To think universities should state separate entry criteria for Indies?

[Wacamole]

DD who is on track for 3A*s at A’level, thought she’d give Oxbridge a go after being encouraged by her teachers. All very excited, doing super curriculars etc. Only just been told she doesn’t meet minimum entry criteria that would be expected from an Indy, which is straight 9s. She doesn’t have straight 9s, she has straight 8s (couple of nines), not only that, the course she wanted to apply for at Cambridge doesn’t require Maths at all, but school has advised they won’t even look at her if she doesn’t do Maths AND Further Maths. She is doing neither. Apparently an EPQ is also mandatory even though none of this is mentioned on Cambridge website.

All this second guessing, reading between the lines has been really confusing.
I have no issue with universities asking for higher entry criteria for students from indies for obvious reasons but wish they would be more transparent and state this on their ‘Entry requirements’ same way they state contextual offers?

@mumneedswine

Does this mean that you do as much outreach as you like and contexuaalise offers but accommodation simply prices disadvantaged kids out?

I suppose Oxbridge are the only unis that can support disadvantaged children from a financial point of view?

Some of the 'very poor unis' were offering specialisms like jewellery design, typography, speech therapy, sports marketing , midwifery, magazine design and so on.

That reflects the old polytechnic system: the older universities did more pure subjects and research. The polytechnics (now 'poorer universities') were where technical training took place. Courses offered still mirror that division.

@Tibtom

Do you think getting rid of the name pyrotechnic has helped. Does calling every HE institution a university improve standards or create a slightly more complex higher education picture.

I’m sure there are different models and work well for different organisations. We have a mentor programme where we meet regularly with A level students who are likely to be the first in their family to go to Uni. We also have a apprenticeship recruitment route for those not wanting to go to Uni and join after A levels. The majority coming through this route can’t afford to go to Uni, are from state schools but very bright. They have the same opportunity to qualify as chartered accountants but it takes four years not three. The advantage for them is they actually qualify earlier than those who join after three years at Uni.

accountancy apprenticeship programs are amongst a handful of apprenticeships that work well. DS looked carefully at those run by JP Morgan, BDO etc. In the end, he decided he wanted more control over where he studied for his degree and and didn’t apply.

@mids2019 yes, we can provide all the information and support but students then have to be able to afford it. London is too expensive to live or commute to so most don't apply there. Oxbridge is quite cheap to live which I think has encouraged some to apply. And lots head North.
Uni is expensive and for a lot of families not everywhere is doable.

Yet those in London with families with not much money do receive £12,382 maintenance loan which is not too bad to cover most London rent a room plus your food etc. UCL 39 weeks self catered own room from £7800 a year. which leaves £4500 for food and travel and in London there may be a chance of part time paid jobs too. I think it can be more the middle class only getting £4k maintenance loan where the less well off get double who have the problems financially with university.

Yes I would say that those who can get the maximum loans can manage. The issue is debt aversion and the resistance to view the student loans as a tax rather than debt. But there isn't really an issue about affordability for those on the maximum loan.

Durham may be in the North but that doesn't make it amazingly cheap, not sure about other unis in the North. But student living out rents are broadly similar to living out rents in Oxford and I was startled by the Durham college accommodation rents.

I’m in London, and my DC attended London comprehensives. Many, many London children attend London universities and still live at home. Or those that live in house shares get full loans. As many have had part-time jobs before leaving school, they often continue those jobs while at university, and jobs are (or were, pre-Covid) easy to come by.

What is the point of raising aspirations and encouraging wider participation if recruiters (many with two bags of McCain oven chips on each shoulder) are going to discriminate against Oxbridge and other top university graduates?

I’m sorry (not sorry) but people with 3A*s and a first from Oxbridge will be cleverer than someone with 3Cs and a 2nd from a former HE institution.

For vocational degrees it is a different matter, but it is absolutely preposterous to posit that an English degree from Oxford is on a par with one from Chichester “university”.

