Another path to greatnesses

[chopc]

I woke up around 4:30 this morning and it hit me like a tonne of bricks. Couldn't get back to sleep so thought I will have a go and starting the new thread. Hope the title is not too cheesy

University is for a lot of different purposes. Some want a good university and a high paid job. Others a good university but no interest in a lucrative career. It is just too hard to generalise. A lot of us want our children to gain independence and make that break from living at home into the adult world too for our children in going away to university.

I certainly have no problems with my children going after high paid work if they want to as it makes life easier (I am too close to my mining roots and absolute poverty not too long back to be too comfortable with "just be happy, money doesn't matter" which seems to be a luxury of the well off). However I am content my oldest son was a postman for 3 years after university and since then has driven a foot delivery van. I think he could do a lot better but he seems happy for life which is more than many people achieve.

The admissions people all say there are definite nos, definite yeses, and then a lot in between.

I really don’t think every candidate is indistinguishable from the next. I don’t think many brilliant applicants are missed. If someone didn’t get in, I fear they have to accept they were not in the absolute “yes” category and there hasn’t been some major injustice.

Eg I was reading an admissions tutor saying if they had a penny for everyone who mentions Jane Austen on their ps. So the interviewers talk about Jane Austen, and the candidate has clearly only limited knowledge and can’t be stretched. some people have all 9s, predicted 3 A*s, say they love English/History, but really need to be reading at least 3 books a week and widely, to shine. Sticking to the syllabus, however well, gets a candidate in the door, but that’s about it.

I don’t agree @Xenia that those people who aren’t obsessed with their DC’s earning potential are always well off. I am probably nearer to family roots in poverty and coincidentally mining than you, yet I can honestly say I would rather my dc be a paramedic than a hedge fund manager. I think they would be a more valuable member of society.

I truly hope that Covid teaches us that the idea that children who attend certain schools and universities and who enter certain professions are more valuable than others is seen for the utter bullshit it is.

I'm genuinely intrigued and hope someone can elaborate for me.
To what extent can an admissions and selection policy be deemed to be robust, when not every course has a pre-selection test? Additionally, interview candidates for a specific course, are not given an identical, core set of questions, on which they can be assessed during and in the post-interview comparisons. Of course the flow of conversation will differ with each candidate and with all the different interviewers and interviewing styles involved but a core set would help to standardise and help to lessen that "subjective" element.

Can't remember who was asking but no haven't seen any Durham history offers out since deadline passed this end!

I certainly have not said that anyone is more valuable than anyone else. My core beliefs are that we are all of equal value. I do think some of those who are quite well off don't need to worry about money and might be able to take the risk of a lower paid career though but I agree not everyone will fall into that general statement.

There is always clogs to clogs in 3 generations principle. Plenty of people who do well and whose children then revert to how the family always was when in poverty.

I agree it is hard to be objective when assessing people for anything other than if you just have a basic requirement to have passed certain exams. None of my children had an interview (they didn't try Oxbridge) so university entrance was relatively simple - would they meet the grades for their offer or not.

@Xenia I didn’t say you had said some are more valuable than others. I was speaking generally.

@SeasonFinale

Can't remember who was asking but no haven't seen any Durham history offers out since deadline passed this end!

That was me! Thanks season Come on Durham!

The reason higher paid jobs came up was because the op was concerned that not getting to Oxbridge had an effect on careers. I’ve been more than clear that “rejected” DC can achieve highly if that’s what they want.

Personally I have not directed my DDs to do anything nor expressed whether I think what they do is of value or not. It’s for them to decide and not for me to dictate. DC find their own jobs but we were poor at home and I didn’t like it and worked hard to have a higher standard of living. Some people are driven to want money and others take a more laid back approach. Totally individual choice but I don’t think parental pressure based on what does more “good” to society is the way forward. If everyone was employed by the state, who earns the taxes to pay for them? Might it be the higher earners? So I think everyone has value to society.

I mean my family were poor. DH and I are not.

And to add: one of my concerns with DD not going to Oxford was concerns around what she wanted to do afterwards and how her chances might be dented. It’s a very raw time and parents don’t always think straight!

@PresentingPercy Just to let you know that I took your posts about jobs/ earnings they way it was intended

It has been almost a week now and on reflection I know getting a place at Oxbridge is not a guarantee of anything and if I am honest I know it won't really affect his career path. I think I am just disappointed really.

In the US for example you can apply to all the Ivy League Unis but over here there are only two elite Unis and you can only apply for one in one year. And most people will know it's difficult not to get invested in an Oxbridge application as it takes up so much time and headspace due to the various stages and the work that goes into it. Even though it's DS doing the work an interested parent will also go through the journey with them. Although the chances of being rewarded are slim, I thought DS's chances were good as did his schools which has good experience of Oxbridge applications.

In any case it has been interesting to read all the posts and people's opinions.

One my good friends with older kids had good advise which I have also used with my DC: when choosing a career path, think of what kind of life you want to be having. Then work backwards and think about the type of career that will enable you to have that and check you have the right AL etc in order to get there. If they don't have any idea about career path at this point, do what interests them the most.

At the end of the day they absolutely should have a career they enjoy as most of their life will be spent doing it. However if doesn't give them the life they want, they may soon stop enjoying it ...... so money is an important consideration as well

I am not a parent, but I am someone who got rejected by Cambridge 15 years ago - after having been top of the class in every subject throughout my school career and told by every teacher from the age of 11 that I would get in!**- and although my story is very, very far from a tale of adversity (!) hopefully I can offer some reassurance about future career success and earning power?

I was pretty gutted. I had been put in the pool but not fished out after interviews. I got my top marks as predicted, went to LSE, worked hard, graduated first in my class. Did the usual society stuff too, plus part time jobs and internships.

