Oxbridge Applications 2019 (Part Three)

[windowframe]

Today is a big day for many... time for a new thread too

It always makes me a bit that people assume that private school = undeserving thickos and state school = undiscovered talent. There are shades of grey!

Ds went to a comprehensive. He had no help at all. Certainly no identification of likely applicants. In fact there was rather a curled lip about it all and at the higher education information evening the woman hosting spent the first five minutes ranting that all universities were equal and that there was no difference between the University of the South West and Oxbridge. For every parent thinking that was poppycock, I'm sure there were plenty of others who were "first time consumers" (and not MNetters either!) who would have been taken in by this crap.

As for blanking out the names of institutions on applications... then we end up with a public sector full of people from the University of JustFoundedLastWeek where they hand out firsts like nobody's business, and graduates from top ten universities all heading to the private sector. In fact someone from the Foreign Office told me this was exactly the case.

If Oxbridge is now at least 50% state school, then why do those state schoolers suddenly become "the enemy" when it comes to job recruitment ?

Sidetrack here and not looking for a reply but what isn't easy in the 11+ is precisely that lack of additional scrutiny and where a case can be made for looking at books etc etc.

But the borderline is always going to throw up problems (and the two areas are similar). If there's been a shift at the Oxbridge level though, then it's probably not before time.

Irma I certainly don't make any such assumption! But when there are a cluster of independent kids and a cluster of state schooled kids all vying for the same set of places then it does seem to be the independent ones who come up trumps in larger numbers. I say that because it's the very strong perception of so many state schooled students there who are probably bright enough to get a proper sense of any weak links in the admissions process. As I said, 'less able' is relative.

Tail end?!

We know some seriously good applicants from private schools over the years who did not get offers, but say, got acceptances from places like MIT. I suspect it may be that the more average who get in and then struggle may simply be be noticed more (and in any population someone will be towards the bottom.)

Top universities use different methods to recruit. Not every Oxbridge acceptee will get a clean slate of acceptances elsewhere.

One, albeit anecdotal, example. DDs friends applying as international students for, I think, engineering seemed to think getting an Imperial place was very tough indeed. No shortage of international students so a perceived preference, other things being equal, for home students. Elsewhere that perceived preference was reversed. (And perceptions might have been completely wrong anyway!)

In one article I think I read about the initial selection being into 3 piles - the very likely, the maybe, and the nos, before interview.

As an academic I've never seen this done in my subject area (sciences). There are of course some nos that don't reach interview, but there is no split into three piles between those that are interviewed. And they are interviewed (and scored) by multiple people: what for one interviewer might be a marginal case is quite often a clearcut yes or no for another interviewer, and the student gets discussed in great detail between different interviewers. (I would comment though that it is always surprising to me how homogenous interview scores are, even when the interviewers are from different branches of the subject, different nationalities, different genders.)

On the public sector front, my own mole thinks it very funny that despite the blanking out of institution, the Civil Service has become more Oxbridge dominated not less!

Oh dear. Yes tail end means those towards the bottom of this particular (Oxbridge applicant population). It's just a school term which appears not to translate very well without offence! None intended, I didn't know it was controversial.

Yes tail end means those towards the bottom of this particular (Oxbridge applicant) population.

Irma I definitely don’t think that. I do think, however, that whatever your innate intelligence, it will be nurtured more in most fee paying schools with smaller class sizes etc, than standard comprehensives. Presumably that is what is paid for. There are great state schools though, like my daughters thankfully, and poor private ones I suppose.

With many years of experience in academia, I have not seen correlation between private education and being at the lower end of accepted students.

User I am pleased about that. I thought perhaps it meant, with the huge number of applications, that that crude separation was a start. I can’t remember where I read it though.

User crossed posts - my reply was about the 3 piles!

Hi - if anyone wants to ask me anything about STEP, or the STEP support programme please feel free to ask me! (I'm the one who developed most of the resources on the website).

