York, Durham, Exeter

[GodessOfThunder]

These universities seem feature in a disproportionate amount of discussion on Mumsnet as institutions commenters see as desirable for their DC to attend. Obviously they are well regarded universities, but why do they attract more discussion here than other Russell group universities, especially those in northern and midlands post-industrial cities such as Manchester, Sheffield, Leeds, Liverpool, Nottingham and Birmingham?

A few possible reasons were suggested by DH:

• They enjoy an undue level of perceived prestige due to being in smaller old cities/towns like Oxbridge
• The Mumsnet user base is skewed towards the SE and biased against post-industrial cities. Mumsnetters are less likely to be familiar with them and hold “grim up north” perceptions.
• There is a “showing off” factor in starting threads and commenting that DC has applied for, or attends, these institutions - the same goes for the “Oxbridge support” threads, the like of which you never see for red bricks.

Does anyone agree, or are there other explanatory factors?

But this is the problem - the 'elite' universities aren't (just) funded by the Government. Beyond the 'core' funding a huge amount of what contributes towards making them 'elite' is derived from legacies, donations and funding from rich donors who often have a whole family line who have attended an Oxbridge college, for example.
When Lord Rich B'Stard learns that his grandson didn't get in, that funding often quietly disappears (and reappears later at St. Andrews/ Durham etc).

I'm not saying I endorse this practice - just pointing out that it happens, and the 'elite' nature of some of these universities is inextricably linked to established wealth and power structures that isn't easily or quickly replaced.

My neighbours (both Cambridge grads) were telling us recently that their old college has lost a huge amount of funding in the last few years in this way.

It's naive to think it hasn't been a private club in the past, and naive to expect it will continue in the same way when the current structure is dismantled.

Again, I'm not saying I support it, but I don't understand how people can't see what makes it 'elite' in the first place?

So are exeter and York mediocre unis that rich white kids go to so they meet more of their own and mumsnetters rate disproportionately for their quality, or elite institutions that kids from poorer backgrounds would love to go to but the concentration of rich kids acts as a barrier to entry?

because after 23 pages I am no longer sure

I presume no one wants private school pupils excluded from all the better universities or allocated to London Met or some other kind of socialist experiment?

I agree. I understand the reasoning but it's become extremely difficult to get into Oxbridge from our school.

And while contextual offers may be one way of levelling up, the only person I know to receive an unconditional contextual offer from Durham last year went to a private school and came from a high earning family. So a bit of a blunt instrument at times.

Ultimately universities want engaged students and there's a point at which things go too far in terms of social engineering.

As I mentioned upthread I had 2 of mine at a high-achieving grammar and a secondary modern at the same time so I have kind of lived through some of this. What I will say is that despite the schools being fairly similar sizes and equidistant from our house, anyone who thinks the 2 DCs had equality of educational opportunity literally does not have a scooby.

The purpose of contextual offers @maybebalancing is to attempt to address some of these inequalities. The one at secondary modern has proved, in fact, to be pretty academic – her A level results aren't fantastic because the school wasn't fantastic but her Masters most certainly is – perhaps because it followed 5 years of more equal opportunities?

There's a fantastic bit at the start of "A Room of One's Own" where Woolf imagines endless streams of gold poured into the marshes of East Anglia to lay the foundations of Cambridge colleges.

I understand the purpose of contextual offers and that they are done with the best of intentions.
I do think that they are going to have unintended side affects however and I'm glad I was spared them.

I know my children are fortunate to attend a good school. But I also know plenty of people who go back into state school for the sixth form as it's a positive for university applications. And some who spend that money on private tutors.

I'm not against contextual offers to widen university access for kids at lower performing schools. But it's not perfect either and there's a balance to be had.

I know what you mean.

Theres probably an element of both being true to be honest.

The people you know are very misguides as universities look at where GCSEs were taken to decide on any contextual considerations.

Exeter is okay but it is just another RG uni, nothing special. Bristol has lost its cachet and I'm not sure if contextual focus has affected that or not.

Sorry - 'misguided'

Or do teachers tend to steer kids towards unis with a high success rate in terms of offers in recent years?

That can perpetuate a similar trend.

And is it unreasonable if students pick the 'prettier' universities? If the courses are similar, it often comes down to how much you like the city.

The people you know are very misguides as universities look at where GCSEs were taken to decide on any contextual considerations.

Asked in a genuine way but the example I referenced took their GCSEs at the same private school. So I guess it just be where they live as it can't be their school.

A good question….

