Talk sense to me about DD not applying to Oxbridge

[MixedFeeling]

DD is very strong academically, straight 9s at GCSE and on track for 4 A stars at A level. She wants to study psychology.

I’d always imagined she might apply to Oxford or Cambridge but yesterday she told me that she doesn’t want to. Her reasons are that she thinks it will be stressful, that she thinks the other students will be too serious and she wants to be in a bigger city with more going on. On her list are Bristol, Edinburgh, Glasgow and Leeds.

WWYD? I don’t know whether I should just leave it or ask her to give it more thought- I think she’s wrong about Oxbridge students all being serious and it being especially stressful (DH and I were both at Cambridge and that was certainly not our experience- our friends were a mixed bag and the tutorial system was very supportive. Nb I’m aware that the fact we were both there has probably subconsciously informed our expectations for DD.)

Obviously the choice is hers ultimately. But I don’t want her to decide based on false information or fear of failure and then regret it. Keep talking or leave it?

I understand where you're coming from, OP. I studied at Cambridge and my very academic daughter always said that she would apply there. She was still saying that at the start of Y12 and went to visit etc.

However, she changed her mind when she started looking at courses. The medicine course just didn't appeal to her because there was no patient contact in the first 3 years and she felt that she would find that really demotivating. It's a very academically focused course for a subject that is, for dd, primarily about people. She also decided that she wanted to be in a bigger city.

We went to the open day together and that confirmed her view that it wasn't for her. I was secretly a bit disappointed because I had wanted her to have that same special experience that I had enjoyed at Cambridge myself, but actually, having attended lots of other open days as well, I could totally see that it wasn't the best fit for her. And I also realised that, actually, although she wouldn't have the same special experience that I had in Cambridge, she would have a different special experience of university of her own.

Stress levels weren't really a factor in dd's decision, because medicine is pretty stressful wherever you go. However, I think your dd is right that there is more pressure for other subjects. Certainly, the workload was a lot more intense in my subject than it was for friends doing the same subject elsewhere. The short terms add to the intensity, I think. There were a lot of mental health problems amongst my peers.

Ultimately, it is your dd's decision, and your job is to keep your own ambitions for her to to yourself, and actively support the choices that she makes. We are living our own lives, and they have got to live theirs, in the way that makes sense to them. While I was a little sad that dd wasn't even going to apply to Oxbridge, I was actually quite proud of her for looking past the big names and actually focusing on what she wanted from her university experience. Oxbridge really isn't the be all and end all, and your dd will get a great degree and hopefully have a great experience wherever she chooses to go. I wish her good luck!

She will have given this a lot of thought and she really knows best. Her other options are all great universities. Be supportive and proud of her, don't make her feel you are disappointed. She will go far in life, do not worry!

And to add to my initial post, the workload at Cambridge is certainly way, way more than at the next tier down. DS, doing English, was churning out 2 essays a week, self- researched. Then having them picked apart in supervisions. Friends at Exeter and Bristol also doing English were having as few as two essays a term. And Anglo Saxon and Chaucer in translation! Oxbridge is not for the academically faint hearted.

My DD not interested in Oxbridge even though teachers have broached the subject with her. Neither Uni do the subject she wants to take and she doesn't feel like it would suit her.

I'm quite pleased really as the only people I come into regular contact with who went to Oxbridge are two misogynistic males and a woman who is a seagull boss.

Obviously not all people who go there have grim traits , but it's always in the back of my mind .

Honestly, as a Cambridge graduate, I would absolutely not want to work for a company with such archaic and misguided recruitment practices. A policy like that speaks volumes about the company culture. There will be many much better employers with more enlightened approaches to recruitment.

DD1 went to a superselective grammar and is predicted A*s for A levels but didn't apply to Oxbridge. She was at first looking to do product design and neither of the universities offer those kinds of courses. She eventually chose architecture which Cambridge do offer, but decided she preferred the atmosphere of northern/Welsh cities and their universities. It seems sensible to me.

My DH is a recruiter for the biggest tech companies in the world and they massively look at university, they have a list of top institutions globally that they look to hire from and rarely deviate.

Great. They can stay well away from DD1 then! There are far more interesting jobs and places to work than giant companies.

I went to Oxford and loved it. I’m now a teacher in an independent secondary school and increasingly pupils are choosing to apply to the US/Imperial/a host of other universities rather than Oxbridge.

Equally we have lots of pupils who aren't really 'Oxbridge material' applying because their parents have encouraged them, or they've overestimated their own abilities. They are almost unanimously unsuccessful.

It's an amazing place to study but it suits a particular type of person. The pupils I see getting offers are, on the whole, independently motivated to apply and genuinely passionate about their subject.

It's not just one spot on the application form; the extra reading, early deadline, admissions tests, and interviews all mean a serious application is a time-consuming and potentially stressful undertaking. Fine if the pupil wants to put the effort in, but it can actually be a big distraction from A levels, which isn't worth it if they don't really have their heart set on trying their best to win a place.

What would I do? Pat her on the back for great results; trust her judgement; respect her wishes; let her go; give her the freedom to make her own decisions.

Leave her be now - you have had your say, expressed your opinion; given your advice. Now it is down to her, and whatever she decides, give her your support, congratulate her for any places she is offered. This is the moment when she finally moves into adulthood and it needs to be with your blessing.

I have had 3 DDs at this stage over time and they have all done well and they all knew that we were behind them 100%. They have all turned out to be well-educated adults with good jobs and the courage to create balance in their lives and to recognise that their intellectual skills and a career are not the most important things.

I get the impression that, these days, Oxford and Cambridge are like holidays - the fun is in the anticipation and in reminiscing about it to all and sundry afterwards. The bit in the middle just has to be endured.

