Is Oxford only for rich families?

[Foslady]

My dd is taking GCSe’s Next year and her school are having various universities in to talk to the pupils. When the Oxford representatives came they mentioned that due to circumstances for one of the colleges there was a very generous bursary you can apply for. This particular college has the course that dd wants to study and now she’s thinking ‘why not?’. I want to support her in all her choices, academically she is quite gifted, and yes, there is a huge time period before university application, but I don’t know if we are the ‘right’ kind of people for Oxford. Up until recently I was a lone parent on a low wage. I now am with my partner but money is still tight (and to be honest if she was awarded the bursary it would be amazing , a massive help). I don’t want to ruin her dreams but at the same time, in reality, are they feasible or am I just kidding myself?

Oh, Bubbles... "It’s not offensive to say or think that former industrial areas where higher numbers of people have not accessed higher education have DCs who are not as bright as the stockbroker belt in Surrey! It is fact!"

AHAHAHAHAAAAA! Stockbrokers, so well known for their intelligence.... bwahahahahaaa.

So glad that so many people on this thread have already commented to say that Oxbridge is definitely not just for students from rich families. It totally isn't!

Your daughter may also want to look at top Ivy League colleges in the US, as these also compete for the brightest students from all backgrounds and offer very generous scholarships to those they really want.

It seems sensible to me to take a rain check after GCSE results are out before getting too focussed on either Oxbridge or Ivy League. OP's DD is still in the first year of Y10. There's a long way to go.

Well said goodbyestranger. It's worth noting that pupils in deprived areas often attract a pupil premium so in fact have more money per pupil than grammar schools.
Beanbaglady- I can comment on BME in our local private school in the London area. The majority of pupils are not white British. I would estimate 50% are white of which the majority (60%?) were either not born in the UK or if they were, are the first generation in their families to be. They have a remarkable success rate for Oxbridge and Medicine.

DD also not white British if anyone cares

BeanBagLady

My DC went to a very academic London private school, though one which was very ethnically diverse. Close to 50% went onto Oxbridge, and most of the rest to London/Ivy so I have personal observation, though based on a specific sample.

1. If I was to guess at what differentiated the borderline applicants between who gained Oxbridge places, and who did not, I would say confidence. It was almost as if Oxbridge expect, at least their public school applicants, to be of a type. Cambridge, in particular and most maths/engineering/physics/economics students opted for Cambridge, seemed to like the destined-to-be merchant bankers, who would wow at interview, and were less willing to scratch below the surface to discover the shyer nerdy type with a real academic passion for their subject. I hope/understand that this is different for state school applicants, who are not expected to turn up to interview "fully formed", but could see why they might see others' confidence as off-putting.

1. It seems to matter not one jot in terms of getting to the next stage, whether they went to London or Oxbridge. In DS' subject, for three years in a row, the applicant with the strongest interest in their subject (as suggested by involvement in the school subject society) went to LSE and all did extremely well, playing active roles in University life with DS now in the US studying for a PhD. Those who went to Cambridge have duly headed for the City, one landing a very good job indeed. The same seems to have happened to those who went to Imperial, with DS' closest friend now pursuing a really interesting academic path. Another friend who did not want to stay in London, despite 5A*s, so headed for a University Bubbles does not approve of, had a great time and has again done very well.

In short, I suspect those that have the ability/grades and a willingness to engage and work hard do well on any well regarded course. And there is always an advantage to be closer to the top in a less selective cohort. That is if Imperial can be regarded as a less selective cohort. One relative, deeply disappointed to be rejected by Cambridge, was then very surprised to find he was the only one in his Imperial tutor group without at least 4A*s.

My caveat with London is that it is a different style. If you are able to put yourself forward, join subject and interest societies, attend voluntary lectures, go to lecturers' office hours and so on, there is a huge wealth of resource. In almost any subject just about anyone who is worth hearing will pass through. But if you don't, no one is going to go looking for you. (Having said that follow up on non attendance plus performance needed to pass exams is reasonably tough, so you can't coast.) The fact that the majority of overseas students are there to learn, and with a scattered student body social life is centred around campus, means that the learning culture is perhaps more dominent than elsewhere, which DS loved but perhaps not for everyone.

1. I think there is a culture shock for many London kids who study elsewhere. DD, who is white, was shocked by the lack of ethnic diversity at her University, and at how ethnic students (British and overseas) tend to stick together. Both she and DS had ethnically diverse friendship groups at school. DS continued to have friends from all over the world and from different backgrounds. DD has done well to avoid the very visible clique of posh ex-boarding school girlies, hanging out mainly with state educated Northerners, but even so friendship group is mainly white British. It took her a good year to settle, and though she is now very happy, she is still planning to spend her intercalation year in London. Our neighbours son equally regrets not being brave enough to opt for UCL over Oxford. He found the latter quite "small town".

