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?

@Ihlaria - yes, I remember well my own resentment that Oxford had to create extra hurdles for people applying. I can’t emphasise enough though how much I enjoyed studying for my degree there. It’s normal to feel a bit resentful about the extra pressure of applying to Oxford or Cambridge, but so incredibly worthwhile if your main motivation is your love of the subject and desire to find like minded people to learn from and discuss it with, given the Oxford tutorial style of teaching (or Cambridge seminars and supervisions). I also loved the collegiate system once I was there and identified strongly with my college. It’s difficult not to develop a strong sense of belonging in a collegiate system.

Of course there are other places that are just as good for particular degrees, less intense (which might suit some people better), where you will have a great time, make just as many lifelong friends and from which you can leave equally employable, but, actually, I will never regret making the effort to apply to a place I had a wonderful, eternally memorable time at. I don’t think a lecture-based, non-collegiate system would have made quite such a strong impression on me.

*conferencing! Not co defending 😂

To all, why should people want a place at Oxbridge if they don't want to put the effort in to give themselves a good chance to achieve the position ?

People need to understand the reasons for the extra effort required to get into two specific universities, or they will question why those two universities think they are a special case. I think it is justified due to the distinctive method of teaching, the intensity of the short terms, the access to the world class facilities and people, the access to extra financial support for those who need it, and for the college experience. Those two universities really do provide an experience like nowhere else. So - maybe not totally worth it if you are only actually interested in a degree for personal career advancement, as other good universities could offer that for less effort, but definitely worth the effort otherwise.

Well yes.
One of the reasons my DD wanted to try for Cambridge was precisely because it would be a challenge. She didn't want to go to uni for an easy ride, what a waste of time and money that would be! Not that the other engineering courses she'd applied to would have been a doddle, of course.

yes they’re optional but they are also almost mandatory to ensure the network that is so buzzed about by going to Oxbridge.

Absolute bullshit, 30 years ago I attended one ball doing the worked for half/partied for half thing to get a free ticket, it was totally not mandatory to attend and the idea that social networking went on at such an event is laughable everyone is off their faces and dancing/going on fairground rides - not involved in some kind of Dan-Brownesque pact. I NEVER went on a ski trip and am not even aware they existed. I joined no secret society - maybe everyone else was in it and I was the only person in the university missing out on amazing networking opportunities. I doubt it. A tiny number of odd people joined the Union, they were considered weird wannabe Tories and avoided by the vast majority. The kind of people who go on ski trips regularly, to balls etc exist at ANY university and I'd say were far more prevalent at places like Durham- they are not what Oxbridge was about by the late 80s early 90s and in every way it's become far more inclusive since. I worry about what advice you're giving clients at your "educational consultancy" if this is what you truly believe.

Also, a friend's ds has just started at Oxford from a well-known public school. She says he feels very disoriented because he's in such a minority. He'll live!

So how did my dd mange to save money then during her time at Cambridge? By living in college accommodation that cost 4.5k/year, eating college subsidised food or cooking simple meals herself and by getting paid jobs and internships over the summer. If there were secret societies they were secret to her too. She wasn't a summer ball type person, no interest, didn't miss out. She joined the societies that were of interest to her. She managed to pay for holidays out of her money too.

Contrast it to her friends that went to some other universities who need subsidising by parents beyond the full loan amount simply to pay accommodation and food.

I think your education company may need to rethink its old fashioned and out of touch view of Oxbridge.

I could be wrong but with the secret society's, it's secret and only if you get the offer to join from other members, I believe, I think it was that way with some society's, otherwise then you don't know if they exist etc.

@OhYouBadBadKitten my DD was the same. She joined in various things and did a lot of new sports including football. She and I support the same team but she is actually not a bad player herself. When she was at school, girls didn't really play football, although there are a lot more playing now.

I'm concerned about the information getting back to @delilahhey 's clients. The image portrayed is more akin to Brideshead Revisted than what Cambridge is really like. Firstly, they aren't "children", they are adults. You might be "more in the know than the average parent" but how do you define average? Your knowledge is somewhat wide of the mark from what I can see. You are completely wrong about not being able to have a job; loads of us have students there who have worked in their long summer vacations. They simply don't have the time to work in their intense short terms, and if NatSci DD was anything to go by, in the Christmas and Easter breaks, she was busy revising, doing supervision work or sorting out her notes.

I don't know whether Cambridge is more expensive than London, but Sainsbury's seems to charge the same across the country. DD's college rent for her undergrad and Masters years was a lot cheaper than living in London. Transport by bike is free and unlike lots of London, Cambridge is set up for bikes.

In DD's first year, we went to a parents' lunch in her college. The Master told us that the average cost of educating an undergraduate was £18k per year (early 2018). The fees DD paid were the same as any English university. So how can it be so expensive?

DS has applied for Oxford this year, he knows his chances of an offer are tiny, but we’ve really enjoyed the experience of learning about the university.

There’s so much information available and easily accessible that I’m struggling to see where all these barriers to the application process are.

The university has a great website, most college websites are pretty good too, then there are The Alternative Guides, free webinars, videos etc - there’s also too much info out there.

there’s also too much info out there.

Maybe that is the reason?

Typo there - should have been ‘almost too much info…’

Maybe you’re right, although I’ve enjoyed filtering through it and picking out the best bits for Oxford and the other universities DS is interested in. I’m very process driven and enjoyed comparing the different places, grades needed, cost of living, teaching methods etc

Frankly I'm worried about the information your company is giving out if this is what you really think.

