Oxbridge schmoxbridge?

[Randomword6]

I'm just wondering, my kids all rejected the idea of Oxbridge as dated and elitist, and I didn't go. It was thought back in the day that going to either was a guarantee of a good career, but is this true now? Does it depend on the subject?

Oxbridge is no guarantee of anything. They are two very good universities with international reputations, some excellent teaching and resources and lots of additional financial support available to students. As a result it's tough to get in and a pressured workload. I'm a fan of the college system for helping students feel they belong and of the 1:1 or very small group teaching which definitely can mean that students who get stuck in can do very well.

If Oxbridge don't do the course you want or if that very intense and personal teaching puts you off, it's not for you. There is a bit of ceremonial stuff and costume which you can decide is enjoyable tradition or off-putting and dated. The universities have a posh reputation which can attract posh people, who are human too, you might even like them.

Employers are increasingly moving to university-blind recruitment so it is about your abilities and skills. That's as it should be. Studying in an environment like Oxbridge surrounded by other high achievers remains a good decision to make if you fancy it imo.

So which university was this then? It’s a bit strange to claim it’s not lower then just leave it out…

I went to Oxbridge. (One for undergrad, t'other for postgrad.) First of my family to go to uni, I was a scholarship student at a local independent. Now I'm a teacher at a different independent school, where many of my colleagues are also Oxbridge graduates. Is that a 'good' career? That very much depends on who you ask. I enjoy it, or at least the actual teaching side of things, and I'm earning more than either of my parents did, which is some measure of success.

Very glad I went, but for academic and personal rather than career reasons. It was literally the only place in the UK where I could have studied the things that I really wanted to study (as an undergraduate, anyway).

DD is at art school. Not even vaguely interested in Oxbridge or the academic league tables; like me, she's at the place which offers the exact course she wanted, which has a laser-like focus on the very specialised job she is chasing. Which wouldn't be well paid, but is her dream. She's having the time of her life.

An Oxbridge degree is a guarantee, for those that want it, of a job interview at some of the highest paying employers. Doesn’t mean they’ll actually get the job, of course. It can quickly elevate someone from a low income background like mine to jobs where you’re on £500k by age 35. It’s the opposite of elitest, it facilitates social mobility.

There are other ways to get those interviews, but an Oxbridge degree pretty much guarantees they’ll at least talk to the graduate.

For those who take advantage of it, it’s also a dress rehearsal and networking opportunity for a few specific careers like politics and journalism.

It wasn’t elitist or snobby when I went 20 years ago, and I doubt it’s any more so now, though some do seem to feel free to be rude about it in a way they wouldn’t insult other places. A friend of mine was ferociously nasty about it until she visited me there and said “I suppose I was being a bit rude, I forgot it’s your home and real people.”

Hard to see how it’s dated either when you look at Oxbridge’s cutting edge scientific research.

Go, or don’t go, it’s nothing to me, but I am a little tired of people being rude about it, and assuming it’s elitest, when I know so well that it’s nothing of the kind.

DH did a science degree at Oxford, and a doctorate at Imperial. His doctorate involved some lab supervision, and he was surprised and disappointed at what he felt was the difference between the students he’d done his first degree with and those he taught.

In his words those at Oxford seemed to “live” the subject, it was their passion, what they felt they were born to do while at Imperial he got a lot of “is this going to be in our exams” when a question led somewhere interesting.

Agree completely. Sensible post. I know of couple of very lovely pupils who went this year and I expect with thrive. One of the most intelligent people I know went to Oxbridge, got a good degree and was miserable there. Another boy I know left early as it ground him down - it had been his parents and his dream to go since he was little and it was very sad.

I also agree that high profile politicians like Boris Johnson, Liz Truss and Kwasi Kwarteng are not great ambassadors for Oxbridge and put pupils off if they don’t know anyone else who went.

For top law firms about 16% of trainee solicitors go to Oxbridge (and about 15% come from Durham, Bristol and Exeter). However I don't know how many students those various university graduate every year to do a good comparison. Top barristers' chambers have a higher Oxbridge percentage - you can see all that on their websites as new barristers have a CV up there.

