Despite having the right grades, my child is not applying to Oxbridge because ....

[TalkinPeace]

• she wants to live in self catered accommodation
• she does not like the small sizes of the colleges / social units
• having to go back to college for lunch while doing a lab based degree does not make sense
• the whole gown and formal dinner stuff smacks of coat tails rather than standing on own feet
• she does not fancy fighting through hordes of tourists while moving between buildings
• having a tutor picked by which college they are based in rather than their research specialism seems very odd to her

Also, for what she wants to do, the course at Oxford is not that well balanced
and Cambridge, despite having a fab course was not a place that felt like home when she visited for 2 days.

So she will be putting other Universities on her form and taking a great deal of stress out of this house.

For what its worth, those of her friends I've chatted to are also ruling out Oxbridge in favour of other Unis because of the first four points.

What are other people's reasons for ruling out Oxbridge, despite having the grades?

My daughter had the grades. She went to a very high achieving grammar - her friend who was a year older got seven grade As at A level (no A then) - she took two at night class. She was rejected from Oxford as she wanted to do a language which isn't usually studied at school and she didn't have any languages, not even English Language at A level, though she had As in a few languages at GCSE. So just wanting to go and having the grades doesn't necessarily mean you can get in.

So my daughter's reasons for not even going to the open days, never mind applying, were that she worried that she would feel out of place. We're in the north and she felt she wouldn't be taken seriously. We don't have a lot of spare money and she didn't want to feel like the poor relation. Mainly, though, she was put off at the thought of mixing with so many public school boys.

She went to Manchester, loved it and got a First. Lots of public schoolboys there, of course and she did secretly like the fact she'd done better than them at exams, despite their parents spending £300,000 or so on their education. (This was after her own education had been questioned by them - ie asking which school she went to and dismissing it with a "Never heard of it.") I don't think asking someone which school they went to was something that would occur to her unless she met someone from her home town, when she'd just ask in case they had friends in common.

talkin you really won't get too many people focussing on where their DC are not applying.

Instead, they're focused on the positive reasons they're choosing other places.

Once a student has made their choices than that's that. Why would anyone spend time trying to build a case against one of the ones they didn't choose? .

The only ones who do that, are the ones who can't get past it. Because their focus is in entirely the wrong place.

Cambridge is a "tiny town" ?
I live in a small town (popn=12k).
Whole thread is a bit of stealth boast, 'course.

Well for my first degree I went to a different and often sneered at Uni (as did several of my later friends at Oxford).

The degree I did with the same "title" as an Oxford one, was very different and had modules which made me highly employable. In at least one job I had afterwards they employed me because of those modules, and would have wanted someone to from Oxbridge to have done some kind of conversion - as Oxbridge do not teach that aspect of the subject.
I'm not totally sure my original Uni still does...

I would judge on the course (including nitty gritty) and how it matches future ambitions. And aspects like Big City/small town - and chances for a particular hobby etc. as major factors.

You and your DD have been criticised as the reasons are just not true. I did forget to mention that in my "historic" Oxford College almost all rooms have access to kitchens - except where fire regs will not allow.

Fair enough talkin - I'm just not clear what's so wrong with everyone's replies.

But perhaps it doesn't matter. I'm sure she'll be happy wherever she is, really. Most people are.

It's funny you say that mummytime - my sister did a mfl at a redbrick, followed by a legal conversion course (I forget the acronym) and then worked in a city law firm. She worked abroad in the country of her language degree when employed by the law firm, along with some Oxbridge graduates. She said the Oxbridge alumni spoke more 'classical' versions of the language, as opposed to the more modern, business version of the language she learnt at a redbrick. I imagine the latter would be more useful in working life.

I was offered a place to read Engineering at King's College in Cambridge and I turned it down for the following reasons (I got the grades so I could have gone)

I wanted to do a year abroad and they didn't offer that (I eventually went to Vienna university for a year and loved every minute).

I needed to earn money and they wouldn't let me have a job in term time. (I ended up working 10-15 hours a week and still got a 1st class degree)

I didn't want to have to study general engineering for two years when I was pretty firm that neither electrical or mechanical interested me (I ended up specialising in building structures)

I stayed overnight in halls before my interview as I had a long journey and my interview was 9am. Got the piss taken out of my northern accent and state school education by a bunch of tossers. No doubt they were not representative of the general student population, but it was pretty devastating to a shy 17 year old.

