Universities bribing dcs with free gifts - has anyone else's dc had this??!

[headfried]

My ds got an unconditional offer from UEA but it was his least favourite; hasn't yet decided on his firm.

Had had various letters, calls etc from UEA - ds is predicted good grades so I can see why.

But today, ds got...a free pair of Apple headphones through the post from UEA!

Real ones.

And the best bit is...ds is now thinking of going there as a result.

Anyone else's dcs feeling the lurve?

Maisypops,
I grow up on FSM, so did wife, we are 1st generation home owners, Ds will be 1st generation to go to university. No RG university would offer him a place. If he hadn't been through CAMHS, he may be on line for 120 tariff course.
He has taken reversion notes on our Easter holiday and is revising through Tonsillitis.
Also his university is top 50, only opened fully in 2005 and is in top 20 of HEPI widening participation league and only takes less than 5% privately educated kids.
Too many bright, WC and lower MC kids are told to take low end jobs or apprenceships, which don't lead to decent jobs or proper qualifications. No one ever tells Eton or St Pauls boys or Girls, don't go to university, take a job in MaDonalds/Tesco instead, it will be better for you in longer run. So why do you all say this to kids like my DS?

DS2 graduates from UEA this Summer. He got an unconditional offer from them but it was more towards the end of April/beginning of May iirc. He didn’t get any headphones though. His offer didn’t stop him working for his A levels.

He’s loved his course and he’s done so well. He’s got a job in Norwich ready for when he graduates. I think he’s had the best uni experience that he possibly could have.

https://www.takeyourplace.ac.uk/

Thank you Kitten.
I believe the HEPI report was by a UEA professor.
Sorry OP for derailing, but we can't all have high flying kids.
Back to gifts, Ds student union just emailed/messaged him on FB to offer all accepted students on unconditional offers, first chance for their shag bags free of charge. Does that count as a bribe, unisex too, same for either male or female, plus info on local STD clinics and university/student union services. Plus contacts for domestic abuse and rape helplines.
Good for them to offer such practical help and advise, grannie is shocked

user1471450935 I get your point about what was said (I'd focussed on the very very odd comment about pointing and laughing) but I do think it would give you more credibility not to generalize from the particular. High achieving DC aren't 'better' than less high achieving DC - but nor the other way around. Both prejudices are equally bad.

Also, plenty of high achieving DC at good and not so good schools achieve highly despite rubbish domestic backgrounds and ill health. I've known a fair number personally. Top grades don't always mean DC have had a silver spoon.

user: no one has told your DS not to go and do Criminology! No one has said he shouldn’t go to Lincoln (I think you said in another thread). I do think you are over reacting.

The earlier brief discussion was about History and not Criminology. There are differences in where these degrees are offered.

Your DS can choose whatever degree he wants and future employment by the police will depend on a great deal more than his degree. Many of us come from poor backgrounds but we make it in the end.

The reason many students are keen on RG, even for nursing at Cardiff it appears, is mainly due to perceived job prospects and the greater difficulty regarding getting a place on sought after courses. Many universities have strengths but teaching hours are often greater where students have CCC because they have to be. People don’t necessarily see this as a strength. A friend’s DS has 6 hours at Sheffield. The same subject elsewhere would probably be greater. He is teaching himself to some extent but that is a good skill to learn.

I don’t see why it matters how many privately educated students a university has. I guess tribes appeal to everyone, even those whose parents had FSM. I never understand why tribes have to stay together but I agree with Maisey that going to the best you can is the way forward, regardless of background. Ambition for all should not be stifled by parental background or an unwillingness to fall far from the tree.

No one ever tells Eton or St Pauls boys or Girls, don't go to university, take a job in MaDonalds/Tesco instead, it will be better for you in longer run. So why do you all say this to kids like my DS?
Ummm.... except i'm not telling kids not to go to university so have no idea what you're going on about.

What I'm saying is that universities offering lots of unconditional offers has bugger all to do with widening access to HE and everything to do with getting bums on seats for their £9000.

What I'd rather see is a genuine look at thr system to increase social mobility. There is a vocabulary gap between more and less advantaged children by 3. Students in more affluent areas tend to have more access to a rounded extra curricular diet. Schools in leafier catchments tend to offer more academic subjects.
There's a huge difference in cultural capital between Eton etc, leafy state school and disadvantaged state schools. What I'm saying is instead of saying 'ah well just sling tje state kids some unconditional offers and take their money' why don't people actually look at doing what needs to be done to start closing the education and cultural gap?

I do think Maisy, that students also limit themselves. They won’t consider some universities for the reasons stated in this thread. There is a them and us culture and it starts from way back.

