Oxbridge 2024 Entry Part 4

[Lightsabre]

New thread as our dc start the rollercoaster ride of interviews.

I thought Peterhouse used it too

There's nothing on their website about using the flexible offer (though they may well have decided to start doing so and not updated their website, nor told the faculty admissions officer so they can update the faculty website!)

All I know is they have a very state school friendly approach. My insider is a senior prof in humanities there and was a state schooler himself back in the 80s when he was a student

The weakening is unequivocal. It pains me to hear the demise.

Until recently, an oxbridge choral scholar would most likely have been a resident chorister at one of our cathedrals or chapels. St George's Windsor, Westminster Cathedral etc. Inevitably, such choristers continue to win top music scholarships to the top private schools, but very few now have access to oxbridge. While non-former-choristers may well be as musically gifted in general, on joining an oxbridge choir, they don't possess the delicate understanding of choral balance which five years as a chorister inevitably instils.

That exquisite sound, which so magnificently transcends, has been lost. It is a great tragedy.

Inevitably, such choristers continue to win top music scholarships to the top private schools, but very few now have access to oxbridge.

What do you mean, why?

that might well be due to fewer kids wanting to sing in their local cathedral at weekends - whatever school they go to.

oxbridge still have choral and organ scholarships so i feel sure a private school kid with a cathedral background will still get in? But fewer boys will take up singing to start with

Because they aren’t bright enough to get in, presumably. US universities accept people on sports and music scholarships that wouldn’t be capable of getting in on an academic basis alone.

My understanding is that the choral scholarships are separate from normal admission and won’t give the holders any advantage in achieving a place. It may well be different for organ scholars though as they are much rarer creatures.

I know my son’s state school have success in obtaining choral scholarships mainly at Oxford. The teachers have experience of college and Cathedral singing so offer a good level of support and know the process. The choirs at his school are excellent, but even the sixth for choir (including teachers) don’t hold a candle to the Cathedral Choristers (kids only) at the school he attended as a day pupil for KS2.

I think it is a bit harsh to say that ex-choristers aren’t bright enough to get in without considering how their musical commitments from the age of 7/8 may have made it more difficult for them to shine academically against other private/boarding school pupils.

I was just wondering why these fantastic singers no longer have access to Oxbridge, it seems a strange thing to say, like being a chorister is a disadvantage when applying or something.

If it's just that fewer of them can compete academically now that more state school DC are applying then I guess Oxbridge are first and foremost universities and it's fair enough that they prioritise their academic reputations.

@Jaxx yes you are right it is completely separate; DD went through the choral process successfully in sept but they are very clear that it is not a factor in the academic process at all, except you apply to the college that indicates they are likely to accept you as a choral scholar if you get in (DD was reallocated during the choral process as are many to balance out voice types etc); Organ is different again, and for many (but not all) subjects the academic process concluded in September with the organ trials, and academic offers made at that point. This is Oxford and many young people get choral ‘offers’ that don’t then get an academic place, which as sad as it will be for DD, is an accepted fact

DC is a choral scholar at a Cambridge college. The process has nothing whatsoever to do with the admissions process. Applications for anyone interested in choral scholarships are in March, so after conditional offers have been made.

Basically, they receive a token payment of £100 per year. They have a free 'formal' once or twice a week (or maybe more often in some colleges). They receive free individual singing lessons (number per term may vary by college). There are choir trips after the exams each summer and most choirs record albums on CD / Spotify.

The important thing is to choose a choir they can realistically commit to - eg. Kings will have rehearsals at least every day and multiple services per week. It's a huge commitment. Other colleges just require 2 rehearsals per week, so much more manageable.

I've no idea if standards have fallen in recent years. I wouldn't know!

They're either not bright enough to go, or are bright enough but prejudiced against for being being from 'public school' and not offered a place. It's indisputable that the quality of sound in the oxbridge choirs has gone down in recent years, and I suspect it's a direct result of former choristers not making up the majority of the alto, tenor, bass sections like they always did.

"but prejudiced against for being being from 'public school' and not offered a place"

This nonsense is starting early this year. We don't usually get the discrimination posts until at least the first week in Jan.

@HewasH2O agree and not loving “not bright enough” as a way of describing anyone

This nonsense is starting early this year. We don't usually get the discrimination posts until at least the first week in Jan

Thirded.

I should think each student will get in on their own merits no matter where they went to school or how well they sing

They're either not bright enough to go, or are bright enough but prejudiced against for being being from 'public school' and not offered a place. It's indisputable that the quality of sound in the oxbridge choirs has gone down in recent years, and I suspect it's a direct result of former choristers not making up the majority of the alto, tenor, bass sections like they always did.

If they're 'not bright enough to go' then of course they shouldn't be there just because they can sing. The public school prejudice is blatant rubbish peddled as an excuse for some not getting a place - the public school numbers are still pretty healthy. The integrity of Oxbridge rests on choosing the best fit academic students not the right choir composition.