I hope that helps. It is very much personal observation and I know others won't agree.

MotherofDragonite you may be a bit out of touch with the City. You can't go off for a three year commission these days and then ring up your old school chum for a job. Those days are long gone.

Also, the stockbroker belt refers to a geographical area. I'm not sure it actually exists as a concept these days. It was never peopled exclusively with stockbrokers anyhow but also with medical consultants, lawyers, accountants, bankers etc etc. Anyone who earned enough to live in the relative peace beyond suburbia in a comfortable house preferably with a pool in the garden and golf and tennis nearby. It certainly wasn't a pre-requisite that the parent was either a stockbroker or stupid.

I suppose the thing is Needmoresleep that your knowledge of both Oxford and Cambridge is at second remove and yet you do talk them down as though you have direct experience. I have to say that many, many, many of my DCs' friends from Oxford are studying for PhDs and indeed pursuing a wide range of other careers; by no means all have gone for the City. And someone's got to go to the City, the City needs good brains. Also many, many, many grew up in London, but didn't suffocate in the small town atmosphere. Indeed most appeared to flourish.

bpisok I avoided mention of pupil premium funding because it is supposed to be directed, not just poured into general school coffers.

Needmoresleep I would also take issue with your characterisation of what Cambridge is looking for with Economics, if the boyfriend of one of my DD's knows anything about it, which I assumed he does (or did, he's now moved on from Cambridge, having arrived there from Oxford where he got the prize for best PhD). He spoke extensively about the interview process and what they were looking for and how they tried to divine it and it was all about scratching beneath the surface and absolutely nothing to do with merchant bankers, let alone brash confidence. He also expressed that view that both he and his senior tutor found some of the public school references didn't match the less impressive reality, so they were obliged to scratch - the references were too misleading to be useful.

I may have omitted to say in that post that he taught at both Oxford and Cambridge and interviewed prospective applicants at both.

Goodbye, I was very careful to caveat my post by restricting it to observation only. Your DDs knowledge of Cambridge educated economists is clearly more intimate than mine (DH is an Oxford educated economist) but is again observational. It happens that we know a good few DC who went through London Preps and academic private schools who ended reading economics at Cambridge and without exception all had fathers (not mothers) who were something senior in the City and who themselves exuded great confidence. Plus some very strong academic economists who ended up elsewhere and who did very well. I was also careful to describe "borderline" applicants. The exceptional (presumably including your DC and their partners) will gain places regardless of background, however normal distribution suggests that plenty of applicants will be on the margins.

I was posting in response to questions from a previous poster who asked about London. Yes my knowledge of Oxbridge is secondhand, but given all your many DC have gone to Oxford, your knowledge of elsewhere cannot be that strong. The strength of this forum is that everyone can contribute individual knowledge, experience and opinions, and the occassional post that suggests that Oxbridge is not always the be all and end all may be helpful. I have no idea why you and Bubbles have a seeming need to win every argument, as if to prove you are better parents. My post was appropriately caveated. I hope it was helpful to some. Beyond that I am happy for you to win.

It's not about winning Needmoresleep, don't be daft, it's simply about redressing the balance and giving balanced information. That's the point of MN after all. If you read my posts, I've never once done London down or been snippy about it because a) that would be absurd, given the reputation of the best known of the London unis and b) as you rightly say, my knowledge of them is more limited. So I would be in the same position as you are vis a vis Oxford. I'm not convinced that except on the very broadest level the uni experience of our own generation is relevant any more, as far as admissions or social mix goes. Things have moved on.

I don't see why poor Bubbles has to brought into this! You ticked her off the other day for daring to say something about med school applications on the grounds that she doesn't have a med school DC, so I'm really only saying: do as you would be done by!

Obviously our friend’s experience is only anecdotal however those were her genuine reasons (she came to live with us for 6 months after - she’s a very close friend, probably DD1’s closest! More like family really.) I did mention in the post but didn’t word very clearly - it wasn’t so much the backgrounds she struggled with (which obviously are similar to Durham students) but the smugness, arrogance and confidence she found there, and the competitive culture (fostered by the work in college). She may just have been unlucky but she had a really unhappy time, and she did find continual denial of privilege incredibly frustrating. She is white, her mum is a teacher who cares deeply about her education, she grew up going on holidays (including abroad!) and to theatres/galleries/museums, she went to an ofsted outstanding school. She acknowledges all these privileges and finds it ludicrous and frustrating that kids with way more than that are often unwilling to...

I think with Durham it also varies more from college to college - if you look on here
www.google.co.uk/amp/s/thetab.com/uk/durham/2018/02/28/these-are-officially-the-most-private-school-durham-colleges-40390/amp
It’s clear that significantly more of the privately educated pupils attend one of three colleges for some reason...

