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?

Thanks Heart . he is quite a good kid really. Very protective of his brother.

I think people outside Cambridge don't realise how competitive the colleges are amongst themselves - I can't imagine many Directors of Studies willingly saddling themselves with someone who is not academically able, who will struggle, who will be dull to teach, and who will pull their results down.

It USED to be possible for colleges to sneak less good applicants in, particular at post-grad level, hence the idea of 'special degrees' for sports players. The University and the Faculties absolutely hated it, and I have heard a very senior person (can't get more senior in this context, but I shan't name the person) speak with glee about how it couldn't happen any more. That would have been 8 years ago or so.

My dad told me that when he interviewed potential students for Oxford in the 70s, it was well known that you would do better to pick the state school student over the public school student if both had the same grades. Don't know if this was true of other colleges.

aquavit my reference to donations was not to a "brown envelope" type situation - which I do not believe happens - but rather where a pupil has a very wealthy family with a history of funding buildings, lecturer posts, etc at the university. In those situations I wonder if the rules might be bent a little.

There was one such student in my college. His family had gone to that college for generations and had funded building projects, library grants and so on.

Might he have got in on his own merits? I don't know. He was bright, but incredibly lazy. I think he scraped a 2:2 in the end.

Obviously, this situation is incredibly rare. But it's still annoying as - as you say - it fuels the myth that if you aren't rolling in it you shouldn't bother. Which is SO not true.

Mind you, I can think of several admissions tutors who were known to put through certain physical "types" of student above others. (For example the geog tutor who always picked curvy brunettes... the history tutor who liked sporty public school boys... etc). I actually think this is far more of an issue these days than the money/connections issue.

"my teacher saidthat sort of shit gfoes down well on your personal statement"

Extra curricular activities are good for (1) showing you are capable of doing something other than academia and (2) broadening horizons so when you have your interview you are better able to see different angles/prespectives/put yourself in a character's shoes etc. Also - (3) it gives your interviewer something to start the conversation with.

I suspect she's not going to get anything out of her Wings of Hope, so while managing to achieve (1), she'll fail on (2) and the interviewers will spot her approach at (3).

Your son on the other hand can hold his ground will achieve (1) (2) and have something interesting to say at (3). He is also willing to speak his mind and argue back - which is what interviewers want.

Hope it goes well for him.

'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...

I think it is just rumour. In my town, the outstanding independent is within 5 minutes walk of the outstanding sixth form college but pupils don't leave the indie because they think they will be disadvantaged for Oxford/Cambridge if they stay at an independent school.

Thanks for the replies about sports degrees. I don't think that DS will apply for Oxbridge then: after studying and training, he would quite like to have some time left over for A Life.

"aquavit my reference to donations was not to a "brown envelope" type situation - which I do not believe happens - but rather where a pupil has a very wealthy family with a history of funding buildings, lecturer posts, etc at the university. In those situations I wonder if the rules might be bent a little."

Mmm, I can see that it might be, but I've never heard of it happening. The people I know who interview would be deeply upset if it were suggested to them that they should accept a wealthy candidate - deeply upset to the point of resigning, I think. But then obviously I only know moral and conscientious people!

GrendelsMum I agree that everyone I know would resign if asked to do this (and yes, not least to avoid being lumbered with the student!). Anyone who didn't resign would be the subject of a mass of gossip -- I don't see how it could possibly be a secret. One tiny part of the Oxbridge myth which is true is that it is full of people gossiping about their colleagues.

Minipie, sorry but I don't really buy the attractiveness thing either. It's so much work dealing with these students, far, far more than it would be worth to look at a pretty face (or whatever!) for three years. There are much easier ways to fraternise with your preferred physical type.

Back in the early 80's, I was the first person my school had ever put in for Oxford. It was a tiny all girls, non-academic school. A lot seemed to hinge on the entrance General Paper and the subject paper I did was unrelated to my course choice (but was one of my A levels). My school had no idea how to prepare me.

