Cambridge to 'drop state school admissions targets'

[Stripedquilt]

A lot about this in the news this morning.

One thing I don't understand - 'The institution is focusing on a new access plan to be put into action from the academic years 2025-26 to 2028-29.'

Will this apply to the applications made later this year for the intake of the academic year 2025-26? Or does it mean they start implementing the new access plan from 2025-26 onwards - so the state school targets would be dropped for those starting uni in autumn 2026, not 2025?

Thanks for any clarity!

I think you're misunderstanding what I'm trying to say. You think, I have stated passion is enough, and that someone who just goes in and spouts a monologue about their interests without stopping for breath is going to get in.

My actual point is that, it's possible to prep without being passionate, which you have dutifully demonstrated by providing the perfect example. Your daughter read, watched films. Now, for you, it's 'not much', but it's more than what a lot of others do. And it's the exactly the sort of thing that schools who send loads of pupils to Oxbridge every year, advise their cohort to do, in addition to prepping for entrance tests etc.

What Oxbridge are trying to say is that, they don't want people who have been prepped. Their objective, is to get the truly passionate. Who have done all of this because of interest, not because they've been coached. Now if your daughter did do all of that stuff under her own steam, not just because she wanted to apply one could argue that she was somewhat passionate. Not strong enough for your definition of passionate. But she had an interest beyond getting good grades.

At the end of the day if someone is truly good at performing, it will be hard to tell the difference. And that aside, whether any individual gets in depends on the strength of the cohort.
Many people who do 'meet the requirements' don't get in, because there are others better than them. Your daughter might even have been the last person picked, might not have gotten in if someone else was better? Who knows? You think she didn't do much but actually, she did more than others.

As an aside, MFL as a degree is dying, I think you have been on a lot of MFL threads recently where people explain the reasons against choosing it as a degree, arguing against its worth. And you defended it, stating how your Sri Lankan garage owner wondered why she was doing it instead of something practical like Law. Maybe it was another daughter? But if it was this one, you failed to mention that it was at Oxbridge, which immediately puts it in a different category. Any Oxbridge degree makes one valuable to employers, no matter the subject.... the same considerations don't apply even for someone studying it at any other well-regarded institution.

She didn’t go to Oxford. All went wrong with non MFL subject. She bounced back though. She was just determined.

I don’t think she did more than others. Some others being interviewed had already studied the piece of literature and were talking about it after the interviews. She hadn’t. What does it matter if you are the last one in? Who cares? Who even knows? What you can do is revise your grammar and try and increase vocabulary. It’s then down to you to use your knowledge to work out what you might not know.

Yes. I will defend it as a degree. Others did too. These days no one gives you a chance simply because Oxford is on the cv. If you have had a personality bypass, some careers won’t be for you. Her career doesn’t require MFL or a particular uni. These are merely a step on the way. The days of walking into any career because of Oxbridge are long gone because so many very bright people are not at Oxbridge. DD was probably happier not going if I’m truthful.

Yeah, I don't think any grad is guaranteed anything solely by university name. But it does open more doors. Which is why people are obsessed with the diversity, because it erm gives more people from more backgrounds more chances.

20+ years into a career, nobody cares where you went to uni. And while people talk about the Oxbridge network, I doubt that people are likely to help other randoms because they went to the same uni, or even the same college. It's far more likely that the friend group you made, are useful connections, but once you start working you'll be able to mix professionally. If you just sat in your room and studied you wouldn't be making many friends anyway.

I've gotten useful information from my university friends, mentors, etc. My success in graduate interviews was thanks to help from seniors along with my own efforts. DH had no such thing, he was the only one to get onto a large graduate scheme everyone else worked local jobs for small/medium firms. However, there's still plenty of time to make contacts in the professional world.

I don’t know enough about the brass world to properly comment on that.

The child I am currently funding plays piano. A friend who used to work for the music service on a widening participation identified their self taught talent in year 6 & enquired with the headteacher if lessons could be organised. It wasn’t possible.
There was a change of head and the school scrapped the music project. Child went to secondary and his parents scraped the money together for a 20 minute lesson per fortnight which is not sufficient if child is to aim high.
I now provide one half hour lesson per week, (I contributed a chunk of my own money & crowd funded the rest) child came 2nd in a National comp and there is talk of royal northern junior dept.

but that’s one child. My son’s friend got free lessons at school but not at college (our school’s don’t have 6th forms. They auditioned for royal northern having only had 3-4 lessons in the couple of months leading up to the audition. My husband kindly provided free music theory lessons but they didn’t get in. They might not have anyway but they really didn’t stand a chance without.

Might the Oxbridge solution be that they drop undergraduate degrees altogether and only offer postgraduate courses? Oxbridge becomes the crème de la crème of postgraduate study - for those who truly want to continue researching their subject. I haven’t thought through the financial/funding issues on this though!

