Is Oxbridge no longer worth applying to?

[Ericasdog]

I have been meandering around the uni threads and am coming to the conclusion that Oxbridge universities are no longer worth applying to. I would like to have a conversation about whether my observations are correct.

Getting in - The process seems random and obfuscated. People apply in good faith only to be told that, in fact, they were applying just for one place on their course after all. Applicants with perfect credentials don't get interviewed whereas applicants with lower credentials do. Socio-demographics are a huge factor but nobody knows how they work. The process requires a lot of investment on the applicant's part, yet, seems whimsical on the part of the institution.

Getting out - The drive for state school recruitment has coincided exactly with big corporates going 'university 'blind' why is there this correlation now and what does it say about 'elite' institutions, two of the three top careers for Oxbridge grads are teaching and healthcare, yet, the workload is huge I'd want a career that I couldnt get from any other uni for the efforts, and the slightly eyebrow raising associations with certain alumni, staff and initiatives.

Thoughts?

@mids2019

I think that’s likely to be true in the future. It would be odd if Oxbridge grads only took up academic jobs and roles in the future. That would be a very narrow outcome for bright people and not very well paid either, except for those at the top. I’m sure plenty will aspire to merchant banking, as they do now. The economics and PPE grads might think academics isn’t for them, for example.

I think the bright DC rejected will still do very well and will shine at any selection process for jobs. They might even be very motivated and have great work experience so their career will not be dented. At all.

TizerorFizz the term merchant bank (even more to the point accepting house) isn't a current term, apparently (judging by the blank faces of young people when I say I was on the grad scheme of a merchant bank in the 80s. Presumably to do with all the mergers of places such as Morgan Grenfell around then.

Oops missed a bracket there. But also, why should independently schooled kids be disproportionately represented in the 'elite professions' (whichever those are) if they're not even smart enough to get to the top unis. Are you suggesting that nepotism should make a comeback? If you mean confidence, that very same thing can hide a multitude of failings, so it will have to be something else. I'm going to vote nepotism because I can't think of much else.

The bright Oxbridge 'rejects' may do much better long-term career-wise, if only to prove themselves?

@goodbyestranger sure nepotism is still a factor, given that those young people will very likely have the family/friend connections to facilitate their pathways. Also, generally it's accepted that private schooling gives them self-belief and (over-)confidence in their abilities. So they are more likely to consider themselves up to the challenge of elite professions than not?

They may consider themselves up to the challenge LouisCatorze but the question is, without the talent (and even given a good dollop of that well known confidence which comes from knowing that you can always rely on your parents' money at the end of the day), will they make it past the final interview and then past the probationary period? So yes they may apply in thicker numbers, but one would hope that beyond that the independent school gloss would prove thin.

@goodbyestranger the more rigorous graduate scheme application process these days may help to 'scratch the veneer' of the all-too polished and confident-above-their-capability young people? You'd like to think.

@goodbyestranger
I think the young people you meet might be slightly under educated then. In respect of banking. See attached.

I think lots of DC are disappointed about not going to Oxbridge. I’m only saying they can still achieve very well. My DC didn’t have a merchant banker for a mum or dad. Or a lawyer.

I know you have moved now @goodbyestranger but there aren't many merchant banks where I am, so that's probably why DC here don't know about them. There are a number of "merchant bankers" in rhyming slang, but that's another matter.

I thought I'd posted this, so apologies if I'm repeating myself, but in DD's NatSci degree, although she specialised in Materials Science, she still had to do compulsory Maths and computing plus she chose Chemistry and History of Science. Her materials knowledge at the end of her Bachelor's degree was equivalent to that of a Materials Science graduate elsewhere but DD has the added other subjects too, making her experience & knowledge much broader. Her housemate who did exactly the same courses as DD is now doing a PGCE to teach science, specialising in Chemistry. Cambridge was perfectly happy to enrol the housemate on the PGCE so their Chemistry skills and knowledge must be fine.

At the end of the day, if a kid wants to apply to Oxbridge, they should be given that opportunity but alongside that, they need a healthy dose of reality. I've seen both sides of this with my DDs: DD1 applied, was interviewed by her chosen college but then unbeknown to her, she was pooled to a different college who made her an offer. DD2 applied, was interviewed by her chosen college but then rejected. DD2 is now doing really well elsewhere. We prepared her that it was a long shot, but she wanted to have the chance that neither DH or I was given, so we supported her. The people who pin all their hopes and dreams on Oxbridge are delusional in my opinion. There are other fantastic institutions and courses out there.

@TizerorFizz that's not right. Merchant banking is something different from investment banking www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/05/investmentbank_vs_merchantbank.asp and investment banking tends to be more where it is at now.

Also ToF, isn't that image just saying that Rothchild has named its investment arm 'Merchant Banking'. That would have made no sense for the merchant banks back in the 80s! Very retro though, well done Rothchild!

I wouldn't under-estimate the use of merchant banking as a short-hand for non-high street banking amongst Oxbridge under-graduates and their families back in the day, nor that this evolved to investment banking from the late 80's/90's? to appear to remain current after the influx of US institutions where previously the City was more the old UK banks who tended to describe themselves as merchant banks from an historical role in facilitating merchant activity. I haven't heard an acquaintance self-describe as being involved in merchant banking for thirty-odd years. Investment banking still seems to be used for those within the institutions. Financial services for the law firms and financial institutions supporting the eco system though, to be fair, things might have moved on.

OP, I disagree with your observation that the application process is random and obfuscated. It isn't a perfect process but it is transparent and straightforward to follow. In the end, there are a limited number of places available so this does need to kept firmly in mind, as already said above.