Plus, the intense nose to the grindstone style currently adopted by those two universities tends to give you knowledge with a short half-life.

Let your DD make her own choices.

Why exactly is prioritising recruitment from Oxbridge "archaic and misguided"?

Lots of people have made the point about how demanding Oxbridge is e.g.

"DS, doing English, was churning out 2 essays a week, self- researched. Then having them picked apart in supervisions. Friends at Exeter and Bristol also doing English were having as few as two essays a term."

But that is precisely what makes graduates from those universities attractive to employers.

That is not to say that Oxbridge is for everyone, or that excellent candidates don't emerge from other institutions and have lots of other things to offer - no one recruits solely from Oxbridge.

But to call a recruitment policy that favours Oxbridge archaic and misguided is, in my view, incorrect.

@yogaretreat Also those firms/companies are basically saying to me they only want applicants from wealthy middle class and upper middle class backgrounds, as choice of/going to university at all is as much class based as anything else. They may pay at least lip service to sex and racial diversity but are not interested in class at all.

You're entitled to your view. I stand by mine.

Having done a lot of recruitment myself over the years, I have seen for myself that the Oxbridge candidates (and that extends to other big name universities as well) aren't always the best, so a policy like this excludes so much talent.

I was certainly better at doing exams than most of my non-Oxbridge educated peers, and yes, I churned out many more essays per week than friends who did the same subject at other universities. I'm not sure that either of those things made me uniquely qualified for the workplace.

Good post.

I was certainly better at doing exams than most of my non-Oxbridge educated peers, and yes, I churned out many more essays per week than friends who did the same subject at other universities. I'm not sure that either of those things made me uniquely qualified for the workplace.

Indeed. There aren't many jobs that require that as a direct skill - journalism, perhaps. What you need to do most jobs well is practical experience and things like people skills - the sort of things you learn when you aren't stuck in a room writing essays for hours on end.

But to call a recruitment policy that favours Oxbridge archaic and misguided is, in my view, incorrect.

Agree, it's a filter and you'll get some academic candidates.

My friend slipped up in her finals and didn't get a 2:1 which counted her out of most law firm applications. Doesn't mean she wouldn't have been a good employee (and she has done very well in her law career) but they can't spend hours poring over every application form. Same for wanting three As or A stars at A level which may preclude some excellent candidates who aren't great at exams.

That's life, irrespective of whether you're on the right side of the filter or not. Particularly for firms with larger grad intakes.

That misstates the skills involved. It is not simply a case of writing essays. It is the skill of taking a large quantity of potentially relevant information (ie what is on the reading list), identifying what is relevant and what can be ignored and the. distilling it down to the salient points (in the essay), identifying your opinion and then discussing and defending your opinion in tutorials with someone who is usually a world leader in their subject.

I also do a lot of recruitment. I didn't say that there aren't excellent candidates from other institutions. Of course there are. I disagreed with the view that for employers to recognise the unique benefits of an Oxbridge education is archaic and unhelpful.

@MixedFeeling I’ve had the same conundrum with dc1.

They chose to go to a Uni where they knew they would enjoy themselves. The way he put it was ‘I chose my mental health’.
dc1 has a friend who went to Cambridge. That friend is spending all their time working. There is no time for outside activity. But the friend is happy because he is surrounded by people with similar interest and similar ability and us having a blast discussing <insert obscure subject>. But the cricket, rowing, whatever sort they were doing before? It’s all gone.
Ive heard similar stories from other students who have gone to Oxford and decided to transfer to another Uni for similar reasons.

Having discussed with former students (from 10~20 years ago), it seems that they’ve increased the workload quite a bit too….

Bottom line, dc1 is happy where he is. And is VERY happy he didn’t apply there. He would have been miserable…

Fwiw, it IS very dependent on the person’s temperament. Dc2 is the opposite and has decided to put the Uni recognition first. He is currently revising all day long for his A levels to get his A,A,A….

Its a very personal choice.

DS is at Oxbridge. It's not just that the workload is huge, but the terms are really short and there is a huge amount of self study. Lots of things to consider.

Btw, all the discussions about whether it’s wrong going to Oxbridge in the eyes if recruitment etc….

It will depend A LOT of the subject you are studying too….

That misstates the skills involved. It is not simply a case of writing essays. It is the skill of taking a large quantity of potentially relevant information (ie what is on the reading list), identifying what is relevant and what can be ignored and the. distilling it down to the salient points (in the essay), identifying your opinion and then discussing and defending your opinion in tutorials with someone who is usually a world leader in their subject.

I agree there are other skills involved. But Oxbridge is not unique in teaching them. I did all of the above at North Staffs Poly.

I get her. It's a hard thing to turn down but the archaic traditional side of things isn't for everyone; neither is the heavy public school vibe. I'm not sure that I would have thrived in that environment.

Did she not even want to try to do the interview process, just for experience?

I also do a lot of recruitment. I didn't say that there aren't excellent candidates from other institutions. Of course there are. I disagreed with the view that for employers to recognise the unique benefits of an Oxbridge education is archaic and unhelpful.

To clarify, I am not saying that employers should not recognise the benefits of an Oxbridge education. It's fine to recognise those benefits as long as you also recognise that excellence can come from elsewhere as well. The pp stated that her DH's company had a list of "top institutions" that they recruit from and that they "rarely deviate" from that list. I do think that approach is archaic and misguide, because it almost certainly excludes talented candidates who don't necessarily fit that profile.

Ultimately, it's the company's loss, so it isn't any skin off my nose, but I would not personally choose to work for a company like that as I believe that the recruitment policies are almost certainly reflective of a wider corporate culture that I would find off-putting.