(On music, my children's father is an organist and music teacher. He has seen a lot of brilliant players over the years having to ask for teaching jobs because it can be a very competitive field. In fact quite a few of the City lawyers I know did a music degree at Oxbridge so not everyone does music and then goes into the music field even. I am from the North of England. When my great grandfather's brother died in the coal mines 200 people lined the streets and the mine's brass band played. I am pretty sure there is not quite as much brass playing going on up there now as then (My 3 sons who all won music scholarships are/were brass players - in fee paying schools, not that that makes me any kind of expert in brass instrument teaching in Northern schools,. only an expert in many years of accompanying my children at the piano at home and in exams playing their brass and other instruments over many years... It was grade 8 my 5th child trumpet exam when without a doubt my piano playing was worse than his trumpet playing but I had quite a few years of being better and seeing your children better than you are is lovely).

@mumsneedwine It’s absolutely a way to get bursaries from top schools and fsm. Others pay for your house and car and parents do a bit of this and that for money because they don’t need to do more. Also unmarried parents not living together. The non resident parent makes no contribution on a regular basis but they buy holidays, cars, etc. Resident parents does work but at a level to ensure they get benefits and fsm. You would be surprised how bright people work this out!

@TizerorFizz they might be bright but they have no morals 🤷‍♀️

The FSM students I know live in abject poverty. We live in v v different worlds.

@TizerorFizz do you really know people who are scamming the system like this and getting fsm etc? Or is it a theoretical argument?

@NotDonna Yes I do. I don’t particularly begrudge it (life is too short) but receiving fsm is not necessarily an indicator of poverty. Family circumstances make such things possible and of course no one asks about wider family money do they?

If there were really that many people cheating the system to get free school meals (household income less than £7,400 a year) then surely the FSM percentage at more desirable schools?

I don’t live in a grammar area, but there are 2 schools in our town that are considered to be the best options, one girls and one boys. They don’t have catchments as they are random allocation, but to apply your child has to sit their banding test. The majority of children from the more deprived parts of town don’t sit these, it’s an additional obstacle to those that have enough on their plates with day to day living. The boy’s school has 7.7% on FSM, the girl’s is 15%. My DDs old school is roughly equidistant to both schools and serves takes it’s cohort from the same areas. They have 35% on FSM. Silly me though, it’s all the grabby people fiddling their FSM applications to get into a RI school 🙄

@dontletmedowngently Silly you for skim reading what I said. Never mind. “All the grabby people” was not what I said - I said it’s possible and some people work the system. As they do with nearly every system!

Having a DD at Cambridge and seeing past threads on Oxbridge applications for a number of years I think one of the biggest barriers is perceived cost. Also the ‘vacation’ hassle can be seen as an issue for those far away,

Many don’t apply as they consider it expensive. They don’t realise the bursaries and subsidies available.

Also in the press recently was the issue of so few from The North East and North West applying. I get that Scottish students would would choose no fees over Oxbridge. The ‘vacation’ of colleges at Christmas and Easter is not insurmountable. There are massive mechanisms in place to support storage or transport and some are paid by colleges

Another perceived barrier is the ‘don’t work’ during term recommendation., Bursaries and grants from colleges can again better be advertised. Also the longer holidays to work then.

Top universities should recruit based on merit. If Oxbridge keep playing like they are now, they will die away from the world elite university list.

That's excellent news if true. Doubt it though.

What do you mean by merit? The kid who gets the A* over the kid who gets the A? Regardless of anything else whatsoever?

Can't you see the big difference between A* and B?

I didn’t say B - I’m not convinced anyone, no matter how deprived, gets into oxbridge with a set of Bs. And given the biases in A level marking there can be teeny tiny differences between an A and and Astar.
Moreover can’t you see the difference between those who have an awful lot of privilege and those that are studying in quite adverse situations? Do the latter not ‘merit’ a place at oxbridge?

Or at least be in with a chance?

The latter may well get a string of Astars but not consider oxbridge for a multitude of reasons. So yes, oxbridge does need to re-think their strategy of opening access.

What biases in A level marking? A level exams are marked externally and anonymously.

All students need the same grades for Oxbridge. There are no contextual offers. So they all have those A and A stars. The difference is how they get them. Classes of 5, warm home, food in your belly. Or classes of 26, freezing tower block and have to work alongside to pay the bills.
They look for ability these days, not just privilege.

@mumsneedwine The initial description is all state dc I know. Class size of 5 isn’t common anywhere! Only if you take a MFL!

@TizerorFizz private schools near me all boast about class sizes of 5-9 students. How many are there usually ?

@TizerorFizz and that's why contextual stuff is not state vs private. It's deprivation vs wealth.