Bristol (where I did study) felt like a vibrant, happening place with an up to date course and a good balance. Cambridge felt stifling and too small.

Of all the decisions I've made in my life, I've regretted a lot. But never turning down that offer despite many many people being appalled that was throwing away such an opportunity.

Can I just point out that Cambridge has a higher proportion of state schooled students than Bristol.

No idea. And I did say that I'm sure they weren't representative. But they were fucking cruel considering they were 20/21 and I was 17

Out of interest, why do Oxford and Cambridge persist in making students choose one or the other? (and get away with it)

Why do they have a different admissions timetable than all other Universities?

I accept that they are the top two Unis in the UK over all, but not in all courses.
Why have the other top Unis not kicked off about it?

Yes, SheGotAllDaMoves, though Bristol has a bad reputation for that, too

Hi OP. I had the grades to apply to Oxbridge and didn't, for a range of reasons that now with the benefit of hindsight don't really stand up.

I'd been miserable and lefty and isolated at a fee-paying school for my GSCEs and left there in a huff to attend sixth form college. I encountered all sorts of snobbery about that from teachers and friends at my old school. I was told in so many words that my education (and future prospects, etc) would suffer.

As it turned out, I had a great time at college and came out with straight As at A level (this was long before A* came in). Initially I didn't want to go to university at all, so didn't apply anyway until 18 months later.

I told myself that applying to Oxbridge would be as good as admitting that I'd made a mistake about school, that education elitism was horrendous, that I'd already benefitted too much from it, that (if I'd been accepted) I would have been taking a place away from someone who deserved it 'more'. I think deep down I was probably scared that I wouldn't get in. I had no fear of interviews or exams, having spent years doing them at school, but I was scared of challenging myself and fairly lazy.

It's taken a long time, and a lot of exposure to other (very good) universities, and academics from all over the country (and the world), but I do sort-of regret it now. Not weep into my pillow regret, but a sort of fond, oh-you-fool at my younger self.

No doubt in my mind that being educated at either Oxford or Cambridge is something that if you have a chance to go for and you even slightly want to, you should.

If she doesn't fancy either then she's in good company - lots of students with good grades opt not to apply. On the other hand a lot of students with good grades do apply and don't get in, because grades are necessary but not sufficient.

DS1 (a scientist) says that in terms of modern Oxford, at his college as well as several others whose names he reeled off, you can self cater even in first year. You also don't have to come back for lunch. You also don't have to attend formal hall. Tourists are only a minor fact of life and no-one has to fight their way through them. And once you get to your research year your tutor is designated entirely by your area of research, not by your college. Also, both Oxford and Cambridge are huge universities in terms of raw numbers, so I'd have thought the scope for making like minded friends was significantly better than elsewhere, especially with the initial springboard of the college to start your social life off.

Just countering those things, as it would be a shame if misplaced reasoning put others off.

It is a matter of annoyance that the media focus on Oxbridge when their state school stats are better than some of the highly selective London universities and Bristol etc.

Plus Oxbridge is really quite economical compared to HOR in many places.

I'm also wondering why she is worried about the size of the colleges - surely that's a similar size to whatever halls of residence she ends up in elsewhere? I socialized with exactly 4 people from college in the 6 years - all my friends were from different colleges who I knew from my course (Nat Sci) or clubs. And of the large number of couples I know who both went there, only 1 couple were at the same college...everyone managed perfectly well to meet lots of people outside the college.

Colleges can be as much or as little of your life as you want - I didn't eat lunch in college more than once in 6 years (the food was really terrible 25 years ago), I wore my gown 3 times (matriculation and 2 graduations). I self catered in a tiny kitchenette in college for 2 of the years, then had places with kitchens for the rest.

Your tutor isn't responsible for your academics - that's your Director Of Studies. And chances are he/she won't teach you anyway - that's done by supervisors who will probably be postgrads for the first year and lecturers afterwards. By the third/fourth year doing independent work you will be able to choose your supervisor for that part who has a research interest in your area. But don't knock postgrads as teachers - some of the worst teaching I had as a first/second year was by lecturers!

If the town is too small for her that's fine - Oxford is bigger but if the course there doesn't work then also fine. But lunches and college size are bad reasons to choose.

A quick question for those who say they self catered while living in college.

Had you paid for meals as part of your fees? So were you effectively paying twice?