I got interviewed at a few Oxford colleges on the same day for a science subject when I'd only done Arts A levels. The tutor who accepted me at her college, asked me loads of science questions that I had no idea about, as my school was in the Dark Ages for science. So we ended up talking at length about Art and philosophising about life!

They accepted me unconditionally and I got only 2 As, a B and 2 Cs at A level. So I was a case of accepting the (presumably) promising candidate with potential but not such a good educational background or results.

Fast forward to now and my twin 9 yr old sons are desperate to get into my old Oxford College. However, they go to a v academically selective school and I think it's highly unlikely they'll make it. Neither is a genius.

Despite my own Oxbridge experience, I now feel angry that by bending over backwards to fund two sets of private school fees for my twins, I'm probably disadvantaging them from following me to Oxbridge - unless you get Brownie points for coming from a single parent family that counterbalances the fact they go to a private school and to one that's academically selective too!

Would it really make any difference if they left their independent school at 6th form and went to a state 6th form college? Wouldn't Oxbridge look at their school up to 6th form and deem them 'privileged' by the majority of their school years?

I attended Oxford with a 2E offer but I had passed an interview, an exam which was abive and beyond my A Levels and excellent predicted A Level results - not straight As though.

2E offers, IME were not given because of connections but academic excellence and as we would say today the X factor.

I was given a 2 EE offer...goes to show

I went to Cambridge in the 90s with a 2EE 'unconditional offer'. I attended for an interview, but no exam. It certainly seemed to be the norm at my college where everyone was interviewed.

There was a smattering of people with 'connections' and from well-known public schools, but most people were just bright, hard-working or (in my case!) lucky!

I was at Cambridge just over 10 years ago, and 2Es were still been given (I didn't get one sadly!), but my college (or so they maintained) gave them in exceptional circumstances to those they felt were excellent, but for whom the stress of a standard AAA offer would be too much and might lead to them missing the grades - and that these people were often from state schools, and so was a way of taking the pressure off them.

Don't think there were that many that got given though...

Seems Cambridge doesn't guarantee good grammar

This isn't a thread discussing David Milliband is it?

He who got into Oxford despite less than impressive 'A'-level results, via a scheme where pupils from "inner-city" schools received offers if they "impressed at interview".

I'm sure the sons of university lecturers need such leg-ups, given their disadvantages in life.

Sharp elbows indeed.

www.thefirstpost.co.uk/63652,news-comment,news-politics,the-mole-how-david-miliband-got-into-oxford-labour-leadership-race,2

Admissions tutors are not daft: they can see from the UCAS form whether the bulk of a candidate's education has been in the private or state sector. A sudden switch to the state that cannot be explained by reasons of subject choice, desire for a change, etc, would raise cynical questions, and would not enable the candidate to be seen in the same way as a student educated comprehensively throughout.

Similarly, there are state schools and state schools: pupils from St Swotty's Shireshire Grammar are not regarded as having had the same life chances as Innercity Sink pupils.

There are as many myths, sour grapes and misconceptions in independent schools about Oxbridge entrance as there are misconceptions in the state sector.

Quite a lot of pupils feel discriminated against, simply because previous generations of alumni sailed into Oxbridge unhindered. It has to be pointed out to them that when they achieve the same grades as a candidate from a disadvantaged state school, objectively speaking the latter will be the stronger candidate, simply because they have had to overcome more hurdles to achieve them, including larger classes, poorer resources, less well-resourced teaching. Taking the state school pupil is not discrimination; that's wise selection.

Similarly, it has to be pointed out that less-than-outstanding GCSE or A level grades when you have had gerzillions spent on your education in as close to ideal surroundings as can be created, means that you are either (a) not hugely motivated or (b) simply not very bright. Either way, you are not that attractive to an Oxbridge College. Some of them grasp this; others find these truths too unpalatable to consider.

I teach in an independent school; the state educated me (and will educate my children) and I didn't go to Oxbridge, but prepare students for prospective entrance.

