How involved should you be once child at uni

[swimmer4]

Son isn’t revising for exams. Do we say anything?

If the best you can come up with is the deadline of Oct 15th in Y13 and a train fare for which schools have funds, then so help me God.

Yes Keneft I do know that private school kids are over- represented at Oxford but please, 'pre-filtering for parental support' now means being able to afford a train fare. That's a pretty low bar, even from the NE or NW or the farthest reaches of Cornwall. Schools can and do pay ahead. Ours does.

The impetus for drug use varies wildly from uni to uni.

Drugs aren't going to be eradicated anytime soon. Drug use is endemic and it's not exactly new.

Therefore, by the time you got to university 35 years ago (source: was at university 35 years ago) anyone with the slightest predisposition to not cope had been filtered off.

This is indeed partly true, but it does underestimate the underreporting of mental health issues back then.

And when I was an undergraduate 20 odd years ago two of my contemporaries from my Oxbridge college killed themselves. Several more suspended studies for serious mental health issues.

I still agree that Oxbridge students are much more likely to be able to get through academically, even when dealing with mental health issues - unlike students who have already underachieved before going to university because of personal issues.

Whoops! That was a very weird post (I'm cooking and typing, not doing well on either score).

So are your saying that there is a perfectly level playing field in Oxbridge entrance and kids from privileged families have no advantage at all? BecUw if you are, you are naïve in the extreme.

now means being able to afford a train fare. That's a pretty low bar,

For "able" read "willing".

And if you think that the price of a full price return (because Oxford interviews often start first thing and they are bad at providing night-before accommodation), often via-London is a "pretty low bar" then I suggest you find some brioche to feed the hungry with. It's potentially a couple of hundred quid. Being willing and able to spend a couple of hundred quid on a speculative trip to Oxford is pretty much the definition of "supportive".

Schools can and do pay ahead. Ours does.

Good. But can I tell you, on the assumption that you are a school teacher, that I would advise you to come into a university for a day during admissions cycles, perhaps for an AVD, and try to understand some of the problems we are dealing with.

However you measure their privileges it is clear that on average Oxbridge students are extremely privileged compared to the students at low tariff universities.

Of course there are some Oxbridge students from very challenging backgrounds, but whatever data set you use, Oxbridge takes far fewer "under-privileged" students than mid and low tariff universities.

It is more subtle to compare Oxbridge students with other high tariff universities - and the latter vary quite a lot amongst themselves from private school dominated (Bristol etc) to very international (LSE) to more state school entrants (Southampton etc). (This is why the TEF benchmarks were a nonsense - before having targets for completion, you need very detailed analysis of the entering cohort, not just their socio-economic demographics, but also other factors affecting their progression.)

So, are the TEF awards meaningless user?
Why does Bristol have a disproportionate number of privately educated students?

Oxbridge students are extremely privileged compared to the students at low tariff universities.

And they are extremely privileged compared to the students at high tariff universities, too. I'm not a sociologist, but I would bet that provided you tuned your detectors to the right frequency, Imperial and Trinity would not be too hard to tell apart.

Why does Bristol have a disproportionate number of privately educated students?

Fashion. It's become fashionable, and therefore offers have crept up relative to the absolute quality. It also has relatively high housing costs, compared to other metropolitan redbricks, and it is closer (in driving time) to west and south London than all the other metropolitan redbricks and all the other obvious "one notch down" alternatives to Oxford and Cambridge.

No-one is quarelling with the very obvious fact that Oxford and Cambridge have a disproportionatley high number of privately educated DC. However, to say that parental support is measured by whether or not a DC can afford to get to interview by train is such utter rubbish I don't know where to begin. We live in an area of the country where it's very hard to get to Oxford for a 10am start by train and all colleges always provide accommodation for the night before indeed the invitation letters usually strongly encourage it, to settle in. THis is wildly off thread but Kebneft, you're talking about stuff you clearly know remarkably little about. The problems of access start way before getting to interview but I think you simply had no other answer to this idea of 'pre-sifting for parental support' so just flung out a random idea on the off chance of fobbing off. Attendance at interview is not the issue. The issues start in primary school. And paying for a train fare is no guarantee of parental support. Please at least be credible.

I'll consider my head duly patted.

The problems of access start way before getting to interview

You know, I'd never thought of that. Thanks.

Apologies for poor typing. I'm now drying up - wet hands.

"The problems of access start way before getting to interview"

I suspect you are not alone in this insight. Train fares for visits/interviews is simply a proxy.

Of course I'm not, it's stating the well known obvious - as opposed to something ridiculous, such as that Oxford and Cambridge pre-filter for parental support, through the medium of train fares.

For those who aren't aware, schools have funds available for precisely this sort of thing and all Ho6 will be aware. There's no reason for fares to be claimed later; the school can purchase the ticket instead. Also, Oxford colleges do provide accommodation for the night prior to interview. In case a parent here has any concerns.