When Sure Start operated, middle class parents took advantage. It wasn’t targeted to those who needed it. I agree with what you are saying, and we need to think about how all children can break through the barriers they face. Free headphones hardly does that.

Look at the HEPI report, researched by a professor at UEA, and look how all the RG and Oxford and Cambridge come out at or near to the bottom. They used GINI, I think, data/results and hepi says the best way for universities to increase social mobility is to teach all kids from all backgrounds together. That would seem to not happen in certain universities,

I would agree about vocational courses as I have City and Guilds, ND in agriculture and ANCA in dairy herd management. But these course are seen, IMHO wrongly, as second class by many, as are BTEC's compared to (I)GCSE's. Plus the last three neoliberal governments (New Labour, Tory/LibDem and Tory) have all cut funding into these courses/qualifications.

Bubbles and Maisy you claim you never told my Ds not to go to Lincoln, but both of you claim going to low ranked universities/112 point or lower courses as pointless or not worthwhile. Lincoln comes from a College of Higher Education roots, so wasn't even a poly and his course is 112 standard offer. So both meet your requirements as not been great.
Your right about joining police, but criminology offers numerous other career paths, and He can study abroad in Sweden, Netherlands, Usa 2 options or Canada. Plus there are links to Europol and Interpol.
Past graduates from his course now, shock horror, work for GCHQ, MI5&6 and advise ministers on COBRA.

Maisy
Because the people who royally fucked over disadvantaged students through loss of free post 18 education, YES you MR Blair and Yes You Messer's Cameron, Osbourne, Clegg and two lesser amounts Gove and B Johnson, all went to expensive private schools and they and their backers, have no reason to increase social mobility, they only have their places at the trough to lose.

Also look at Lawyers and other similar careers, it's not the one's on apprenceships. ATT and part time conversion courses who make it to the top. and that's what you and bubbles want kids like mine to accept, not a chance to get a degree and then fight the system from the inside, take a lower qualification and never be let in the 1st place.

But it's late and I have derailed this thread too much already. Ds has ordered his SHAG BAG and was wearing his freebie T shirt to bed, going back to the OP original point
Sorry OP

quartermooninatencenttown - Think they are missing a trick - free clubbing vouchers would be a winner

Won't someone give a thought to the poor seal cubs?

greathat - I am sick to death of unconditional offers. They are being handed out like sweets. The kids then go for them and all effort stops. ~disgruntled a level teacher~

I've had this conversation with teachers so often. I've fed back to my own university how much the practice alienates schools and sixth-form colleges but the people at the top intend to give out more unconditional offers in the future. The largest institution in our region gives out lots of unconditional offers (and is consequently detested by every head of sixth form for miles around) and the rest get dragged into an arms race.

In my experience it is usually the newer universities who are dishing them out in a bid to get bums on seats.

That's not my experience. The University of Birmingham (a member of the Russell Group, which many people around here seem to think is a mark of quality) made approx 3,000 unconditional offers last year.

argumentativefeminist - The Russell Group is a load of wank anyway

I'm putting that on all my PowerPoint slides from now on. Thanks.

My university recruited a marketing person from local industry recently. She had no previous involvement in HE so had to do a lot of research to make sure she understood the market she'd be working in. The most significant thing she got from it was a feeling of utter incredulity at the way the Russell Group's entirely baseless claims to superiority were taken seriously by the government and the public.

you claim you never told my Ds not to go to Lincoln, but both of you claim going to low ranked universities/112 point or lower courses as pointless or not worthwhile. Lincoln comes from a College of Higher Education roots, so wasn't even a poly and his course is 112 standard offer. So both meet your requirements as not been great.
Except i didn't say it was pointless.

I outlined that when an average has to be a 2:1 then the average performance of less academic students is not going to be comparable to the average performance of highly academic students. (The average performance in a set 5 class is not going to be the same as the average performance in a set 1 class. Basic facts there. It doesn't mean it's pointless set 4 studying but it's disingenuous to claim the average working level is the same).

When you add in a number of unconditional offers (which in my experience tend to go to middling students) then the cohort is likely to be different than a cohort where students have busted their gut to get there. (These are the children of the controlled assessment generation, do this piece of work eleventy times so school can secure your grade, then get lots and lots of intervention at GCSE so you don't have to revise. Get to A level and expect hand holding through the course. Then get an unconditional and it's fine for you to coast like you've done through school because someone in life will give you an easier ride).

I've seen countless middle ability students who have had offers for better courses and could have got in with hard work, get unconditonals for less good courses and opt for that course over the better one. And much as some like to pretend that people pay no attention to where you went to uni, people do. That's life.