I went to Oxford in mid 2000s. Household income was c. £23k, and my parents couldn't make any contribution to my costs.

I automatically got a college bursary and the Oxford opportunity bursary (think it's now Crankstart, which is even more generous), and could have applied for travel bursaries, support with living costs for internships or contributions towards buying academic books.

You are only not supposed to work during term time (although most colleges will let students do shifts in the college bar), so 9*3 leaves you 25 weeks a year to get a job. I worked during 2/3 of the vacations in my 2nd year, but didn't need to do that much - my two sisters worked much less, and were fine financially. At one point I was able to give my mum money from my earnings when she was having a few tough months.

I never missed out on any social activities - went to multiple balls, did the Varsity ski trip, joined the Union (what a waste of money that was...), was able to eat in Hall every day that I wanted to. And I lived out in 2nd year, so paying a full year's rent instead of just term time, and stayed up in college for most of the 3 year vacs to study. It was perfectly affordable. Friends who were at UCL or Imperial found managing budgets much more difficult.

Totally agree with what others have said about affordability. We've topped DS1 up to the recommended amount every year and he has managed to save money each month into an ISA. He's worked in the summer holidays and put money on one side to pay for some balls.

He bought himself a 'new' dinner suit from Oxfam when he was volunteering there.

It is sad/frustrating to read of people recycling stuff about Oxbridge that is out of date or simply isn't true.
I have one DC currently at Cambridge and another who graduated this year from Oxford. We can't afford to top up our DC to the recommended amount but they have both managed just fine on less. They have attended balls for free by having roles on ball committees and have paid for tickets using money from summer jobs. DD (Oxford) has had paid work each summer in her tutor's lab. DS (Cambridge) has just had a well paid summer internship. Both have had excellent sports opportunities and coaching resulting in blues/half-blues. Far too busy to worry about the existence or otherwise of secret societies. Both their colleges provide accommodation for the duration of their courses and it has worked out less expensive than accommodation options at other universities. Pastoral support is very good too and the collegiate structure really does create communities to which they feel they belong.

I'm concerned about the information getting back to @delilahhey 's clients

Malbec I'm not in the least concerned about anyone who goes to a paying 'education company', I'm completely sanguine.

There's absolutely heaps of bullshit being peddled on this thread. Just as well that for those of merit, who can't pay for an 'education company', some sensible, well informed voices with recent experience are being heard.

A very big haha to the idea of balls being networking opportunities (possibly for the networking of drug supplies I guess, just the same as at all unis, nothing special there).

It is like most things in life that are worthwhile - it's harder. Same with getting a job in a top firm - loads of hurdles and very difficult and then you get higher pay and with having high A level results- requires a lot more work than getting 3 Ds.

I have had one-step oxfor cand one v at Cambridge. My son at Oxford found it a very toxic environment full of pretentiousness covering up insecurity.One of his tutors told him he should be working 17bhours per day.The other did maths at Cambridge and went into academia, so will never earn a massive salary but loves his job

I think we have to consider for which professions is it a major disadvantage not to have been to Oxbridge and the number of such professions is diminishing

Obviously an Oxbridge degree sets you up well for interview but it is still (and even more) possible for graduates from other universities to compete. Employers are not stupid and simply wish the best candidates

Your professional life certainly isn't over not getting into Oxbridge and I think focused career planning can compensate.

I also think that there are many able people that didn't attend Oxbridge, Peter Higgs (boson fame), Roger Penrose (Mathematician) spring to mind from STEM and I am sure other fields have their examples The point being that Oxbridge graduates are certainly not guarenteed to be any better than others.

If you get genius level children not wanting to attend Oxbridge I think Oxbridge needs to know why those pupils aren't applying.

?! What makes you think Roger Penrose didn’t attend Oxbridge? His phD was at Cambridge and he is an emeritus professor at Oxford. Clearly he felt Oxbridge would advance his career considerably.

If you get genius level children not wanting to attend Oxbridge I think Oxbridge needs to know why those pupils aren't applying.

Really? We're fortunate to have other world-ranking universities in the U.K., there may be many reasons why someone might prefer E.g. London or Edinburgh, or favour a different course or teaching style. One size never had fitted all.

However, they need to be - and very evidently are - aware if there's systematic demographic differences in who applies and who doesn't.

@Walkaround

I believe Roger did his first degree at UCL (of course many years ago)

It may be he decided not to apply to Oxford or Cambridge or he did apply and wasn't 'Oxbridge material' at the time....who knows.

I was putting forward an example of someone who is extremely intelligent and productive who didn't at least initially attend an Oxbridge college.

The fact is London as a whole has incredibly good universities and aspiration to attend one is something to be admired.

It is great to be blessed with a number of great universities in this country and I think each have their merits .

I have to say myown DS at Oxford really did nothing extra for his application.The one studying maths at Cambridge did have to do some practice for the STEP exam, but nothing else There is so much bullshit spouted about Oxbridge on t here threads

@ErrolTheDragon

I think you have an interesting point about high calibre students not applying to Oxbridge as they simply prefer elsewhere for a variety of reasons including course content. Admittedly a significant proportion of the truly talented will go to Oxbridge but when you have outstanding individuals applying elsewhere it certainly enhances the reputation of the university and also bears out the fact not all of our geniuses do attend Oxbridge.

if you look at the combined institution of London university with their alumni and research strengths it is an incredibly strong institution. I don't think London university graduates need feel inferior to their Oxbridge countererparts and I think salary information bears this out.

@mids2019 - of course there are brilliant people at other universities. It would be a deeply depressing state of affairs if it were otherwise.