Why didn't your child apply to Oxford or Cambridge?

[ZeroSomeGameThingy]

www.theguardian.com/education/2014/may/27/oxbridge-state-school-numbers-falling

Given that most people who apply will not get in - there's no shame in an unsuccessful application. So what are the real reasons for this apparent reluctance?

DS1 is very academic and at a leading indie, and so would until recently have been encouraged to go the Oxbridge route. However, Oxbridge is now seen as the fallback 'insurance' choice for those without the extra spark to have US university offers, so the brightest are opting for those.

TheWordFactory - That's interesting about Bristol, fortunately she doesn't have an aversion to private school pupils (she was privately educated from Years 7-11) it was more the attitude about Oxbridge being far superior to other universities that put her off. Plus I do think that although she's generally a confident individual (is on the Student Union), she didn't want the (perceived) extra pressure, either during the application process or if successful, once there.

Top ten would make selective private schools redundant wouldn't it? No one would chance it anymore, and would prefer to stay in a school where there was a mix.

Do they do selective in the states?

Zero if you want to understand the situation described in the article, I think you're asking the wrong question, largely of the wrong people.

You're asking a group of people actively spending time discussing parenting and their DCs' university choices, from a fairly informed perspective, why their DCs made a particular choice. Your title prompts self-selection for people whose DCs might have considered Oxbridge - and whose parents know and can talk about this.

Thus you are addressing a pool of people whose DCs could, on the whole, have applied to Oxbridge if they wanted to. The only question is 'did they want to? If not why not?'

What makes you think that volition, amongst the well informed and supported, is one of the more significant barriers to Oxbridge raising their state school entry rate?

Don't you think there might be structural, demographic and cultural issues, some mentioned here but mostly pertaining to people who by definition would not be discussing their DCs university choices on Mumsnet, that prevent many pupils from even thinking of applying?

So the question is, how well have the universities identified those issues and effective ways to tackle them? How are they feeding back to government and schools about this and working together on this issue?

Why should universities do that? They take (some) of those who apply to them - if people are not applying that is a matter for the schools, not universities - why are schools not encouraging applications?

That is not their view of the matter. They are concerned about numbers from state schools applying and make some effort to increase them.

That is the subject of the article the OP linked to and on which she hoped we would base this discussion.

lottie... Clearly I have a more rose-tinted view of MN than is sensible. I was actually hoping that at least a few people facing structural, demographic and cultural issues might feel inclined to discuss them here. (Along with those for whom it's one choice amongst many.)

I didn't ask "Why didn't your child want to...?" I'm horribly aware that "volition" isn't generally the primary factor (outside a tiny minority.)

Given that the Guardian article was rather brief and anyway repeats the same old stuff, it seemed to me that one might get a more nuanced range of answers on a general parenting forum. Answers, in fact, that might help these particular universities to see where they're going wrong. (Because Word is taking copius notes...)

(But I still want all lectures delivered in Latin.)

TheLateMrsLizCromwell, I quite agree. Our local comprehensive had never sent anyone to Oxbridge until 5 years ago. A new head came in (ex-Oxbridge) and shook things up. They now send 2 or 3 a year. The new head had the confidence to think what formerly was "unthinkable". No other members of staff had been to Oxbridge and they simply were not confident enough in their own abilities to prepare kids for those universities.

I think it is too daunting - if DD who was part state/part privately educated feels that she wouldn't fit in, and that the application process/environment once there was too much, then you can only imagine how inaccessible it could feel to someone in a very poor comprehensive with parents and teachers who don't know how to support them.

Neither I, nor DD's dad went to university, nor indeed our parents or grandparents, (so DD will be the first generation to go) and I think as a result our expectations are different. It's hard enough to understand what life is going to be like at a regular university when you haven't experienced it yourself, and Oxbridge seems even more removed and unreal.

Well, if for example, one of the barriers is parents not being informed, encouraging or even interested in their DCs going to Oxbridge, then you won't hear about that on here - when asking parents about their children.

You may get the odd snippet about people's own experiences in relation to their parents' attitude and other relevant issues in their own background but that's not what you asked about. Nor about experiences from the state sector in particular.

So, yeah, general discussion related to to topic, interesting enough in its way but not really related to the article you linked to.

zero - They need to talk to teachers at state schools in disadvantaged areas. Kids usually need one adult in their life to encourage them to do something different from their peers. Teachers could have an important role in that.

Also a grant fund for the travel to interview, for children whose parents are unemployed or on FSM, would also overcome a practical barrier.

BlueStringPudding, the good news is that your DD will not have disadvantaged herself by going to Bristol. Top employers love the place and it's a fun university. The kids I most worry most about are those who could have gone to a top tier university but settle instead for their local (and perhaps not highly-regarded) university. They are disadvantaging themselves through lack of school/personal motivation/confidence.

If you are a very bright child in a state school you are probably very conscious of it.

You then go to Oxbridge and your confidence will be knocked for six. Unless you are exceptional, you are really probably going to feel very ordinary and no longer very bright.

The Oxbridge experience is wonderful but I don't know if I'd recommend it for the above reason.