The BBC/civil service is going to be packed with very mediocre people (as it is beginning to be already).

@IrmaFayLear

I can your point to some degree. We have the two best universities in the world but we put barriers in the way of placing weight on that when it comes to recruitment (at least in my role).

The university blindness is imposed nationally. I don't know who or how it was decided but once you blind it becomes difficult to argue to unblind.

I am guessing those in power have looked at the preponderance of Oxbridge grads at senior levels in a wide range of professions and decided diversification was the answer. I know the BBC have been looking at this for some time in terms of recruitment strategy.

I don't think it is actively biased against Oxbridge just there is no allowance for university attended in selection criteria.

I think this sort of policy actually impacts those from relatively poor families at Oxbridge as those are the ones without connections for career enhancement and possibly more reliant on traditional recruitment processes.

I think we need to give thought about whether it is fair that pupils go through the arduous entrance process for Oxbridge and the rigours of the degree to gain no real advantage when it comes to career opportunities.

Opinions as always may differ......

If you live IN London then going to Uni there from home seems sensible, but moving away from home is what a lot of 18 year olds want to do. If you live just outside then commuting is upwards of £4,000 a year. Halls range from £7,000 to £15,000 (don't always get first choice), and it is the middle income kids who can't afford to go. A loan of £8,000 means parents have to top up a lot and some just can't. Cost of living in London is expensive (its my home town and I love it dearly but rent is pricey). PP students can get bursaries and top up loans so for them it's more affordable. But many want a campus Uni, or to be near the beach or live in a castle.
A lot of students will have a part time or summer job to be able to afford it wherever they go in the country - only those whose parents have deep pockets don't. My own 2 have stacked many a supermarket shelf.

I’m sorry (not sorry) but people with 3As and a first from Oxbridge will be cleverer than someone with 3Cs and a 2nd from a former HE institution.*

This isn’t necessarily true, though. There are lots of reasons why children might not get super grades at A level or go to Oxbridge, but they can still be cleverer than those who did. And being clever doesn’t necessarily equate to success in the jobs market. The cleverest person I know did go to Oxbridge but has never been able to hold down a job and still lives at home with their parents. The company I work for has lots of Oxbridge graduates, but also lots from ex-poly universities. There is no difference between them as to who can do the job or get promoted etc.

Irma , I take a lot of your points but I don't think it is necessary to write "university" like that. FWIW Chichester has an excellent reputation in performing arts in particular. I don't think appearing to sneer at an institution is helpful in framing your argument.

I did read that people from less advantaged ethnic minority backgrounds still go on to earn less after attending Oxbridge despite the perceived leg up this should give them so there is much still to be rectified. They are also less likely to gain top degrees across all institutions.

Oh and also FWIW one of my favourite students went to Chichester last year with ABB at A Level.

Irma, I agree but don't worry, over time those who are good do well in careers and those who are useless fail, no matter what the background and whether they got into the job because their father works there or because they are black or female or disabled or lesbian or whatever is the current group where preference is given).

Also things like being able to work all night or have stamina or not have depression and being strong are relevant too in some jobs so you need a range of things, even just dedication to the job to do well in my view for many of the higher paid careers. Woody Allen was once asked why did so well - h e said I show up (ie he turned up for booked work on time, something a lot of people don't manage). If our children can show up, never be late, do what is required, not break down, not be off sick again and again, be reliable, happy , nice to be around, good at the job etc then I think they will all manage fine.

The general issues are very complicated. Eg in my view even black boys in London (some of whom when to my sons' minority white London private school) have more advantage than the children of my mother's 19 first cousins in Sunderland who are all white. There are none of the London mentor programs there, there are is no proximity to really excellent London state school sixth forms for high achievers, there is no being next to the seat of power and there are fewer role models.

Oxbridge takes whom they think are the best people for their degrees. However do they concern themselves with the suitability or employment?

In any case having been selected for Oxbridge and come through their rigorous degree, should it then not follow those students should be able to hold their own when it comes to getting a job even if the application is university blind? Doesn't everyone go through the same psychometric testing and answer the same questions?