‘Prejudiced for being from a public school’? Really? The Cambridge stats are around 30% public (correct me if I’m wrong), which is approx 5 times the percentage of students that attend a public school. That could in itself be considered prejudiced the other way - although I hope that isn’t the case and it’s down to individual merit when it comes to academic ability and suitability to the teaching style.

@Redhotchillipeppers

According to this source (and I don’t know how reliable it is, but it’s approximately in line with other results I’ve seen)

• At the primary stage, 5 percent of pupils attend private schools.
• At the secondary stage, 8 percent of pupils attend private schools.
• Of those in sixth forms, 17 percent of pupils attend private school

It seems to be commonly quoted that 7% of pupils attend private schools, but it seems to me that the percentage for sixth formers is more relevant than that for all pupils.

According to The Tab (student newspaper) 28.2% of Cambridge University students are privately educated, so you weren’t far out at 30%, or were correct for last year, whichever way you prefer to look at.

Either way, it’s closer to twice than five times. Like you, I’d like to think it’s individual merit.

It's fact that Oxbridge is likely to give the chance to the applicants from state school rather than from the independent schools. It's nothing wrong. But only talking the higher ratio for Oxbridge student numbers is also prejudiced as you forget the fact that Oxbridge is highly selective just as the the independent schools.

It's fact that Oxbridge is likely to give the chance to the applicants from state school rather than from the independent schools.

It's this sort of statement, made without any qualification or evidence which really gets my back up.

It is certainly a fact that a higher percentage of students from state schools are gaining places at Oxbridge in recent years, and I think that it is probably because, rightly, the 'old school tie' is less important than merit now. When I applied (many moons ago) and knew I'd messed up my interview, my housemistress said "Oh, I'll just phone X and tell them to take you". I refused because I knew that if I hadn't gained a place on merit, the imposter syndrome would be even worse. At a recent dinner party, where the only non-Oxbridge grads were me and my husband, many of them said they would never have got in nowadays - academic standards "are more rigorously enforced than in our day".

Both universities have worked really hard to widen access and stop state schools telling their able pupils that it 'isn't for the likes of us'. It should be open to all. Therefore with more people applying, especially from state schools, and with a current bulge in 18 year olds, alongside a fixed number of places - the chances of a place are possibly smaller than they used to be.

I wish every single child waiting on an interview outcome the best of luck and really hope that if the news is not as they hope, that they can be proud of themselves for throwing their hat in the ring - the fact that they got interviews prove that they are 'good enough', 'bright enough' 🙄etc and that they will succeed and thrive at other institutions. (It hurt like hell when I was rejected - but I would never have met my husband or studied such an interesting subject if I'd hit my 'law at Oxford' goal).

But only talking the higher ratio for Oxbridge student numbers is also prejudiced as you forget the fact that Oxbridge is highly selective just as independent schools.

This is true and why Oxford (don't know about Cambridge) publish data showing % of high-achieving students in each sector and compare that with their intake.

Their latest figures:

23.1% of DC who achieved ÅÅA or better went to independent school. (This is from 2020 so may be slightly inflated.)

31.9% of the Oxford intake is from the indie sector.

They are over-represented.

Sorry, I meant that with the same predicted and entrance test grades.

Well, the privately educated choristers who sparked this particular discussion are unlikely to be in the group which went through the state sector from 5-16 and only swapped at sixth form level, given that the argument is that they often get scholarships to “top private schools” from a much younger age. And we haven’t yet started on the other claim made by those determined to get upset one way or the other, that the state/private statistics refer only to school attended at sixth form and that lots of private school parents whose children get into Oxford or Cambridge have started swapping to state for sixth form, or grammar school at 11, and making the Oxford/Cambridge state school statistics appear to be better than they actually are, given that they are based only on school attended for A-levels, not the 11 years or 5 years prior to that stage. Then we have to go through the argument that wealthy parents are ensuring their children only go to the “best” state schools and are getting tutors for their children and that this is cheating the system and depriving deserving children of good state school places as well as good, honest private school pupils from their places at Oxbridge. Then someone has to argue that you can only go so far and can’t do anything about the fact that some students have more supportive parents, etc, etc, and blah, blah, blah, ad nauseam.

All of this is, in any event, a relatively pointless discussion for people who are now in their last year of school, can’t change the schools they have already attended, and have already applied to Oxford or Cambridge.

many of them said they would never have got in nowadays - academic standards "are more rigorously enforced than in our day".

My friend, a teacher, who was state educated and went to Cambridge, a long time ago, said the exact same thing, that they would not get an offer if applied now.

I really hope this thread doesn't descend into judgements as it has been supportive. Our DC have applied to Oxbridge knowing that they are highly oversubscribed so not all will get in. That is the reality. I trust the admissions teams and I don't think it's helpful to anyone, especially our DC if there is accusations of unfairness.

It will be what it is and our DC should be proud that they applied.