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?

[quote Walkaround]@TizerorFizz - the fact the friend is in the GB squad kind of exemplifies the point - you can row badly but for fun at Oxford and Cambridge, or row elsewhere because you are unfeasibly good at it. [/quote]
Rowing: Learn to Row Membership (2nd half)- £70.00
(From the University of East Anglia Boat Club web pages. University chosen for a decko as DS2 is there, albeit not wildly likely to take up rowing).

BUCS is British Universities & Colleges Sport - the national governing body for higher education sport in the UK.

Both Oxford and Cambridge appear to be participating members.

@MarchingFrogs- Still not quite the same as every college entering several boats into bumps and head of the river races a couple of times a year and lots of people from every college going down to the river to watch them, and the college’s rowing record in said races being chalked up on the college walls or displayed in the college bar for all to see. You don’t have to look for adverts on webpages for rowing to be very much in your face in and Oxford or Cambridge. To compete against other universities, you have to be pretty good at rowing. To compete against other colleges, you just need enthusiasm. To watch the competition, you just have to want an entertaining afternoon.

Wealth and privilege are scarce is a comment full of holes.

The assumption that there isn't enough wealth to go round, that it is finite, is a very British fallacy. The idea of wealth creation is one that boggles minds.

Privilege is a concept embedded in the class system, again something many British people take for granted without much examination.

@maeveiscurious, yes, I think she's spent a shedload of money on private education and realised that Oxbridge now admits many kids who went to comprehensives. I suspect she wants to know where else to turn, whether there's a closely guarded third level education secret the plebs haven't yet discovered.

@Walkaround
Not according to some at Oxbridge! No fun rowing at all. All very serious.

There is fun rowing TizerorFizz. DD1 gave me a prettily painted wooden spoon awarded to her boat to prove it.

Don't apply, then. Oxbridge won't mind, don't worry.

@TizerorFizz - well, some people are just so competitive they don’t know how to have fun, but they’ll be in the 1st VIII or not rowing at all. The 2nd and 3rd VIIIs tend to have a pretty enjoyable time of it!

The only photo I have of DD in an eight, they're all wearing antlers.

So... definitely worth applying for the privilege of rowing for fun.

In answer to the OP's original Q, probably not if you're obsessed with wealth & privilege. You're unlikely to go down well with the interviewers.

[quote mathanxiety]@maeveiscurious, yes, I think she's spent a shedload of money on private education and realised that Oxbridge now admits many kids who went to comprehensives. I suspect she wants to know where else to turn, whether there's a closely guarded third level education secret the plebs haven't yet discovered.[/quote]
Yes @mathanxiety it's similar to those special GCSEs and A levels which kids at private schools take that aren't open to those who attend scuzzy Secondary Moderns

To be fair to OP, I think she’s just been reading other threads because there is one where find people got college feedback and they were saying it was random and why bother applying when there was only one place at the college. I think she’s just going off what she’s read on here, rather than having a particular axe to grind about school sectors.

op I think you have some very strange notions about modern day Oxbridge. Lots of ordinary people go there and many of them really do go there for the love of their subject and study for its own sake and for the unique teaching methods and environment. It's many years since I was there and all my friends were from very average backgrounds, a mix of state and private. Some have gone on to stellar business careers, a few are famous! Many are just living very average lives.
Certainly having Oxbridge on a CV opens doors but then you have to prove yourself. oxbridge recruits intelligent people so it's hardly surprising they go on to do well but it is certainly no guarantee. Whatever background people come from these days if you attend Oxbridge it says something about your mind not about your class status.

When dh started consulting they only recruited from Oxbridge, the move to focus on diverse teams is not an attempt to be more PC - it is evidenced to produce better outcomes. I'd say dh's cv did open doors in the very early stages of his career but it wouldn't say much for his achievements if that was how he was credentialising himself now.

dh's cv - I meant Oxbridge on dh's cv

The issue of effort v reward is definitely worth considering over Oxbridge and was an issue in the 80s when my siblings went too. It is more effort. My 5 children all decided they could not be bothered (and thought they might not get in which may well have been true even when their schools suggested they had a go). That would be partly laziness or having better things to do and partly that they were right the effort given their own personal chances of getting in was not really worth the time to be spent on it when it was not going to be career destroying to be at say Bristol v Oxbridge (3 of mine chose Bristol offers over Durham).

I am certainly not saying Oxbridge is not worth the effort, but many doors to high paid jobs remain open if you go to somewhere else in the top 10 and if you are quite bright.

I remember a lunch with a lawyer friend years ago and he was discussing whether his son should go to Eton in terms of damage caused by people hating Eton v the advantages. He went to Eton in the end and did fine. I do not think we have quite reached the position where a state comp child who goes to Oxbridge is then treated like the plague for having sought such a privileged institution and I am half joking here but I suppose it might become a toxic brand if HR find everyone is mostly from Oxbridge and then deliberately try to avoid that so the PR image of the place shows you treat Sunderland on a par..... Then we move eventually to the cultural revolution of China in its day when anyone from a good profession or whose parents was sent to work in the countryside sweeping up waste to achieve true equality and chances for the less well off.

I can't imagine going to the likes of Eton will be a disadvantage for a long time yet. Sending a kid to a second rate private school IF there is a decent enough state alternative might not be such a good idea though.

One thing worth pointing out - as someone who recruits graduates - the response and support we get from University’s careers dept vary enormously- from completely being ignored - so we don’t post opportunities at that university to careers depts who are incredibly responsive and supportive. Oxford and Cambridge were both excellent in this regard. Others response times were very poor. So it’s not just the teaching etc - oxbridge go out of their way to obtain opportunities for their students while other careers dept sleep.

@Ericasdog

A "mega-lucrative career", you unforgiving lot!

So, an applicant's application is relativised according to the cohort from which they are applying.

Will applicants from high achieving cohorts stop applying altogether because they have reached a ceiling and can't improve on their application any further? Does an application contrasted against a low achieving cohort open up a space for inferences that may or may not be true ("this applicant may have achieved more in a different context")? As I said, lack of clarity.

Re teaching and healthcare professions - I was genuinely surprised at the numbers. I would expect more Elon Musks than teachers (teachers are clever and good but Elon is clever and rich).

Don't be so bloody rude and contemptuous of the teaching profession. Learn your manners.

@KaptainKaveman, tempted to add, ditto re healthcare, but will just say, Where's the b*dy Like button when you want one?

(One of my besties from school followed her 3 years at Oxford with a first career in medical physics and ended up a primary school headteacher. She must have been really popular out on the river).

Of course, attendance (in whatever century) does mean you can take a firm side in the boat race. (Even if you were far too lazy to step into a boat when you were there …)

The Women’s race went well!

🚣🏾‍♀️

Your attitude towards career paths in teaching and medicine speaks volumes about you OP. I am just surprised that so many clever and polite people have taken the time to engage in such a distasteful and stupid thread.

But the men’s race went better!

I think it's quite an interesting thread about issues of what is privilege (Oxbridge) and why people seek it, their schooling and what they do afterwards. If more people from less well off backgrounds go to Oxbridge does that mean more of those people go into high paid work as they have made such effort to get to Oxbridge or do they have lower aspirations because a salary of £30k is a King's ransom to them as people they know don't earn much or the opposite - they are not well off so want more money than some very rich person who may not have to work very hard as their family has money.

There will be statistics of earnings 10 years after you graduate looking at Oxbridge people from comprehensives and those with very low income families compared with others I expect so it could probably be assessed. it may be it makes no difference at all and the same % of bright children with rich parents at Oxbridge as those from not so well off backgrounds choose to go into higher paid work.