How Far Backwards Are Oxford and Cambridge Bending For State 6th Formers Where You Are?

[SeekEveryEveryKnownHidingPlace]

The last time Oxford and Cambridge were in the news for their largely white and privately educated student body, I remember a lot of talk about how they 'bend over backwards' to widen participation.

So I am surprised that the session where I live (how to apply, what it's like, secrets of successful interviews etc) delivered by an Admissions Tutor from Oxford is happening at the most expensive and exclusive private school in the city. Other sixth formers can go, and our school has let anyone interested know about it, but something about this doesn't scream 'WP' to me.

I know there's an argument that this school probably has the Oxford contact, it works fine this way, if everyone can go then what's the problem... there are three private sixth forms, one state college and four state 11-18 schools here: it had to be somewhere.

But the message this gives out is - private schools are where you go, to go to Oxford and Cambridge, and Oxford and Cambridge are where you go from private schools. The link gets made. The very vast majority of state sixth formers here will never have been through the doors at this private school before: for some of them, it might actually be quite intimidating. The whole thing just suggests an inextricable link between private education and these universities.

So I wondered whether this is the norm, or just us? Anyone?

It's obvious to most people where the unfairness lies but a SE bias suits most MPs and other influential people because they send their dc to schools in the SE. We have people like you Battleax saying it's our fault for not applying while conveniently enjoying the benefits of a more monied education.

Something is going better in the NE, (compared to NW, Wales, NI etc) not in terms of application volumes, but in terms of offer rate. So that sticks out and that's interesting.

Application numbers per region, is a big sticky multi-factoral tangle of a situation. There's nothing magical about the sheer fact of being in a particular region, I.e. standing on a particular bit of soil.

It's about schools, uni outreach, parental encouragement, perception, class, confidence and a dozen other influences that come together.

I fucking give up.

I think you're probably meanings in to what I'm saying that aren't there and making assumptions about me that aren't accurate.

I'm certainly state educated, so are my DC and I'm from a working class area of that helps you out at all.

while conveniently enjoying the benefits of a more monied education.

Oh just saw this bit "monied education" indeed.

Get lost I received my (flawed, Thatcher era) state education with lumps of plaster regularly falling on my head. I was (am) an orphan. I paid my way through my (non Oxbridge) degree by doing bar work and financed my higher degrees as an office temp.

Most of which I've touched on MN before.

Could we possibly get back to the data now?

I am talking about the money per pupil spent now. I went to a comp in a mining town during the miners' strike. My home town is one of the most socially deprived in the UK. However that doesn't have any bearing on the issue we are debating

Just to go back to the issue about it being hard/harder at Oxford and Cambridge, from the page before - compare weekly essays that you have to discuss with tutor and peers, and defend, to 2 essays per module (so six in a semester, spaced well apart, three around the middle, three around the end), that you submit electronically and on which you receive confidential feedback - which is the norm in most places now!

I'm in no doubt that it's very hard work, and more intensive than friends will experience at some other places, and very different from anything undertaken at A level. Not to say it's impossible, or that it's a bad model, but definitely tough going.

I am talking about the money per pupil spent now. I went to a comp in a mining town during the miners' strike. My home town is one of the most socially deprived in the UK. However that doesn't have any bearing on the issue we are debating

No. You invented a -completely false - backstory for me based on not liking something I said.

You made a fool of yourself.

I think defending them in a 2:1 tutorial is what really makes it challenging OP, more even than having to churn them out, and that isn't something state education prepares them for.

I made no assumptions other than you are more than likely based in the SE.
I couldn't give a flying fuck if you think I made a fool of myself.

I made no assumptions other than you are more than likely based in the SE.

That was dim enough. Also the "monied education" nonsense.

Have you considered just engaging with the issues and the data?

So you aren't in the SE?

No I'm not. I'm from London but not any more. Too poor for London now.

I think defending them in a 2:1 tutorial is what really makes it challenging OP, more even than having to churn them out, and that isn't something state education prepares them for

I imagine it's a combination of both - and no, I agree, it doesn't.

I wish I could storm the Sutton Trust with my views. I don't think the problem lies in students not getting in from the North, or from ethnic backgrounds, or who have been on free school meals. The problem for me is the vast swathe of lower/middle income kids who no longer stand a chance because of lower standards in schools and a complete lack of cultural capital bestowed on children today.

Where I live no one (or very nearly no one) is poor, but part of a huge mass of middle incomers living in a bland cultural wasteland. Of course kids aren't going to get into Oxbridge (for Arts subjects) if they have never had the opportunity or encouragement to stretch themselves.

I shall now trot out my usual anecdote about the time I was a school governor and tentatively suggested that instead of only offering pop music to the pupils (lunchtimes/assembly/productions) perhaps they could be introduced to a bit of classical/folk/jazz etc etc. The Head shot me a murderous look and said "The pupils cannot access classical music. It isn't in their experience and isn't fun." Whaddayado?

I'd vote for you as Access Czar Lady

Not that Czars are elected but you know...

Thanks for that link @Battleax. Really interesting, and handy interactive map. I think that applicants from Scotland are disadvantaged by the mismatch between the educational systems at 16-18, but there are several pockets of low rates.

To get the full picture, it would also be useful to see applications as a % of the A-level entrants, by area.

I know one very bright woman from the North - East who was offered a place by Cambridge but declined it, and went to uni in the North, because she didn't feel she fitted in with the other applicants she met at interview. I expect many others are put off from even applying by such worries, but it's hard to see what the unis can do about it other than keep sending out student ambassadors to encourage people to apply.

We're North Wales, and it's not so much the particular sixth form centre that's doing the promoting, as the government itself. They have a gifted and talented prog for those with a top certain % of GCSE grades. Several schools in the area working together as a hub to present after school events for debate and looking at applications/choosing Uni/putting together a personal statement.

There is a residential trip to Cambridge later in the year. And a conference for Oxbridge speakers to come up here too.

DD has Cambridge in mind. I'm not sure she's going to be so suited to living that far away from home as she's a very insular type of person. On the other hand she's forever slogging away at her work and enjoys school work and studying.

One of the super high results girls in our area didn't go to Oxbridge. She instead got a full scholarship to Stanford USA.

Just a quick post on the side issue mentioned by tefal. That is absolutely my experience too.
My DD attended a Uniq summer school last year and has since met up at various houses at get togethers. DD was amazed at the background of, and available opportunities for the other students. She reckoned that only her and one other chap are "properly poor". None of the others had experienced the invisibility that poverty forces upon you. This is certainly not stemming from a chip on my shoulder. Almost to a T, the kids have houses with multiple bedrooms with ensuites, multiple floors etc with parents either Oxbridge alumni or similar and working in solid professional and academic jobs.
I also do not wish to appear ungracious. Uniq gave my daughter a fantastic boost and she received an offer for 2018.
Why are the kids from mediocre/shit schools and economically deprived backgrounds not showing up at summer schools? Are they applying? Financially, I am looking at options to help DD, as I can't currently support her in this way. Is the fear of the cost and snobbery from private school kids putting people off?
Just wondering out loud. As you were

Financially, I am looking at options to help DD, as I can't currently support her in this way. Is the fear of the cost and snobbery from private school kids putting people off?

Very first thing; FORGET cost. If you're a low income family, the bursaries at Oxbridge are seriously good. Accommodation costs are some of lowest anywhere in the UK and terms are short.

I'm not exaggerating. Cost won't be an issue if she can get a place.

Second thing; The best way to beat the inequality is to be ballsy. Potential applicants rule themselves out in droves for fear of not fitting in. That's what you have NOT to do to be in the race. Tell her not to be intimidated.