Where my head is at is that…

Exeter, Durham and York are somewhat overrated by Mumsnetters. This is likely driven by a combination of the attractiveness of the location and the strong presence, in Exeter and Durham’s case, of the privately educated.

This strong presence helps create a perception among some A-level students and those that influence them, that these universities are not places for comprehensive kids, the less wealthy, those who are culturally different etc.

This barrier reduces the pool of potential universities they consider applying to, and thus, equality of opportunity.

Although Exeter and Durham may be somewhat overrated (see above), they are still highly regarded institutions and more work needs to be done to ensure all feel comfortable applying.

The END 😀

Neither! They're both stereotypes only perpetuated on Mumsnet!

Both my kids (Exeter and York) had friends from all backgrounds and both universities have some outstanding, top-ranking subjects/ courses.

And I'm not sure how any university consistently ranked in the Top 20 out of 160 can be considered 'mediocre'. (Pity the rest, ranked 21-160!)

I'm sure the main barrier to entry for a lot of students to Exeter is that unless you're in the SE it's bloody far away

I'm sure the main barrier to entry for a lot of students to Exeter is that unless you're in the SE it's bloody far away

Yep. Bristol was a stretch for us, so Exeter was out of the question.

People seem to be saying that schools are desirable because they have a lot of private school kids. That the over-representation of private school kids is what makes them overrated.

But, instead of shrugging our shoulders and saying they are good schools, among 20 other good schools to choose from, who happen to attract a certain demographic- we get upset about it. Why? If it’s not to your taste many other highly rated schools are available.

There are only two ways to solve this problem:

1. Insist that no university have more than 24% privately educated students (picking this number because, it reflects the percentage of As and A*s produced by students coming out of private 6th forms)
2. Change our attitudes. The private school students don’t inherently make the schools more desirable. It’s our perception that makes it so.

Play it cool. Shrug your shoulders folks.

in a similar vein I work with many children from a specific minority group and their choice of universities is largely determined by where they feel that group is well represented - no massive spoiler but it isn’t the commonly perceived “elite” institutions

given the no massive spoiler sweeping generalisation can you expand on this at all @KittyMcKitty

Some minority groups are clearly doing pretty well in terms of accessing the "top" unis, but others which I think you are probably alluding to significantly less so. I absolutely agree this needs to be raised and barriers tackled however I think greater precision and targeting is needed. Recognise you may be limited in what you can share on an MN thread of course.

There is a significant gap at the overall level between the likes of Exeter and Durham, vs the likes of Imperial, UCL, LSE. Part of that explained by simple geography, but that is too often used as a convenient excuse.

There has been progress in terms of participation since 2014-15, but progress varies. HESA rather generalises unfortunately. However the, admittedly a bit simplistic, Asian, Black, Mixed and White graphs start to tell differing stories.

The Asian progress very different to Black - although if we broke this down into more meaningful sub-groups we'd get a much more accurate picture.

Mixed and White

and if I were to summarise the challenges your (and Wombat's) thoughtful set of posts were making in one graphic it would probably be this one.

If you rank the universities by their average entry standards as per CUG, removing the Scottish universities the list is as follows
1.Cambridge
2.Imperial
3.Oxford
4.LSE
5.UCL
6,Durham
7.Bath
8.Bristol
9.Warwick
10.KCL.
11.Manchester
12.Exeter
with York at 17.

The popularity of a university may make it competitive but from this Durham and Exeter do end up with students with high entry standards. This can be self perpetuating for ‘prestige’.

There is a significant gap at the overall level between the likes of Exeter and Durham, vs the likes of Imperial, UCL, LSE. Part of that explained by simple geography, but that is too often used as a convenient excuse.

Amongst my fellow parents, there's more of a predisposition for Asian students to live at home during their university years, for religious reasons or not really liking the idea of heavy partying. It's certainly the case among my son's friendship group.

Given the south east is highly populated and ethnically diverse, that may be a factor in the higher representation in London universities and less in Durham and York. London is also seen as more cosmopolitan which appeals to some students.

Which brings it back to the point of like attracting like. If private schools have a high percentage of their cohort going to Durham or Exeter, that's likely to continue. I went to a high performing grammar school but my geography teacher told me I wouldn't get an interview at Durham and when I did, I was unlikely to receive an offer. Looking back, I can't believe that level of negativity (it was deeply satisfying to prove her wrong).

Thanks again for the ethnicity data - really interesting.

Do you mind explaining what we’re seeing in this specific chart.