Parent of oxbridge candidate-peersupportneeded

[funnyperson]

OK so my DD is applying to Oxford for entry in 2011 and has a 75% chance of getting rejected so I am told by the Oxford website so I reckon a new thread would be helpful for us parents who may end up with joy or grief but in any event need to keep sane enough to support our loved ones. Any tips on maximising chances of success at this stage?

funnyperson - 'Also thinking rather wryly about one of my opening posts in this thread. Hah. I thought I was being paranoid. No, it transpires I was being insightful and foresighted.'

Actually, I wish I'd noticed this thread earlier - I'd have answered questions where I could... but my LO has been ill so no MNing time.

Add message | Report | Message poster Heroine Mon 27-Dec-10 14:28:45
btw University of Warwick research showed that state-school pupils with sub straight As are more likely to get a first than private school kids with straight As...

Heroine, what are sub straight A's as opposed to A's?

Bearcat, I think this was probably what heroine was referring to.

It found that BBB from a comp. resulted in the same degree result as AAB from a grammar or independent (so not quite state vs private - you have to lump grammars in with the independents). ie: 2 grades different - this was across all universities.

At the most academically selective universities (presumably oxbridge or equiv.) the grammar/independent students needed between 0.5 and 0.7 of a grade higher at A level than the comprehensive students to achieve the same degree result.

What's interesting is how people who have evidently had no experience of 'all the russels' can so easily say ' all the russels are (in effect) perfect'

What is clear is that (traditional 'graduate') employers believe they are getting the best from the brightest, but in fact they are getting 'those with the best a-level results who applied to one of five universities' irrespective of a) the inherent ability needed to do those a-levels in spite of other factors b) the fact that it is statistically a poor decision to apply to oxbridge if you are an outstanding state school pupil and c) other factors like subject performance, working in an environment suited to you for study, liking your peers, having a particularly strong learning relationship, academics working in precisely you area etc etc.

The best pupils are often ones who don't make a cliched choice based on what parents want - I have worked with cambridge grads and shared a house with two - one of these was really bright. The other two were dull, domineering, and had poor people skills (in fact one would self-harm if she wasn't given full domination of almost every situation). One of those two was great at stuff in her subject (Economics) but terrible as a) transferring and expanding economic understanding to other non-economic models and b) completely useless at understanding that there are otehr perspectives both on economics and on subjects that economics is one tool to understand the situation amongst many. i.e neither of the last two were what I would call 'russell group material' but were being employed soley because they went to cambridge.

Its frightening that some of our top employers so drastically misunderstand statistics, but then they are perpetuating a system they benefitted from - the question is, are we, as a country, benefitting from putting less-bright people with the right background through a system that were it granted to the brightest and best from state schools would accelerate our country's performance?

Heroine

'the question is, are we, as a country, benefitting from putting less-bright people with the right background through a system that were it granted to the brightest and best from state schools would accelerate our country's performance?'

I think this is exactly the right question.

Your examples bring out another point though- perhaps those who are academic and very good at detailed and in depth research into an aspect of a subject, to a level likely to produce new knowledge and innovations, are not necessarily those with the best social skills or even the most employable.

Perhaps those who need to focus on academe do better in a protected environment. Both sorts of student are needed- those with high EQ and high IQ. Those with both are probably extremely rare. I suspect the state school system fosters the aquisition of EQ.

Sorry, acquisition of emotional intelligence leading to a higher EQ.

A nice thing- DS went to a party ( lots at the moment because everyone is back from their first term at university) and met a few Cambridge people- new friends of an old school friend- and (to his surprise) found they were 'safe' and easy to talk to. ie they were normal people.

Dr Lollie what is an LO? Hope whoever it is gets better

DD and I were chatting and reflecting that is is a good thing that Oxford send out notifications so soon after interview and before Christmas. It means there is ample time for the news (good or bad) to sink in, to discuss with the family, without having to run the gauntlet at school, and then recharge batteries before immersion into mock exam revision etc. The Cambridge people have a much longer period of waiting and can't really relax over Christmas and are back at school having to face peers all through the offers/rejection process.

LO = Little One, funnyp (ie small child)

Agree that getting the decision before Christmas is kinder than after (but feel very sorry for those whose letters were delayed this year but who weren't emailed to compensate - I am stunned that some colleges didn't email automatically as well as writing, esp when some actually phoned!)

My kids have several old school friends who are Oxbridge graduates & they are generally exactly the same person afterwards as they were before they went - clearly "normal" people do go, as well as the other kind

Ponders one of my best friends from school (I have two) went to Oxford - we had a lovely time playing a silly board game with our children/er I mean young mature articulate intelligentsia yesterday. The only thing is.........neither of us is normal We both hate parties.

Two of my mums best friends from uni went to Cambridge (mum went to LSE so still a little hazy as to how they know each other: postgrads I think) We all still meet up - grand children included- and have a good old cross generational heated debate on current affairs and play charades every Christmastime.