It certanily helps but 3 of my children went to Bristol and are lawyers or almost so and I don't htink it's harmed them nor me not even to try Oxbridge. (We went to fee paying schools)

I think the truth is we don't really know yet whether/how an Oxbridge degree (or not) will affect this generation of students. I get a sense employers are becoming more meritocratic - more use of employer-specific tests and uni-blind applications. Which is all of a piece with Oxbridge itself doing much better, smarter, fairer admissions. It feels like the overall trend is away from baked-in social privilege and towards aptitude, which in the context of higher ed and careers can only be a good thing? But we'll know a lot more in 20 or 30 years about how this all actually played out in professional seniority.

I agree that the last ten years have NOT been good for the PR profile of Oxford PPE - and I say that as someone whose brother did Oxford PPE. Not sure what Oxford could really have done about that though.

Oxbridge is elitist if you mean they''re the two most selective universities in the country with excellent teaching. If that doesn't appeal to you do your do. It's certainly not dated for the same reasons and the toff image is a good 100 years out of date, there are a handful of toffs there but far more at other universities and far more really clever comp educated dc at Oxbridge. It will certainly never hurt to have Oxbridge on your CV.

It is an interesting issue because for some jobs you do needto be reasonably bright and therefore if we recruit people with low A level grades who are not up to the work of a job then customers suffer and potentially even die. So if it is elitist to select by the skills like this you need for some jobs then it is life saving to be elitist.

Many oxbridge grads go onto to have great success and careers - it does seem to open certain doors employment wise.
Many oxbridge grads go onto to very limited future success even those with 2:1 or 1sts. My cohort either hit the stars career and life wise - law, medicine, science, archeology etc or they have struggled through life. Oddly in my group there are no in- betweeners.

Just becasue I'm in their looking at the moment:

Times World University Rankings 2023 - where UK Unis fall top 20:
1 - University of Oxford
=3 - University of Cambridge
10 - Imperial College London
22 - UCL
29 - University of Edinburgh
35 - King's College London
37 - LSE
=54 - University of Manchester
76 - University of Bristol
=82 - University of Glasgow
=104 - University of Warwick
=108 - University of Birmingham
=114 - University of Sheffield
122 - Lancaster University
=124 - Queen Mary University of London
=128 - University of Leeds
130 - Uinversity of Nottingham
=137 - University of Exeter
=139 - Newcastle University
=139 - University of York

Manchester, Glasgow, Birmingham, Sheffield etc seem to punch above their (Mumsnet) weight - you never hear of people on here going on about how great they are, but in reality, anyone going to any of these top 20 is surely almost guaranteed an interview at least. I went to 2 in the top 10 (not Oxbridge) and have always got at least an interview at every job I have applied for.

Having an Oxbridge degree opens doors to people who are no brighter than people who studied elsewhere, but they get the opportunities and this is where a lot of the inequality lies.

Having an Oxbridge degree opens doors to people who are no brighter than people who studied elsewhere

Really? They must have some strong qualities if they did well in the assessments and interviews?!

Why do you think employers target certain Universities when recruiting?

@Hillarious how are you assessing intelligence? All the people I know with an Oxbridge degree are very bright! I'm not saying there aren't other bright people who studied elsewhere, but still, they are definitely very smart.

Interesting debate. As a manager at a blue chip FMCG company and can safely say that Oxbridge degrees do not influence my recruiting. It’s about the applicant, what have they achieved during their undergrad experience? Why do they want the role and what skills do they have to offer? Some amazing candidates come from what others here would call ‘lesser’ universities. Some Oxbridge educated candidates apply with no evidence of relevant work experience etc just a degree. In my opinion it’s the universities that include placement years that come out on top. But depends what career you want to pursue, but Oxbridge education alone opens no doors here.