So that's seriously inept pre-filtering!

My observation is that bright students are more likely to attend Oxford or Cambridge if their parents place a high value on attending Oxford of Cambridge.

For those who aren't aware, schools have funds available for precisely this sort of thing and all Ho6 will be aware.

I am an external examiner for a top London department, which interviews (many, not all) applicants. They are sometimes told that pupils cannot afford to get to interviews, and that schools/sixth forms do not have funds available. The funds available are apparently insufficient - and prioritisation has to be used. Prioritisation seems to put Oxbridge and medicine interviews first, then others. The department concerned is discussing whether to offer more funding for interview transport or interview via Skype.

In any case the issue of whether there is funding or not actually misses the point: students have many misconceptions and these are often not being corrected by schools and sixth forms. In a grammar school that sends many students to top universities, it may well be the case that all pupils know to ask about funding for attending interviews and heads of sixth forms advertise its existence. Having done outreach in a wide variety of schools and colleges, this is simply not the environment that exists in many sixth forms.

I agree with user. I know a girl who is the brightest mathematician at her school for at least a decade. Her maths teacher persuaded her to put Cambridge down on her UCAS form on the basis it was "just one choice". Real confusion then when the offer included STEP. A kind MNetter whose son self studied STEP a couple of years ago kindly passed on links for internet resources and maths camps. The girl's other choices are based on places people she knows have gone, not particularly highly ranked for maths. This would not have happened had either school or parents been more Oxbridge focussed. Apparently she is now enjoying STEP preparation as it is more interesting that school maths, but it is almost certainly too late.

(Plus she had the idea that Cambridge and Imperial would be too "nerdy". )

Oxford does not actively pre filter for parental support. However the process that takes a child from birth to Oxbridge is a constant filtering process. As is the process that takes a child from birth to any top flight university.

Hmm, I was about to say we are very hands off with ours. And we are, in terms of nagging them about the workload.

But when DS fell out with his flatmates and was basically being bullied in his second year, we spent 2k on alternative acommodation, which pretty much stopped him from dropping out and turned things around to the extent that he really enjoyed the rest of his uni time and got a good degree.

And, knowing DD1 can be a bit "wobbly" we encouraged her to go to uni less than an hour away. And yes she has wobbled and done a fair bit of nipping home. But we've encouraged her to seek help and some counselling and she's on the home straight now. (I think drugs have played their part with DD's mental health though).

Fortunately DD2 seems to be taking uni in her stride. But we did subtly remind her that if she went to the same city as DD1 she might end up becoming embroiled in her crises, so she wisely went further away.

I don’t think Bristol, UCL, Durham universities (and others) are a modern fashion. They have always been seen as universities you apply to as well as Oxbridge. I appear to be older than everyone else posting! The modern phenomena are Warwick and Exeter.

Is there any evidence to show that contextual offer students are more likely to drop out or get 2/2 or lower? Or is this anecdotal from a Bristol student? It wasn’t my DDs experience there. That’s anecdotal too, but has there been any study of these students and their outcomes and whether they do, in fact, need more support? I think many of them are self-starters and very resilient.

BB, my son (at Bristol) says those with contextual offers seem then to get very high A level grades, A* and A even so the fact they were offered BBC doesn't matter as Bristol seems good at choosing those who even with a low offer then get high A level grades. I presume they go on to do as well as anyone else who has As at A level in their final degree.

I also agree those universities are not a modern fad. Traditionally it was Durham if you didn't get into or try for Oxbridge. I applied to Durham Bristol Manchester Leeds and Leicester in the 70s for example.

Is there any evidence to show that contextual offer students are more likely to drop out or get 2/2 or lower?

No. But different students will face different challenges. For example former boarders are used to being away from home and may have arrived with a large friendship group. Others from different backgrounds may not have the same support networks, may not have the same technical skills (maths etc), and may not have lived away from home before. My understanding this may be all the more so for international students or those from some under-represented ethnic minorites.

I have no doubt that many on contextual offers will outperform those without. Indeed Bristol's experience is that state school pupils, on average, outperform those from private schools. However that does not tell you everything about an individual's experience. DS certainly felt it was far easier to start his course with FM A level, compared with friends who had self-taught FM AS (his course's old minimum requirement). Students will flounder for different reasons, or rather an accumulation of reasons, but others have suggested up-thread, things like part time work, etc which are more common with non MC students, will contribute. The aim will be to unpick risk factors and to support those most vulnerable.

"I appear to be older than everyone else posting!"
Fight you for it!

In my day it was Oxbridge, St Andrews. Durham, a wild card (Southampton was popular in this slot) then Hull in case of utter A level disaster.....

Kent was the "disaster" choice where I came from. It was supposed to be cold and on a remote hill, which is the sort of thing we based decisions on.