Yes I felt sorry for those who didn't get the news promptly too. Emailing a scanned in letter is probably sensible these days but would have needed planning. Perhaps they will plan for bad weather next year (which would be good because sunshine will then be guaranteed!).

It would be great to have an updated article in the Historical Review or similar by an Oxford or Cambridge expert on how to write a fantastic/outstanding history essay at

1. A level

2 undergrad level.

My DH (Cambridge graduate)is dead normal except for in his DS's lives!
They love him really!
It has been known over the years for some of his none Cambridge mates to take the piss out of him,but it's always in good humour because he's a normal good mate who likes a bit of a laugh, a drink, parties and rugby (probably not in that order).

funnyperson - i agree - last year it was AWFUL - a real cloud hanging over all christmas and new year very very stressful

the only good thing was that the oxford people have to suffer much more the 'well- how did you do?' bit because by the time the cambridge ones were out everyone had lost interest a bit

re the 'normal' people - DS had a complex that they were all going to be 'weird'
I placated him by saying 'YOU are going aren't you?' As it turns out there are an awful lot of 'normal' people there - although maybe slightly higher than average number of 'different' folk

LO = my 3 month old son. He's had a nasty cold.

I'm on maternity leave hence no admissions for me this year.

I expect different colleges send decisions in different ways as some have more staff than others (bc some have more money than others...). At mine, the admissions staff are run utterly ragged at this time of year. They're trying to streamline it, but it's still a huge job for our small team.

There are definitely some weird people at Oxford, but lots are quite normal and nice too!

For anyone reads this next year looking for tips about admissions this may help

and this

Enjoy the little one and the maternity leave!
I will never forget entering the scary world of mums when my first born reached playgroup age. There are no people as competitive or as protective or as materialistic or as SCARY as other mums when one has a few degrees. The reason is that the degrees are of NO consequence whatsoever beside how good a mum you are or how well turned out after a sleepless/sicky night or how quickly you have managed to get your figure back or - really scary- what age your child sits up/says first word/walks etc etc. And, possibly, the cost of the buggy/nappy bag etc. Also the saab/merc car. And then when you go back there is the world of nannies And if you have degrees the other homey well connected wealthy mums who have married alpha males will go out of their way to demonstrate what wonderful mums they are compared to geeky you. All quite quite scary for a person of little EQ such as myself. I never got the hang of it really. I always wore the same fleece jacket thing from asda and that was a BIG mistake. At the 18 year NCT group reunion recently I was left out. So pleased to have left it behind now the children are leaving school!!!!!! Years of avoiding the mummycompetition at the school gates are nearly OVER! I have made two and a half really good mummyfriends and lots of friendly acquaintances. I have some lovely shared memories of children running to hug me after school, and nativities and carols services and concerts and plays and rushing to get to parties on time and so on. It is enough. Does anyone else feel like this?
DrLollie this will not be you as I expect there is a like minded peer group of learned mums in university towns such as Oxbridge??? Is it true that you bake lovely cakes and have civilised teas with Earl Grey or Lapsang in rooms overlooking medieval quads with other wives, sharing college gossip?

Are there colleges which are better than others for dons and their wives? In terms of living/social circles/funding/salary etc? Do tutors live in college? If not, is accommodation provided by the college? Do colleges provide child care?
I mean I know that at one level one has to turn up and give at least one seminar a term to the undergraduates but I was wondering what it was like for families of more full time staff. Lyra in the Pullman books ran free in the college grounds in a lovely way. Its not really part of this thread so you don't have to reply as I don't mean to be intrusive. Do students meet families of tutors at all?

I don't mind answering, Funnyperson.

Colleges have differing levels of wealth, from some being very strapped for cash to others being very wealthy.

This affects students and staff. Wealthy colleges can do things like provide textbooks for students free, they might give more generous scholarships or bigger travel grants etc.

It affects the extras staff are offered, like housing grants and research support funding. There are different types of academic position, the general model for humanities is a fellow is paid by university and college jointly. You then have to give lectures (for faculty) and tutorials (for college). The standard is 10 hours/week tutorials, I think but I'm not sure what the average for faculty is. Fellows also have to be responsible for their college students' welfare, so they meet with their students every term at least once and keep track of how they're progressing. This ranges from helping with general academic development to a telling off for not working hard enough to help with problems when they're struggling. We also have welfare staff who help with non-academic problems, counseling staff for psych/emotional issues and college nurses for health issues.

For staff, college will offer things like housing grants to help pay the cost of living (Oxford and Cambridge are pretty expensive to live in). Some colleges can also offer housing, which is usually a flat on college grounds or in a house nearby, but this differs across colleges - I sure some offer amazing housing and others less so. I wouldn't live in college as you wouldn't get much work/life separation.