Skiiltan
I said in my experience.
Universities (of all rankings) have been giving unconditionals for years but they have tended to go to people who have already got their A Levels and are doing a gap year, adults who've done their access course already and are going back to uni, practical courses such as music/art/drama where the applicant has already demonstrated skills beyond their a level grades

Last few years there's been an explosion of giving unconditonals to Cish grade students prior to sitting their a levels. Given A levels are going linear now that means some universities are dishing out unconditonals based on personal statements, GCSEs (which many weaker-middle students are coached and spoonfed through with rafts if intervention) and predicted grades (which are often inaccurate and a best chance grade). Hardly a marker for social mobility here. They just want the money.

And much as some like to pretend that people pay no attention to where you went to uni, people do. That's life.

A friends DS had a phone interview terminated when they found out he went to Exter, this was the year before they joined Russell Group

Exeter

They used GINI, I think, data/results and hepi says the best way for universities to increase social mobility is to teach all kids from all backgrounds together.

This is one report.

There is also considerable evidence for my subject areas (mathematics, physical sciences, computing) that students coming in with grades below the average for the course are much more likely to fail/get low passes.

A university maths course for which most students have A stars in maths would be unkind to take students with, e.g., Bs in maths - there is years of data indicating that such students are unlikely to cope with the pace and depth of the course. It is much better for a student with BBB to get a 2:i from a mid tariff university than be accepted by a high tariff university, and fail to complete the course.

Widening participation for high tariff universities is just not as simple as allowing students in with lower grades, when the latter are much more likely to drop out. And it is very, very difficult to find out in interviews/tests when a student with lower grades (from a challenging background) is likely to get through a high tariff course and when they are not.

bruffin
Exactly.
I'm not saying it's right to have a 'these are the unis we prefer' as a blanket rule, but people can (and do) have their own preferences. I did 2 courses (one at a good uni but not top and one at a top uni) and I could tell the difference as a student. I entirely understand why graduates from the 2nd were more sought after than the 1st.

Entirely anecdotally, you can tell the difference in subject knowledge of the trainee teachers by uni. 1 local uni in particular seems to turn out graduates with 1sts who have awful subject knowledge. I've trained some brilliant trainees from there, but almost every trainee there's been an issue with has come from the same university (interestingly it's one who are throwing unconditonal offers around to C/D borderline a level students).

DD was offered a cash incentive from a uni if she accepted them and got predicted grades. Thought about it (with hindsight not long and hard enough) turned them down and went elsewhere. As I went to said uni in the Middle Ages when there were no incentives, not even a pair of socks or a stick of rock, I am now wondering if I could have claimed the cash for myself as a sort of retrospective incentive.

Dd received a copy of Persuasion from Exeter, very clever link to their English syllabus. :)
DD and DS are both first generation to go to uni, I've had nothing but support and guidance on here. It is true that I've had to do huge amounts of research into applying to universities but I do feel strongly that we can hold ourselves back by insisting on an 'us' versus 'them' mentality.
Shaking our heads and saying other people don't want our DC to do well will hold us back, ignore them, if you look hard enough there are many more people thrilled for your DC and their achievements.
Both of mine applied to Cambridge, both received 4 offers from top 10 universities because the very worst that could happen was the university would say no.
Mine didn't get offers from Cambridge, DD will try again next year, but we had endless support from then.
DD's best friend turned down her Cambridge offer for an unconditional at Birmingham, because the stress of trying to be perfect affected her deeply and she was struggling to study at all.
Equating high achieving with privilege is a slight on all our DC.
Sorry for the ramble, toothache! 😖

Christ, this thread has derailed.

I got an unconditional offer (2nd year now), probably because my course has 7 people on it and they were desperate to recruit so they could run it. Yes, to get the money out of us, but also to give us the opportunities of this very niche course.

At the end of the day, if more unconditional offers means more "average" students going to uni, so what? You either sink, swim, or just about keep your head above water at uni, and only a little bit of that is to do with your academic skills.

You don't have to be exceptionally smart to go to uni, and I don't think you should have to be. If you coast through your (usually rote learning, uninspiring) A Levels and then get an opportunity to develop a deep, long lasting passion and skill in your degree subject - where's the harm?

MaisyPops
I said in my experience.

And I said this isn't my experience. What's your point?

Universities (of all rankings) have been giving unconditionals for years but they have tended to go to people who have already got their A Levels and are doing a gap year, adults who've done their access course already and are going back to uni, practical courses such as music/art/drama where the applicant has already demonstrated skills beyond their a level grades

But this isn't what anyone is talking about here. We're talking about unconditional offers being made to students who haven't completed their A-levels yet. This is done by high-tariff institutions as well as lower-tariff ones.