The only people I knew at Cambridge who got in with low offers were on the "inner city" scheme.
They all got thirds and 2:2s.
Generally everybody who sat Oxford papers got EE offers in my day.

I know a lot of people who got 2 E offers, for reasons already discussed on this thread-more common at Oxford than Cambridge which scrapped it's entrance exam earlier, but there were exceptions depending on the college, the subject and the candidate- clearly Queribus interviewed better than me!!My understanding now is that low A-level offers are much les common. Also, Cambridge sometimes said "2E's and a STEP Grade 1"- well if you were only capable of 2 E's you'd have no chance of a STEP Grade 1 so it's ot really a low offer as such.

I dont know anyone who actually got 2 E's.

The "worst" A-level results of anyone I ever met at Cambridge (I went in the mid-nineties) was ABB.

You always get the odd slight thicky(and I mean, like, one per college) who is a member of overseas royalty and you sort of suspect might be there on the basis that his/her dad is paying for the new library, but on that sort of pay off, I can overlook it- the new library was VERY nice

I knew a couple of students at Oxford about 15 years ago who got average grades compared with the standard As & Bs and whose parents had made major donations to their respective colleges.

It backfired to the extent that both students struggled with the work and got mediocre degrees, plus weren't very happy.

Yes, in my day (late 80s) you either had to pass an exam and do an interview, after which you got a nominal offer of two Es - because basically by then they wanted you and you knew you were going - or you did interview-only entry, and got a high offer, usually AAA or AAB.

I have a close friend who is now closely involved with Oxbridge interviews, and he tells me it is very much done on merit. Those who would like to believe otherwise are usually just class-warriors and chip-on-shoulder Oxbridge rejects :)

I know a fair few people who got 2E offers, it wasn't that uncommon in my day and I'm only 25, so that wasn't long ago.

pag, just saw your post - I didn't do my English degree at Oxford but lots of my now-coursemates did. I bet your DS already knows, but if not, make sure he reads the course spec. and takes in how much old/middle english is on offer - it's a shock to the system if you're not expecting it!

Prince Charles and Prince Edward. QED.

I suppose it depends on who your connections were or maybe they got special brownie points for being head boys at Gordonstoun ...

Also, Clare Balding had this to say in The Independent about her acceptance by Cambridge:

"It's so extraordinary that I got into Cambridge. I got an A in my English A-level, but my grades in history and Latin were poor. I applied to Christ's College and was turned down. My father [Ian Balding, the Queen's former racehorse trainer] was very disappointed: he had got in with only O-levels!

I had two years out. I took history again and started riding in races. I rode eight winners in one season and nine in the other. Then I had tuition in interview technique at Radley College, where my brother [the present trainer for the Queen, Andrew Balding] went to school. I felt terribly comfortable at the Newnham interview and got in to read English."

BTW the bits about her father and brother were in the original article.

To be fair, I don't know what she got for her history retake but is still doesn't sound like she got 3 As and, unlike the princes, she did get a 2.1 for her degree.

Clare Baldwin got a 2.1 in her degree, she was riding in races AND she was president of the Union? No wonder her supervisor always commented on how clever and well organised she was. Clearly someone who was very good at one subject, and less so at the others.

There's an interesting article about how she was initially rejected and then accepted by Cambridge here:

www.alumni.cam.ac.uk/uploads/File/CAMArticles/CAM%2052/My%20Time%20at%20Cambridge.pdf

GrendelsMum - I pointed out that Clare Balding did get a 2.1 and it does appear that she did do well at Cambridge

However, from what she says about it, she appears, on the face of it, to have had average A-Level results (which is after all the issue behind this thread) and, while she suggests the reason she got into Cambridge was the tutoring in interview technique she got at Radley College (would that all state educated applicants could get such tutoring), I am prepared to bet that being the daughter of the Queen's trainer and the niece of the 17th Earl of Huntingdon did not go unnoticed.