I am following the discussion about the currency of an Oxbridge degree with interest as my DC haven't graduated yet. They are fairly focussed on building up interesting CVs and seeking out opportunities and internships. One is interested in research/policy making, the other finance. DH and I (non-Oxbridge) work in none of these areas.

There is also a great advantage of doing the "year in industry" or year abroad which Oxbridge does not tend to have. This is particularly advantageous in STEM subjects so students come back to their final year knowing how a lab or industry actually works

It also sometimes helps show students what they DON'T want to do! DD2 did a more vocational first degree and spent a year in an NHS lab, assuming that was her logical career path. She decided that wasn't for her, so she then did a highly academic MSc which has opened up different possible careers.

I graduated from Oxford in 2006. The interview process was awful. They basically told me I wasn't good enough and that I wouldn't be getting a place and came back to me later with an open offer, that made me feel second best.

I wouldn't recommend the University based on my experiences, but I realise experiences vary based on the college and the subject.

I got a TEFL several years after I graduated and was shocked to discover the teaching on that course was so much better and more student focused than anything that I had at Oxford. The teaching at Oxford was for the most part, poor.

Otoh, many oxbridge stem students (as elsewhere) will spend 2-3 months each summer vacation doing internships which serve a similar purpose without committing a full year to one company/institution. The Cambridge engineering degree has a requirement for a certain amount of relevant internship to be completed before being admitted to the third year.

I hope it has changed but internships at one time were often unpaid, when DC's were applying they looked into this and found Oxbridge (and a few other unis) expected students to arrange their own placements.
Thankfully major employers are seeing beyond the private school/Oxbridge job candidates (where I work at an NHS trust we have no Oxbridge graduates out of 30+ in our section)

A year in industry which is part of your course and has to be arranged via the university is very different to a vacation placement which has no bearing on your degree. Of course the university won’t arrange these for an adult. I can’t quite believe you’d expect that they would.

This does seem like a good time to remind everyone that despite stereotypes the majority of students at Oxbridge are state-educated (and although not yet reflective of the wider population this proportion was higher at Oxbridge in 2020 than at Exeter, Imperial and UCL, amongst others) and that most students have to undertake some kind of paid work during the vacations.

@fiftiesmum
That probably says more about the NHS than Oxbridge grads. Maybe no Oxbridge grads apply? They might prefer the civil service?

I am obviously a banking dinosaur. I do think intelligent young people looking for a career can get clued up. I’m not actually giving direct advice to anyone but my observation is that when young people mix with other bright young people they do find ambition and strive for something “above their station”. If they didn’t, us not remotely clued up country folk would never have DC in high earning careers. Our DC find out what suits them despite never ever meeting anyone doing their job. I have numerous examples of this.

Placements are often in short supply for students. It’s a casualty of too many university courses offering this. Even when universities say they have industry links, there are not enough to go round. It’s been like this for a long time. With apprenticeships it won’t improve either. It’s not vital for high flying young people either. They need to concentrate on vacation schemes and many are paid. Even stem students can benefit from this.

We are offering paid internships this year - and all I can say is, the standard of application is very poor. One University apologised in advance saying many students have lost interest in academic and paid work and that many recruiters have fed back the poor quality and professionalism of applicants, they asked us to be empathetic. Internships are out there but we’re not lowering our standards because students have lowered their’s.

They don’t read the job description, they can’t follow basic instructions, they don’t know how to write a covering letter, they don’t do basic research, they don’t prepare for interviews. And then they ask for tailored feedback when they’ve put bugger all effort into the application! Being on course for getting a first - is not enough to have employer's dropping at your feet begging for you to come in and save their business!

At the minute you can stand out by just fulfilling basic requirements- and I’m including students from top drawer universities in my rant.

fiftiesmum it could be a geographical or specialty thing or both rather than than droves of Oxbridge applicants are weeded out and rejected.

@BritBoxBangers
In my DDs chosen career, lots of applicants don’t write specific cvs which cover their skills that apply to the position or area of expertise for which they are applying. They tend to have a generalist cv and they bang it off to everyone. Decent students do all the things you say. I think you have been unlucky but there are lots of students who think their degree is enough. I always find this surprising but there is huge emphasis on MN regarding getting a first. Few employers want the first and nothing else. Decent universities offer help regarding cvs and applications but students seem to ignore it. I do think not applying for a job or internship with the required accuracy will diminish social mobility and I would like to see students accessing advice on this.

I hope it has changed but internships at one time were often unpaid, when DC's were applying they looked into this and found Oxbridge (and a few other unis) expected students to arrange their own placements.

DDs internships were decently paid. Yes, she had to arrange them, but the department provided a good list as a starting point, which seems like the appropriate amount of help. It was good practice for job hunting (though as it turned out, her second summer employer invited her back for the 3rd year working from our home during lockdown and then a full time job on graduation) I think the department had some internships in their own research labs which could be used as a fallback if anyone needed them.

Placements are often in short supply for students. It’s a casualty of too many university courses offering this. Even when universities say they have industry links, there are not enough to go round. It’s been like this for a long time. With apprenticeships it won’t improve either. It’s not vital for high flying young people either. They need to concentrate on vacation schemes and many are paid. Even stem students can benefit from this.

Yup. DH and I are chemists, we were curious about how the 'year in industry' was sold to prospective students. It seemed like all the 'top unis' were talking about the same small handful of employers. And DH was rather of the opinion that he wouldn't have particularly wanted someone for a whole year who'd only done 2 years of their degree.
Also bear in mind most engineering degrees and increasingly science degrees are 4 year integrated masters anyway, and for the latter many of the high flyers will go on to do a PhD. (The 'entry level' for my type of job is at least PhD... our new recruits all have post-doc experience.)