That’s a kind offer Pallando

I would agree with what Lilli says I have a very similar experience, I applied to Cambridge from a state school and received very little preparation and didn’t get in. There was no consideration of context then.
The change I see now that they are provided with context of the school for the GCSES which I certainly think helped my dd. She attended a comprehensive which has been RI for years and achievement is well below average. So when her GCSEs are put against the average for the school they are well above but probably below what is mentioned here. She certainly didn’t get all A stars. I really feel they are trying to level situation at long last and it feels like they are trying to be fair. I know it’s very difficult for those candidates who have all A stars but I think that’s only one part of the picture. I would say that any interview is subjective to a degree, it can’t help but be so.

With many years of experience in academia, I have not seen correlation between private education and being at the lower end of accepted students.

But then that doesn't accurately reflect what I said. I think that your specialty in Cambridge may actually not be comparable to the arts and humanities at Oxford anyhow, for various reasons, but it's a well known phenomenon over there and grates on quite a few people.

Dd is at a small non selective private school , she has not had any extra preparation at all. She has all the disadvantage of being at a private school when Oxbridge assesses her but in reality she is worse than many state school students who have had excellent preparation.

I think it is impossible for Oxbridge to get things right.. and they are going to be criticised whatever they do!

She said she is officially ' Cambridge reject' - had a good laugh about it and was looking forward to going to another university.

actually not be comparable to the arts and humanities at Oxford anyhow, for various reasons, but it's a well known phenomenon over there

I agree sciences are not comparable - particularly subjects that primarily use measures such as STEP for selection.

However, it is simply not a well known phenomenon that the weakest arts and humanities students at Oxford (or Cambridge) come from private schools. It may well have been so before my time, 20 odd years ago, but this is not what colleagues, relatives, etc who work in these areas say is happening now.

I really think people underestimate academics: if year after year the private school candidates at the borderline were accepted, and were weaker, why would academics keep accepting them, rather than correcting their systematic error? Why would it be in their interests to keep taking weaker students? Especially bearing in mind that academics these days aren't themselves all/mostly from private school backgrounds - indeed, wealthier students are more likely to go on to much better paying jobs than academia.

Goodbye, is your knowledge of a selective state school. 'Tail end' is an odd expression, and quite objectionable especially if used by one group of students to sneer at another. IME by about 16, most kids have learnt to accept each others different talents. Plus school performance, at least in London, can be very skewed by parental expectations. The pressure on some is immense and a pattern of strong A levels followed by a bit of a flop at University is far from unknown. Equally others, DS included, were delighted to discover that they were far higher up the cohort at University in maths than they ever were at school.

I really feel the private/selective state focus is a bit of a dead end. All those who get offered places will be good. On another day a slightly different group would have been selected. A year later and with an extra years maturiry, some will be thriving, nomatter where they go. Others less so.

All we can do is wish them all the best. Lots of strong students. Plenty of good Universities.

I really don't think you understand my point user. Also, I have to say that we do have interviewing Oxbridge academics in the extended family so they're not an alien breed.

Needmoresleep tail end has never been used by any students that I've encountered. It is however used in the selective sector when analysing and tracking 11+ data. Hardly objectionable!!

But you do suggest thst there is a fair amount of judging going on amongst students.

Both DC, in London and Bristol, have had relatively few friends who came from selective private schools. Indeed I can only think of one, and he was from overseas. I assume the competitive element of Oxbridge life could be difficult. First you believe ypu are the brst, then you worry about being the best of the best.

Needmoresleep honestly! Observation doesn't need to carry with it a 'judgment'. I'm able to work out which of my colleagues or peers are the cleverest, kindest, most generous, sociable etc. without making a particularly negative or positive judgment (especially since one quality may well be more than balanced by another). So too are young people in their own community. I think it reflects on you that you think observation implies competition and 'judgment' - it certainly needn't.

I don’t understand why ‘tail end’ is raising hackles. All interviewees will have fallen on a distribution curve, and whether you call it the tail end, the cut-off point, the maybe’s, the satsumas, it wont change the fact that the scale exists.

There’s no student running around at Oxbridge eyeing up peers and calling them tail-enders. Equally, to goodbyestranger’s point, there will be tutorial partners that you will be underwhelmed by (or in my case, you’ll be the underwhelming one), who invite comparison with friends who didn’t get offers.

I also very strongly disagree that all Oxbridge applicants go up with the idea that they are 'the best'.