How would this disadvantage Oxbridge graduates or be seen like it's discriminating against them?

Chichester is a lovely place to live, and I am sure, to study. The University evolved from Bishop Otter College, a teacher training college with a specialism in PE (from which my primary school benefitted decades ago). However, I agree that a Chichester English degree does not have the same rigour as an Oxford one and it should be ok to acknowledge that.

@daisypond

I’m sorry (not sorry) but people with 3As and a first from Oxbridge will be cleverer than someone with 3Cs and a 2nd from a former HE institution.*

This isn’t necessarily true, though. There are lots of reasons why children might not get super grades at A level or go to Oxbridge, but they can still be cleverer than those who did. And being clever doesn’t necessarily equate to success in the jobs market. The cleverest person I know did go to Oxbridge but has never been able to hold down a job and still lives at home with their parents. The company I work for has lots of Oxbridge graduates, but also lots from ex-poly universities. There is no difference between them as to who can do the job or get promoted etc.

There are some big questions here in that can we ever have a perfect system for objectively measure intelligence. We can never have a perfect system but examination results and university attendance do act as a proxy.

I think that university accomplishment do not necessarily guarantee success in the jobs market ((and the converse is true). However it is factual that Oxbridge grads earn more the RG grads who earn more than new university grads on average
I
The alumni from Oxford and Cambridge would suggest that a lot of clever people are the product of those universities and I don't think that is necessarily a bad thing.

I think the idea that 'all degrees are equal' is theoretically correct the reality is different. I think the issue is how to convey this information to school students without 'looking down' in some universities and ensuring individual tailored advice is given.

I think the importance of good career advice cannot be underestimated .

I am not disputing that often. I don't like putting university in speech marks, though, which implies it isn't even really a degree.

I would like to think that the rarefied breed who attend Oxbridge aren't just going there for future high earnings. I imagine that sometimes their love pf learning means they end up in less well paid (relatively speaking) academic and research fields. Those who want to earn loads tend to target certain degrees as much as anything. I teach some students who love to parrot out data about highest paid A Levels/institutions/ degrees. They always assume they will be the ones above the average!

Anecdotally, the three ex Oxbridge students I have come across lately are all at present either in satisfying but low paid jobs (on furlough as it goes) or not in meaningful employments at present. One of those will be training to be a history teacher next year.

@Piggywaspushed

I guess what your saying is the ideal Oxbridge is a seat of learning and future academics are ideally placed coming from there.

I would imagine that careers advice at elite universities is as important as elsewhere. I would think there is a public perception of elite university = elite career = well paid. Maybe this is not always the case.

Is it a case of removing the 'Bullingdon Club' image to give a more general perception that elite university grads face the same challenges as the rest of us?

The success of the widening participation drive at Oxford and Cambridge may well shift the thinking on university blind applications, or the whole thing will be pointless in terms of social mobility. At each level of young people's lives (secondary education, tertiary education, employment) it doesn't work if the thinking fails to join up.

I have to say that this idea that employers shun the mention of Oxbridge isn't borne out at all by my own DCs' recent experience, where interviews have frequently referred back to Oxford.

@goodbyestranger

I agree....joined up thinking is needed.

Chipping in on the conversation about polytechnics and whether they should have remained so rather than changing to being called unis. Let's not forget it wasn't only vocational courses like jewellry making, engineering etc that they previously did. They also offered courses such as Law, History etc believe it or not - whilst they were still 'Colleges of Higher Education' /'Polytechnics'.

I had just recently moved to the U.K when this was going on and from what I gathered, it was one of the key reasons why they changed their names/title to 'university' because it was seen as unfair to those graduates of arts/ humanities from Colleges/Polys because their degrees were seen as 'lesser' i.e LLB Law from Luton College.

Unfortunately, it seems this tactic didn't work, as they were never able to shed their previous labels, they just became, the 'poorer universities'.