Oxbridge and State Schools

[RiversideMum]

Feeling a bit cross about a presentation DD attended at a local school for all the secondaries in the area. It didn't seem hugely encouraging given that the DCs there had been invited to attend by their schools and therefore had the potential to be applicants. Now in my heart of hearts I'm not sure that DD is Oxbridge material, but for her to come away for the presentation saying "I don't think I would fit in" is somewhat disappointing.

[BoffinMum]

Believe me, some of the accommodation is pretty dire in the shared houses.

To get an idea of the sheer diversity of the place, go to the Freshers Fair. Beagling Society next to the Anorexics next to the Rock Climbing next to the Assassins' Guild (I was in that one) next to the Chocolate Society etc etc etc. Student Societies

[Yellowtip]

I really hope that's not true, that there was an Anorexics stand at any recent Cambridge Freshers' Fair. That's sick, isn't it?

[Yellowtip]

At a quick glance on your link Boffin I can't spot it, not an Anorexics' club. So why say it?

[Yellowtip]

Nope, can't see one anywhere Boffin. For a heavily self proclaimed intellectual you've just been incredibly insensitive to lots of posters on other threads where parents are despairing about their DCs' mental health. An apology is due I think? That sort of stuff makes one wonder about your credentials tbh.

[BoffinMum]

It may be in abeyance (you have to persuade a member of academic staff to be in place to check accounts etc annually) but there was definitely an Eating Disorders group, and I know this because one year they took the stand next to the Family Society at Kelsey Kerridge and were very keen to help the student parents with babysitting and general support, which was lovely. I am honestly not making that up, folks, and you don't need to doubt my credentials, seriously.

FWIW that year there was then a three way spat amongst the pro lifers, the Family Society and the Eating Disorders people, worthy of a TV sitcom, with the pro-lifers' plastic foetus model being defaced with post it notes, but we won't go into that.

[BoffinMum]

The mental health support and Student Counselling Service is brilliant, btw, if anyone on here is worried about their DCs. Students get free counselling sessions subject to the readily given approval of their personal tutor, and there are loads of support groups run by the service.

[BoffinMum]

LOL at heavily self-proclaimed intellectual. Wish I could retweet that.

[JessieMcJessie]

Yellow, a bit unfair to suggest Cambridge students think themselves "above" shared house living. It just isn't necessary in many cases due to colleges having lots of good accommodation (which they make good profit on for conferences in the vacations) and if I recall correctly you weren't allowed to live out if College had a room for you- all part of creating a community. Mature and married students excepted. I have dredged up a dim memory of friends at other colleges being in shared houses, however I think that the colleges owned the houses.

[alreadytaken]

The best article I have seen about Oxbridge is here www.telegraph.co.uk/education/universityeducation/9601544/Why-Oxford-and-Cambridge-might-not-be-for-you.html and is something anyone thinking of applying should consider.

Cambridge gives more weight in selection to AS grades, Oxford to GCSEs. Perhaps as a result Cambridge recruits more of the people who go on to get 3A*s at interview. Oxford seems to make some rather odd choices about who it will interview and that inevitably gives rise to suspicion about how genuine a commitment it has to widening access.

When my teenager was considering Oxbridge they looked at the different colleges and where they might like to live, that was quite a large number of colleges. They then tried to identify admission tutors with whom they felt they could have a dialogue based on shared interests. They visited those colleges at open day to make a final choice of college. Maybe that wasn't necessary to get a place but it wasn't going to do their chances any harm and it does mean that if they make the grades they have more prospect of enjoying themselves later. Of course that process would be much easier at some public schools where the teachers may know the tutors personally and be able to suggest a good match. If we'd know about varying levels of supervision they would probably have looked at that, but we didn't.

Boffinmum I wouldn't waste time defending your credentials, It isn't necessary. My teenager is attracted by the Assassins' Guild too. They were slightly put off by Cambridge freshers being shorter than Oxford's though and by Cambridge laying on less activities for those attending interviews.

[Yellowtip]

Don't be silly Jessie I don't for a moment seriously think that Cambridge students are above shared house living. It's very common in Oxford, that's all.

Boffin I'm definitely not interested in you defending your credentials, despite what alreadytaken suggests. Nevertheless any academic tutor worth their salt at either Cambridge or Oxford should probably think twice before being too flip about eating disorders ('Anorexics Society' is certainly flip). I don't usually get heavy, but that remark was pretty lightweight, so I assume from it that you may be too.

[Copthallresident]

I have to say I am not sure what has happened to this thread, a few people seem to be trying to generalise their own experience in a way that doesn't reflect the experiences of the people I know who have gone through the admissions process either now or in the 70s when my northern grammar sent quite a few pupils there. Or to be suggesting there is some magic bullet for success? Of course amongst able people you will get all sorts of personality types and interests but apart from having been able to demonstrate ability and an inclination /enthusiasm/passion /Arsedness (delete as is your inclination for a subject I don't have any sense amongst those who succeed, that you have to be a particular type or to have networked in a certain way to get in, or to have a particularly proactive parent or even think in a particular way.

There is the random factor in that interviewed by those who will teach you an element of subjectivity creeps in (and it works both ways, a tutor might want to teach you but you might not want to be taught by the tutor) and in any given year your subject at your chosen college may be very popular and pooling isn't a perfect way of levelling out chances (nor is looking at the statistics for past years since a less popular subject at a less popular college one year may well attract more applicants the next. ) Any applicant has to be prepared for that randomness, it may sound a tired old cliche but it is true many bright people don't get in and some surprising people do.