Plus if you never have an exceptional career you will spend your life feeling you've not achieved your potential,

^If you are a very bright child in a state school you are probably very conscious of it.
You then go to Oxbridge and your confidence will be knocked for six. Unless you are exceptional, you are really probably going to feel very ordinary and no longer very bright.^

Alternatively, as is the case with the children of three of my friends at / graduated from Oxford

• graduated and now teaching
• graduate this year, going to do a PhD
• graduate next year, going to do a PhD and younger sibling going to Cambridge

there are LOTS of bright kids at state schools because LOTS of us cannot afford private and most bursaries at private schools go to families who went to private school.

Speaking for my (very academic, sporty) sister

1. I wanted to do Medicine and Oxford/Cambridge were not the best universities for that subject;

1. I'm into live music and gigging. Much more of a scene at a red brick/ metropolitan university;

1. It's not for people like me. I'd fit better elsewhere.

Ime there are many families (usually maintained sector) who do not think it possible. This may be overcome if schools provide incentive and support, but too many don't and are quite negative.

Then there is significant extra work to do in preparation for testing and interview so that cuts out those who like to fly by the seat if their pants or who have other priorities. I can understand that someone who isn't confident might wonder if their efforts will go in rewarded and just Not bother. If you can do that though you can probably do the work when you get there. THere really is quite a lot of support and the College structure helps here.

Some of the reasons listed above are a bit odd and sometimes incorrect. I want to agree with the poster who said the op is talking to an informed demographic and therefore the wrong demographic, but I think she is being over generous to some of the contributors. Of course there are sensible reasons for alternative choices, but I am wondering, for example, what feelings would make someone say that at their children's school Oxbridge is an insurance for those without the spark to go to the US.

Because quite frankly, if any of my children DID get into Oxford or Cambridge, they would not be able to go because we do not LIVE in Oxford or Cambridge and you just cannot borrow enough to live in either of those places, nor get a job that pays anything decent as you're competing with a bunch of cheap students.

The preparation for testing and interview - are there resources to help students prepare for that? If your school does not provide taht support, and many don't, and your family are too poor for tutors, then there needs to be some advice somewhere for those applying.

So sad though that so many seem to lack confidence about fitting in. Fine if you are after a large city, instead but there are so many lovely, down to earth students attending that the persistence of the idea that one won't fit in is a shame. The pastoral care is strong too.

"there are LOTS of bright kids at state schools because LOTS of us cannot afford private and most bursaries at private schools go to families who went to private school"

I didn't say there weren't (I should have balanced this by saying that the brightest will also stand out at private schools) . If you are really bright you do usually stand out within your small school. You don't once you get to somewhere like Oxbridge. I can only speak for my own experience though.

calmet I'm inclined to think it might need something more fundamental than sending Ox/C reps to meet resistant teachers who may have no relevant personal experience.

Instead of wasting time tinkering with the literature syllabus it might be worthwhile, for a decent government, to find a way of ensuring that all schools, not just seniors either, have access to (or employ) a teacher who has personal experience of the application process - and who isn't bitter about it... Someone who is prepared to talk to parents and children as early as possible both to smooth out misconceptions and to show how practical obstructions might be overcome.

(I'm still not saying "Oxbridge" is the only way forward - but clearly the superbly educated are all flitting off elsewhere and it isn't pleasant to think of these places becoming preserved in aspic.)

If you are really bright you do usually stand out within your small school.
Indeed, but in a school with a cohort of 300 or a college with a cohort of 1500, the leap to University is nothing like as much as it was for bods like me who were at a gels school with 40 per year in the 6th form.

Also nowadays many, many more people are at universities from all over the world.

ZeroSome
But the government do not WANT good careers advice at all schools, as otherwise the plebs would start to get uppity

The prep that some schools do is overplayed a bit. There are sample tests to practice on the website. They can't really be taught much as such, but rather familiarised, though here can be an element of technique.

THe interview is like a one to one lesson. There isn't a trick to them. Other students can feel demoralising - some behave unpleasantly and I often hear candidates say they found that aspect off putting but most won't get in - one of mine said only the nice ones were there once she arrived at the start of term!

Zero If you move away from my experience as a parent to experience of mentoring organisations and university access schemes then I would say the issue is the lack of role models every bit as much as the lack of parental encouragement or even school encouragement and support. If you are from another culture in a school where the vast majority actively do not want to pursue academic work let alone university / Oxford then these students will tell you how hard it is to not just access the cultural capital to enable you to go through the admissions process but also the motivation. These students are not in their everyday lives exposed to fellow pupils, students and graduates who understand their interests, ambitions and challenges and what it is like to be different from their peers and to share with them the possibilities not just at Oxford and RG but at all sorts of outlets for their talents.

"The project targets those pupils identified by their schools as having academic potential, but who largely come from households that face inter-generational economic and social exclusion, as a result of poverty. This exclusion can deny them the information and self-belief needed to either continue education post age 16 or to access higher education, especially to UK’s most competitive universities." www.acdiversity.org/

Encouraging state school applicants to apply would be a blunt instrument, neither Oxbridge or other universities distinguish between good schools in leafy suburbs with mainly middle class pupils whether state or private. Our local outstanding comprehensives and sixth form colleges have no problems motivating and equipping both middle class pupils and those from less well off backgrounds to apply, there is a sort of critical mass of shared knowledge and motivation within their community, even without the necessary encouragement at home. It is getting into the inner city schools and underperforming rural comprehensives to find the pupils who would really benefit from being equipped with that information and self belief.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-27539473