"dons and their wives" - - there are lots of "dons and their husbands" too.

Some colleges have nurseries so yes sometimes the children are in college having walks etc. Staff also bring their children in sometimes and there are college functions (like Guy Fawkes) that are family-oriented. My students have all met my LO and get very excited to see him (they even bought him some very sweet presents). They've also briefly met DH and he does come to dinners in college sometimes. So in my experience it's a fairly family-friendly environment, which is partly why I wanted to work here. When DS is bigger I'll be bringing him in to play in the college gardens for sure!

I've also met my students' parents in some cases, and we have lunch with them at graduation so I get to meet them all and tell them how wonderful their children have been to teach (pretty much always true in my experience).

DrLollie what a lovely post. Thank you.

Happy New Year to posters and their children, wishing all a smooth and delightful transition with the young people into University.

nottirednow

"you may not know that some admission tutors don't look at those who don't pick a college" - what?? if you don't pick a college your application would be randomly assigned to a college. If they didn't offer you an interview the faculty would assess you when they assess the pool and send you to another college if your application made the cut off.

"You may not have been abroad, have designer clothing, the latest computer games, the same gig and festival tickets. So you are unlikely to be part of the "top" group at school as you can't share the same experiences." I don't see how any of that is relevant to academic or interview performance at all.

"which put up subtle barriers." who does this, exactly, and why would they? and the evidence??

"It's just window dressing a system designed to ensure that those with money keep their positions." just have a for that one.

For the record, I know of people who've been admitted who come from very poor families, from families where no one has been to university (let alone Oxbridge) and who've been to very weak schools. But whatever, feel free to believe what you want.

nottirednow- some of the things you mentioned are about what might make a sixth former 'popular' with other sixth formers (designer clothes and festival tickets)

But here is a thought which I am still reflecting on as I write.

Success in an Oxford interview depends partly on self confidence.

But what increases self confidence? Is it only the admiration of materially minded peers or are there other things?

For example my daughter found that she had to make a decision that the Oxford interview/admission prep was something she wanted and so had to spend time on and do herself- independent of what peers or even teachers thought- there were some jealous peers and some negative teachers anyway. Her confidence was increased because she did the prep. My daughter went to her interview in a dress from Primark. Only an example and because we were on a budget.

Realising you have said other complex things too.

not tirednow i do not agree with you at all

We are NOT a poor family - nor was ds deprived of anything as he was growing up

He had only been abroad alone as a teenager (funded entirely by himself -no family hols) and had no experience of oxbridge at all

ds went on one open day at each of oxford and cambridge and no others

we have no family links or knowledge of 'the system'

Looking back on here MN was a huge source of support for me - reading and learning before ds decided to apply but when he did apply it was pretty much 'blind'

Cambridge and undoubtedly oxford - provide a HUGE amount of statistical information on applications/subjects/colleges which enabled ds to make as informed a choice as possible

We did suffer some paranoia about the whole rich kid /poor kid thing but more in terms of the state vs private school thing and you do WONDER about the whole application thing and if it is fair???

DS did win a place at his chosen college.

I will never know what helped or indeed hindered him but i do believe that a lot of what is said is gubbins and that if you look at the information out there you can learn for yourself. Every child has internet access albeit at school or in the local library and i think -to steer a prospective candidate in that direction will work wonders in opening their eyes.

You sound a little defeatest tbh

'earlier on this thread one of the admission tutors said they don't consider anyone who doesn't make a choice of college - subtle discrimination.'

I've never heard of anyone doing that - it's a bit odd, TBH. Even if they did, how is it discriminatory against poor applicants? Applicants don't choose colleges for lots of reasons and there's no correlation between poverty and failure to choose. And even if a tutor did ignore an application like this, there are systems in place (ie the pool and random allocation) which would sort this out.

'A young person's ability to speak out is influenced by whether anyone listens to them when they do so...[etc]'

Hardly Oxford's fault. If they do apply and I interview someone who seems lacking in confidence I adapt the interview to help them as much as possible. I've even re-interviewed people the next day when I don't feel they've done themselves justice to give them a second chance.

'Of course the occasional student from a poor family is allowed in - have to have some window dressing. But the statistics (link further up the thread) show just how few that is.'

The statistics don't show that at all.

You seem to think there's some sort of conspiracy here, as if we all sit around discussing ways to keep poor students out. If you took the time to really look at all the steps we take to widen access, in fact if you knew what you were talking about at all, you'd know this was utter garbage.

But you are clearly just bitter and have no knowledge of the processes you're commenting on.

I've done my best on this thread to shed some light on a process people find (understandably) opaque. I've got better things to do with my time that try to explain something to someone who willfully wants to believe what they want to believe regardless.

and

...

These days admissions tutors at Oxford don't even know whether students have chosen a college, or if they have just been allocated one. I am an Oxford admissions tutor.