I interview a lot of graduates and clearly an Oxbridge degree will guarantee an interview assuming they meet all the job specs. However, once they are at the interview stage, they are all on a level playing field and I tend to forget about which university they're from. If anything, with Oxbridge grads, I tend to have higher expectations and might ask trickier questions and/or expect smarter answers.
In the latest round of hires I've just made, I interviewed a few Oxbridge grads and rejected all of them, their performance at interview was indeed very poor. All those who got to the next round (and got offered a job) were non Oxbridge grads. Nothing against Oxbridge (one of my children has just started at Oxford) but in my industry having a good brain is not enough to be successful.

DD has refused to apply, much to the disgust of her college tutor who has basically refused to give her any help with her Uni applications. Apparently she’s going to “affect the stats”.
Apart from anything else they don’t offer the course she wants.

I actually did the same 30 years ago - my teacher took me down to the Oxford Uni open day. I wanted to do Politics but they only offered PPE so I didn’t apply ( would not have actually got in given my eventual A level results in any case)

I have interviewed a fair few graduates for training posts and have never offered a post to an Oxbridge person. Our best have been from UCL, Manchester, kings and Birmingham. Maybe three years of living in cities while studying did the trick

That's lovely to hear, are you able to say what profession your ds is in now having studied maths?

Sometimes high intelligence comes at the cost of life skills, either naturally or the young person's parents / schools did not help them grow holistically.

The world changes. We have generally a more egalitarian society and employers take a broader view on getting top class graduates. With the decoupling of independent schools with Oxbridge to some extent we are getting a more diffuse elite with 'lesser ' universities such as Durham becoming comparable to Oxbridge at least in the UK. With so many young people having very good A level grades Oxbridge entry becomes more difficult to successfully regulate and there is a steady stream of high achievers going to a range of top class universities and employers are aware of this.

we will see in future positions traditionally held by Oxbridge grads being taken by graduates of other universities (or non at all) e.g. government. It will be a slow process but I think the country is moving in this general direction.

interestingly I think US universities have greater name recognition with my daughter's generation with Harvard, Yale etc. being well known through the plethora of US teen series and movies available in streaming services.

Don't be silly @Lilacsunflowers and @PrincessButtercupToo et al! Surely it depends on what the degree is. There are plenty of universities that rank higher in certain areas than either Oxford or Cambridge (or Yale or Harvard)!
The number three in the world course for my child's subject is the University of Hertfordshire and extremely competitive. It may be a middling uni overall in rep, but in this specific industry it's top in the country. And I'm sure there are many other courses that could say they outrank Oxbridge.

Biger UK law firms have about 16% of their intake from oxbridge but the next 3 (from memory Durham, Bristol Exeter another 16%). In other words it is as yo would expect for a career where knowing difficult legal issues is quite important - that those with the highest exam results tend to do best and as more of those are at Oxbridge than say Sunderland not surprisingly more of those from Oxbridge get the better jobs but it not as if the intakes are 100% Oxbridge by any means. Also some law firms once student have the minimum A level grades, pass the other tests are then trying to recruit institution blind although as the complex legal tests in interviews are quite hard it is not surprising you still find more of the people at the harder to get into universities tend to do better.

(I have no skin in tihs game - no one had ever been to Oxbridge from my small private school and when I asked the head said I was too young- I was a year youjng at school. My younger sibling was first ever to get in and none of my 5 children wanted to try from their private schools).

Tbh although my ds has applied to Oxford and will take a place if offered I know he's finding it quite an alienating process. The college system is confusing, the early application date is a scramble in a state school where very few go there, the additional exam is stressful ... etc. He enjoyed the open day but even then there were signs that they just didn't 'get' what it's like to not have a load of money eg apparently accommodation is done on a lottery basis or something (I don't quite understand and neither does DS) - the student talking about it made it sound like a lark but it has financial implications doesn't it.

Imperial on the other hand invited him to a summer school, talked him through the application process both for them and for UCAS in general and have generally just come across as approachable and helpful and keen to get people in. They might not offer him a place though LOL!

And York have already offered with the prospect of reduced offer after interview, all nice and clear and friendly, sent him a really positive email within a couple of days of the UCAS form going in.

Obviously he'd be crackers to turn Oxford down if he did get in but so far they're not making much of an effort to be appealing other than just Being Oxford.

And that's from the perspective of someone who was feeling pretty positive about it all previously.