Am now in my 30s. Have won several industry awards (think Woman of the Year type stuff). I have two NED roles* alongside my FT career (6 figures, worthwhile and something I look forward to getting stuck into every day) and am 10 years younger than everyone else at my level. I also am on the Boards of a major industry body. I am interviewed by journalists and profiled by industry rags etc.

In short: it is hard to build the counterfactual, of course, but I do not feel like not getting into Cambridge held me or my career back. The same attributes (hard work, intelligence, motivation) that meant I had a shot have stayed with me. I mingle a lot with Oxbridge people, but am just as if not more successful. One good university - and all the ones I have seen on here are excellent - is mostly as good in the eyes of recruiters as the other, although I grant you that the Oxbridge experience is different (and I still think I would have enjoyed it!)

If I come across as big-headed, that is not my intention. Am trying to be helpful and honest to those of you and your DC who are feeling as gutted as I did in the immediate aftermath. And doing so in a listing-my-achievements way that I would never do in real life, unless it was an interview .

**yes, I got complacent.
*usually the preserve of 50-something men

Thank you @chopc

It’s important to remember DC can change careers and it’s not unusual these days. Even back in my day, people didn’t always stick to their obvious career path. Personality, personal goals, intelligence and how much you actually want a job is important. Medics presumably don’t change much but others definitely do. Working out what the individual wants and what makes them happy is important but everyone can make mistakes.

There can be a bit of a lemming thing going on at Oxbridge in particular. When vac schemes are recruiting it can make some feel left behind if they don’t join in. Clearly teachers and paramedics wouldn’t get caught up in this and self preservation is a good trait!

Ps have NC for this, but MN can check!

Career paths are interesting things. Schools, and parents, spend considerable time and effort on assisting DC's to make informed decisions. And yet. Of the many DC's that I know, Oxbridge or not, many started out in fantastic, well paid, well regarded, careers but two, three years down the line changed direction completely. Quite a few are now retraining as HCP's and teachers. Money, it seems, is most definitely, not everything.

@PresentingPercy you seem to believe that people who do jobs that are valuable to society in a way that financiers aren’t live in poverty. They don’t. They should be paid more but they aren’t exactly slumming it. They also pay taxes, so contribute to the finances of our economy. If fact it’s the taxes from folk like them who keep our economy going because the Uber rich seem to believe that paying tax is optional.

Well I wasn’t talking about the Uber rich. I was also thinking of companies paying tax too. I was also referring to the op who said a paramedic job would be preferable. That’s not highly paid. I do of course recognise people can be highly paid in public service but that wasn’t what the pp referred to. She referred to a lower paid role.

The salaries of the public sector are paid by others. The tax paid is a return to the coffers. But the public service salaries are paid by non public service tax in the main. They wouldn’t pay tax at all if the state didn’t state the jobs or levy the tax to pay for them. That’s doesn’t mean they are not worthwhile and as seen above, being a medic is hardly a waste of time financially. But it’s important to recognise who pays for it as well as accepting it’s a vital thing.

If the state didn’t create the jobs....

The state doesn’t create them to keep people busy

LaLa yes, not to different for me except no one had ever been to Oxbridge from my NE of England school until my younger sibling got in and when I suggested I try to our Head she said as I was a year young right through secondry school (I did A levels at 17) I could not apply. I expect had I made it a big thing and pushed for it my parents would have found a way but I did not bother and my father and uncle (doctors) did pretty well at Durham anyway. However I did have the best A levels in my year, found out about university entrance scholarships and put myself in for 3 x 3 hour exams for one university's (where I went to) which the school did agree to invigilate me for at school and did pretty well at university - more prizes etc and have a reasonably good legal career in London so it has not really mattered (also Durham and Bristol rejected me for university because I was predicted by the school lower A level grades than I got).

I don't think we need to be political on the thread. I only came on it because I am the only one of my siblings who did not go to Oxbridge and none of my 5 children even tried and most of us have done fine - even fine in terms of good legal careers in London fine in the case of my daughters and me.

Someone gave good advice above - think back. So obviously lots of teenagers as they always have just want to change the world, bring world peace and save the planet and its animals - fine - that's the spirit of youth although it rarely puts bread on your table. So if you can get them to think at least a little bit in the future - do you want to buy a house at some point or doesn't that matter to you? Do you want XYZ - eg to have a non working spouse whilst children are small or to send children to fee paying schools or have a particular kind of car or whatever - then see what route you have to take to get to that.

Weirdly at 10 I decided to buy an island when I grew up and I still have a graph I drew of how long it would take to save up for that showing one line for teacher and one for lawyer. One reason I picked lawyer was for that..... I chose aged 14 and I did have the island in the Pacific for 10 years in my 40s which was fun.

All my working life was in local government. My DDs were encouraged to think about what they wanted out of life. I quite agree Xenia that it’s worth knowing what you want or indeed what you don’t care about. Young people are very concerned about not being able to afford housing. You rarely hear them say they don’t care and want to live with mum and dad when in their 30s. In some areas of the county achieving independence is expensive so DC are aware that certain jobs will help them get on. Oxbridge is seen as a way of doing that.

LSE where @Lalala86 went is hardly second rate though. In fact no different to Oxbridge really so of course their grads are successful - possibly more so as their subjects don’t include Norse or Archaeology!

@PresentingPercy is getting a hard time for some reason. I was grateful you shared the research pp, it's good to be informed especially as you say when the situation was so raw earlier this week.

@chopc agreed, just disappointed now. Had a good chat with DS yesterday, he's hoping for an Imperial offer and will be happy with that - still wants to try adjustment but will be happy with Imperial if that doesn't work out. I did point out that his course didn't even go into adjustment last summer, and this summer with all the uncertainty around grades - who knows.