Looking at the Kings website
www.kings.cam.ac.uk/study/life/food.html
A microwave as the main cooking facility is less than I had at my red brick 30 years ago (we had communal kitchens with 4 ring stoves, even in the catered halls)

why she is worried about the size of the colleges - surely that's a similar size to whatever halls of residence she ends up in elsewhere?
My Hall of residence had 850 students then and has 1400 now
80% undergrad

You don't pay fees - you pay rent plus a kitchen fixed charge. In some colleges the latter includes an allowance for a certain number of meals but in many colleges it does not include any meals so you are not committed to any. Again rent plus kitchen fixed charge is cheaper than most other universities. If kitchen fixed charges are such a big issue you can choose your college accordingly as they vary quite a bit.

In practice I would be surprised if somebody would have the energy to cook dinner after every 9am-6pm day of lectures and practicals or during exam revision time. It would also be a bit strange if a student never wanted to eat in college with their friends. Those who have a number of meals included in their kitchen charges do use them up over the term, even if they mostly self-cater.

I was a graduate and had to buy meals on top, I would buy a booklet of tickets.

The undergrads did have to buy some meals eg. 1 or 2 booklets, but that would give say 20 meals, they only had to buy extra if they wanted to. The meals could also be used by guests (if you signed up for them quick enough) or I suppose sold on the "black market". No one kept tabs. And a nice cooked for you Sunday dinner was a treat, and when you are in the middle of an essay crisis rolling up to hall to eat was nice too.

I accept that they are the top two Unis in the UK over all, but not in all courses

But in pretty much every subject they teach one or both are in the top 3 if you look at, for example, the Guardian league tables. There's no other university that begins to approach that level (except Imperial, which is a much more narrowly focused institution, and UCL on some assessments). In terms of overall teaching and research reputation they are head and shoulders above any other British universities, bar Imperial. Look at, for example, the THES world university rankings: Oxford 3, Cambridge 5, Imperial 9, then nothing until UCL at 22. I say this as someone who teaches at another university, so not in my interest to do so!

As for the admissions timetable, I suspect that they've always done admissions before Christmas (for as long as they've done interviews, that is). Other, newer, institutions have developed admissions processes later because that works better for them.

From your link:

You don't have to eat cafeteria food, though. There are shared kitchens ('gyp rooms') available in most accommodation, usually equipped with fridges and microwaves. The larger kitchens may have ovens or hobs. In some newer accommodation these kitchens can be a good social space, with large tables and modern facilities. King's has a number of allotments for students to grow food so you can even eat your own vegetables if you want to.

So self-grown and self -catered.

www.queens.cam.ac.uk/life-at-queens/domestic/accommodation/undergraduate-accommodation
Gyp rooms are equipped with a refrigerator and electric rings and are only intended to provide for light cooking. No ovens are provided and self catering is not encouraged on the central site.

Yes, of course the college writes this because they like the students to eat from the canteen to ensure that it doesn't run at a loss. I'm pretty sure there were lines like this in my college's info packs.

But in practice many students cook, some occasionally and some often. This is the advantage of talking to undergraduates at college open days - you can find out what they actually do.

Maybe your DD should simply choose her college according to her criteria? Plenty of Oxbridge colleges have full kitchen facilities for UGs, some don't.

It does sound as though she (and you) is coming up with random (and spurious) reasons for not applying. That's her prerogative, of course.

Socks Am amazed you had that experience at Kings! Kings was c82% state school in the late 90s / early 00s. And a lot of the 18% were very quiet about it. Hand on heart there were more openly gay / bi people in Kings than openly privately educated.

It's a pity you didn't mention it to the students who were there in the holding room the next morning. It would have made their week. A vigilante group would have been formed within minutes! Articles would have been written in our college paper There may even have been a sit in! (In the bar - we had a lot of sit ins in the bar.)

Ok - I'm joking a bit here but Kings students were generally very proud of its inclusivity. And we did spend a lot of time searching out evidence of lack of inclusivity in Cambridge as a whole. And generally being very disappointed when we couldn't find any. When the college looked like they were going to put our rent up we had a lovely time shouting about how it was a terrible blow to inclusivity, all went on rent strike and had several (in the bar) sit ins! Happy memories!

However, you were totally right about general engineering. Dh suffered through two years of mechanical torture. (Although - in fairness - he eventually specialised in a different area to what he had applied for everywhere else in the first place so it was a good thing he did.)