It’s not to say she found Durham a walk in the park socially either - when we were standing in the queue for registration DDs were with her and they said she was on the verge of tears because of two very smug people next to her.

She just found it more manageable and less pointed.

I suppose it's possible that those DC you know who are confident and with a parent who is Something Big In The City may also have the sort of intellect Cambridge is seeking.

I have nowhere said my DC are exceptional. Or their partners (actually some of their partners probably are. They're exceptionally nice anyhow :)).

I definitely don't lay claim to being a good parent. I think on balance I've just about muddled through, with some really quite difficult patches.

PancakeMum that's interesting. I wonder if the 'denial of privilege' may be to do with those people just wanting to get along with others and not make a deal out of their privilege, or let it identify them or separate them in those first few weeks of first year. Your family friend didn't really give it a good shot - I think a lot of students find there's a pain barrier to get through and that can take a while.

She sounds fragile - and it's good that she seems to be happier.

But pancake, would she perhaps be attaching her own confidence issues onto these 'smug' individuals? My own DD would end up talking to them, because she's generally a chatty soul who will make a conversation with anyone, and she's pretty confident in a quiet way.

DS less so, I would imagine.

I've cross posted, but said basically the same thing there.

goodbyestranger she stayed for the full first term but she knew if she wanted to go elsewhere she’d have to leave then in order to apply by the UCAS deadline. She also found pastoral care to be awful - they just assumed she was stressed academically when that wasn’t the case at all. I do understand what you’re saying about denial of privilege - but I think we (friend and our family) always agree that it’s far better to just say “yes, I was lucky to have this this and this, yes it helped me get here”. It doesn’t mean boasting or emphasising background - just being aware. It’s much preferred to “oh I went to Eton but honestly it was no advantage at all”. She had an Eton corridor/flatmate at both Oxford and Durham - the Durham one did the former, the Oxford the latter. She’s good friends with the Durham one.

And she isn’t fragile... dropping out doesn’t always equal fragile. She dropped out for valid reasons - she wasn’t happy there, the culture didn’t suit her. It doesn’t have to suit everyone - a fresher in her college son’s flat at Durham stayed the full first year at Oxford and then dropped out for very similar reasons. They’re both fine...

Justanothermile she doesn’t have confidence issues. This isn’t my DD (who does - find me a kid whose bio family failed them who doesn’t!) - this is a family friend. Why is it so difficult to believe that people may be smug? There are smug and arrogant people in every walk of life...

I was merely asking a question..

Yes, there are many smug individuals in all areas of life. Some possibly have their own confidence issues that make others perceive them to be so, others are simply that way I would suspect.

Imperial is absolutely not less selective for Chemistry / Physics than Oxbridge, not less well regarded.

So, with all these clever BAME private school students getting Oxbridge , why do the % remain so very low?

I appreciate that culture shock is an issue for many London educated kids, the issue is whether it strikes at Open Days and makes BAME students wonder how ‘at home ‘ they might feel, compared to life in s more diverse environment.

And people who are not of that group telling them how they ought to feel isn’t an answer. But it is the only one that comes back from the Colleges: “we are open to all so
If you don’t apply the answer lies with you”.

Peers of my Dc were very alienated by the Open Day experience.

I believe Oxbridge when they say they want to address diversity (of all backgrounds), I just don’t think they know how to do it. Because the people who could help are not amongst them.

Sorry if it seemed snappy justanothermile - I think it’s more Internet tone than anything! When my DD angsts over ‘posh’ people and struggles to integrate herself in mc groups then I know that it’s more a reflection of issues ingrained in her from early childhood than it is a reflection on them. However this friend honestly is very confident, chatty and eloquent, and subsequently has hundreds of friends from every social circle (probably why she was able to find her fit in Durham ultimately). She’s probably one of the most well liked and well spoken 20 year olds I know. So I know it’s often not to do with her own feelings of inadequacy when she tells me someone was being twatty in a queue... they probably were genuinely being twats in a queue.

I believe Oxbridge when they say they want to address diversity (of all backgrounds), I just don’t think they know how to do it. Because the people who could help are not amongst them

I agree with this. It’s a difficult, vicious circle.

Agree that moving unis doesn't = fragile PancakeMum. I made the comment because of your comment about being on the verge of tears. That really did make her sound fragile.

Oxford is a very big university. You really do get all sorts there. I wouldn’t worry.

goodbyestranger she’d been in Durham less than an hour and she’d had to be picked up straight from a shift in the morning (which followed the previous day’s 14 hour shift!)! She was exhausted and the first people she met were idiots who resembled people who made her unhappy at a previous university. I’d say that’s enough to make anyone tearful...