If your DC is thinking of applying from a state school then there are good outreach courses which will enable them to get some sound advice rather than the extreme subjectivity that seems to have taken over this thread.

[Copthallresident]

On the other hand in the interests of supplementing the subjectivities I offer the experience of my friend in the 80s, from large family with problems, underperforming rural comp, bounced into the interview (as indeed she bounces everywhere), Tutor said "Do you want to come here?" She said "Yes" and he said "You're in" and she was given a 2 E offer presumably on the back of having achieved so much from such a beleaguered background. No networking, no parent herding her down corridors, certainly no high table discussions, no great independent studies, projects or memberships of societies, just being herself, spectacularly bright and charismatic. As they say "it takes all sorts"

[slipshodsibyl]

It is natural to make a narrative out of experiences I suppose and to think we have found the formula when we or our children succeed. Things have changed massively over the last twenty years too.

I have however. Been browsing the Cambridge prospectus and have counted AT LEAST 5 usages of ''passion' or 'passionate' just in the few pages I read. No wonder the Yellow twinkies are all marched towards Oxford😄

[slipshodsibyl]

Oops meant do a smiley :)

[RussiansOnTheSpree]

Even with a smiley that doesn't look like a terribly friendly comment, really. I get far more of a sense of young people being marched towards particular destinations from other posters than I do from Yellow.

[slipshodsibyl]

No, definitely meant with a smile as she often asks how such young people can routinely be expected to know their 'passion'. I hope she understands that is how I intended it.

[slipshodsibyl]

But thank you Russians, for allowing me to clarify,since my attempt at a gentle tease is perhaps too clumsy.

[Yellowtip]

Agree again Copthall and thank you Russian, quite right, although I imagine having children amenable to being marched anywhere would simplify life quite a bit :)

As far as Cambridge goes, only DS1 out of my elder four ever seriously considered it. Arguably, he was the only one with the AS scores to merit it. But they all actually far preferred Oxford anyhow, so that choice simply played to their strengths. It wasn't about passion or lack of it. I didn't (and wouldn't have been able to effectively) put any pressure on DS1 but I have to say I'm glad he chose as he did: it makes logistical sense (it would make even more logistical sense if they agreed to come home and go back on the same day, instead of four and five days apart).

On this subject of passion, I think one of the DDs would have been equally happy reading History and the real passion of another was Art. What I find interesting is that they've all developed what others might term passion for their subject as they go through, largely thanks to exceptional tutors, which each has been lucky to have.

[alreadytaken]

Copthallresident it's inevitable that people post their own experiences and sometimes without thinking about whether the system has actually changed since they applied/were admitted. There seem to have been attempts to make the process slightly less idiosyncratic but the decisions can still seem quite random. It's natural to want to try and see some order where perhaps there isn't any.

Within the universities there seem - based on the experiences of my teenager and their friends/facebook offer holder acquaintances - to still be differences between colleges. Therefore your own experience may be misleading even about the rest of the university, never mind the other one. The only people who really know why decisions are taken are those who have sat through the process. For anyone else to consider themselves expert would be arrogant.

[slipshodsibyl]

It is the case that individual Directors of Studies no longer have the same level of autonomy/power to admit whomsoever they wish as they did in the 80s.

[Yellowtip]

How on earth does merely 'sitting through the process' give 'expert' knowledge?

You do seem to have quite a downer on the Oxford process though *alreadytaken'. Why so?

[Copthallresident]

alreadytaken totally agree. I was simply offering up antidotes to some posts that might result in some parents thinking it would be of benefit to put in place some fairly scary bootcamps for DCs, as well as putting off some candidates who are have all the qualities needed to get in because they don't have those sorts of parents, or the resources to build up stella CVs. The fact is that a personal statement that demonstrates the candidate has the necessary qualities through what they have gained through the wide reading that is accessible to all coupled with academic success, especially if not gained at what the unis would regard as good schools (state as well as private ), will be as impressive as it needs to be. Then the application is subject to the randomness of the interview process and the college system. (and that is based on my current experience within a university and my DD and her peers' recent experience of the Oxbridge process)

[anInspectorcalls]

Copthallresident
especially if not gained at what the unis would regard as good schools
How do they judge what is a good school? Is it based on the current OFSTED or the one 3 or 4 years ago when the child was approaching GCSEs?
My DCs school was put into special measures when DC1 was in year 8, so presumably things were in decline from the day he started there. It's since been reinspected as good but my DC didn't necessarily get the benefit of that.

[Copthallresident]

anInspectorCalls It isn't consistent but most unis and certainly Oxbridge will use some measure of a pupil's performance in exams against the average for their school, and the school's overall exam performance too, and there is an qualitative element to the judgement in that it is sometimes glaringly obvious from the school's reference that there are problems, either because changes in staffing and shortcomings in teaching are highlighted or because it is, sadly, just glaringly obvious from the standard of the reference. No uni is going to hold against a student the fact the teachers don't even give them a decently written reference. It was all apparent in the link I posted earlier on Cambridge admissions. I would have thought if the Ofsted rating was taken into account it would only be in the sense that it was highlighted as evidence of contextual information by the school i.e the school's present or indeed past Ofsteds highlighted particular problems which had placed the pupil at a disadvantage.