby players, in that a lot of (especially international) postgrads come to the graduate colleges to do 1 year courses, during which time they will do uni sport, but they wouldn't get into those colleges if they weren't bright enough. Sorry!

Beenbeta, in my OP I am quoting the one time head at Westminster in part. It's a factual account although it happened in the mid/late 80s. I was interested in the case and wondered how much things had changed.

A boy was advised by Westminster school not to sit an entrance exam for Oxford. He did so anyway and failed to get in. The parents then went into overdrive, approaching every college etc. Eventually one weakened and they were told with a recommendation from the head at Westminster the boy could have a place. The head wrote the letter against his better judgement - he thought the boy 'ok' academically but thought there were many others brighter and more deserving of a place. In some ways the head admired the parents determination.

From what I'm reading things have been considerably tightened up and such situations were reasonably rare to begin with (but they did occur).

People do do lots of training as well as their degree ruggermum. In the end I was doing 22/23 hours a week of training for rowing (I worked it out at the end of my third year then marvelled at the fact I was still standing). I wasn't even rowing for the university (they were scarily hardcore - but lovely to look at ).

You'd be amazed at what you can fit in when you only sleep 4 hours a night for 4 weeks at a time...though everyone was half dead by fifth week.

ruggermum some postgraduate degrees might be a bit different [couldn't possibly comment no sirree]. But the only criteria for undergrad admission are academic (slight disclaimer: assuming that someone is academically outstanding as well, extracurricular activity might be good cos of what it means re motivation, self discipline, intellectual curiosity, etc etc). And you're right: it's quite difficult to do the academic work AND lots of training. But not AT ALL impossible so if he wants to do a conventional degree (i.e. not one related to sport) then with enough discipline he should also be able to find the time to train.

40 hours! JumpJockey I am in awe.

I know lots of well connected and rich people who want their children to go to Oxbridge. I suspect I fall into that category myself.
It is now impossible. It really is. I don't know about previopus decades but now it is etry by ability plus promise and thats it.
Ds1 wants to go to Oxford. he is at a 'good' highly academic school and rated, even amongst those boys, as being very talented at english. he did a work experience on a national paper and produced work good enough to get him a byline in the paper. We are minted. we have friends.
It counts for shit.
he may get in, he may not. But if he does get in it will be on merit and we will be delighted for him

Benign - I was a cox, so wasn't doing all the exercise, but in winter it was a heck of a lot of sitting about in the cold... Tuesday to Friday we did weights/ergs from 6.30-8.30 then water training from 1.30-5.30, Saturday and Sunday was 8am-3 or 4pm.

And even after all that I was only the reserve in my boat race year [not bitter honest]

pag I wish your son lots of luck. I think you make another important point: people who do get in should be given proper credit for what they have achieved. Sad if it's then assumed it was due to school, or daddy, or whatever.

I am wondering now if things have swung the other way? Bias against the 5 A* at A'level boy from prestigious public school etc, I've no idea if this is ever so?

I've heard anecdotally of kids leaving prestigious public school to go to a sixth form college (state) or similar to increase chances of Oxbridge entry? May just be local rumour mill going into overdrive...

Aquavit I share your frustration at this myth, it's immensely damaging in many many ways. It would be extremely hard to get away with this kind of ruse these days (though, like most things, it's impossible to prove that it could never happen). EE offers are not something I have encountered in a very long time, but even if they are around it won't be because of 'influence'. If anything they probably have to be justified more rigorously within the College (i.e. discussed among subject lecturers, pastoral tutor and admissions tutor). Getting those people all in league would be no mean feat, and all of them would stand to damage their careers by diverting from the correct procedure.

Apart from anything, the students are usually shortlisted by the people who will have to teach them and organise all their academic affairs for the next 3 years at least. Why would any academic, who has done so much work to get where they are, want to give a leg-up to a candidate who was not one of the best they had interviewed? Sure, in episdoes of Lewis they might be desperate for a drama studio or something, but in real life it's no small undertaking to accept a student into a system that's so intensive and you would be doing yourself no favours by admitting someone who was going to need even more support than the rest.

I understand the situation on bias to be that if a college is faced with two students who look equally good on paper/did much the same in interview, and one went to the top school in the country while the other has a benefits/sink school/carer for disabled parents background, they will think very hard about whether the more disadvantaged one should be given the place (i.e. given what they have achieved in spite of everything, should we say they have more potential/could have outstripped the public school one if all things were equal). However, this only applies if they are pretty much equal.

Generally though, they couldn't give two hoots about where a kid goes to school - those I have spoken to always ask why they should penalise a child for the choices its parents made. They just want the brightest ones, regardless of the source.

I believe that some universities are different though - e.g. Bristol, which I think openly says it "positively discriminates" in favaour of state school.

aqua
I hope he does. he was really excited by the lecture he attended and he loves his subject with a genuine passion.
But when he was at an open day he was chatting to another group about holiday stuff and he mentioned that he helps out at a play scheme for disabled children.

" oh thats a good idea" one girl said to him " my teacher saidthat sort of shit gfoes down well on your personal statement. I am doing Wings Of Hope"
"actually" said pissed off DS1, " I have been doing it since I was old enough. My brother is disabled. Don't sign up for his group will you. He doesn't need wankers fluffing their CVs instead of real helpers thanks"
it is actually quite cynical now tbh.
He works fucking hard. He is incredibly lucky that we could send him to that school. But no one does the work for him and his talent is his own.

Pagwatch your son sounds fab . It's cool that he sees so clearly, but even cooler that he can and will tell other people what's what.

I am not sure tbh Dino
he has attended all the open days but the lecturer who led the English open day just really impressed him. She talked about deconstructing all they have learnt before and tryingto examine text afresh.
I think it was the impression of freedoom of thought and a move away from structured examination of set text really.The sense that he would not be learning to pass exams but learning to enjoy the work IYSWIM
He was enchanted by the library too and the students he met seemed interesting to him.

I think it was that impression rather than any specifics about the course. he is fond of odd texts. His independent learning has been about John Iriving and his use of the narrator as the writers true voice.

I don't know really. It is all a bit poncy for me