Is it true you can BUY your way into Oxford?

I agree with most of your last paragraph, however, i am not referring to rehearsed answers. Merely that practising having academic discussions and questions which stretch your a-level ability can serve to majorly improve performance at interview. Oxbridge interview situations can be replicated to an extent. And, as we all know, practice does make perfect. I do agree that if a state school applicant is truely exceptional they will most likely get in.
On the other hand, there are many public school applicants who win places because they are used to settings such as those of the interview

I understand where you're coming from but I still disagree. There is some truth in what you are saying - regular, mature academic discussion over the course of A-levels will help interview performance, and perhaps helps to explain the extreme success of Eton and its ilk in Oxbridge admissions (what with the excellent teachers and good student:staff ratios).

But when looked at more broadly, this just isn't borne out by statistics. It'd be quite easy to weight the success rates of the private/state sectors by subject applied to, and if you did that and accounted for other ancillary factors, I suspect the disparity would be negligible. Given this, I don't think a state-schooled applicant has to be any more exceptional than any other Oxbridge applicant to do well in interview. I think the tutors are pretty good at cutting through the nonsense and actually getting to the heart of what a student knows, how intelligent they are, and how they think. Social niceties and things will have a pretty small impact if the interviewers are focussed on the academics. One caveat is that perhaps it's easier to bull**** through an arts interview than a science one, but I still don't buy the idea that, on a significant scale, practice makes perfect for an Oxbridge interview. It's about intelligence - nothing more, nothing less.

Well if you've got a non specific warm fuzzy feeling about the process I can't see any need to investigate further...

Meanwhile in every other type of interview, bias exists. It's just a result of getting human beings involved in the decision making process.


Wrt oxford interviews possibly having a pair of knockers helps also http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1457129/Male-lust-is-blamed-for-Oxford-bias-towards-girls.html

Don't rate me down, but I've heard across the grapevine that some people with contacts in Oxford and with some extra moolah can BUY their way into Oxford.

For example, this super rich russian guy in my year is not really oxford mat. He's a distinctly average student who isn't really loquacious enough to blag his way in via interview or personal statement. He has links to admissions tutors in Oxford and a **** load of money and got an Oxford offer for law at BBB.

WTF?

OPINIONS?

Except for you can't "just pay" to get into the top private schools. You compete for a place with lots of other children from good prep schools all of whom have the advantage of wealthy parents or are on scholarships for exceptional talent. Many of these prep schools were themselves selective. Eton typically has 1400 applications for 250 places. It was common to use GCSE books as revision notes for the entrance exam at 12-13 and until recently the entire year would take French, Latin & Greek GCSE a year early with almost everybody obtaining an A or A*. Not surprisingly 150-170 with straight As would later apply to Qxbridge and typically 70-80 get in. So 80-100 boys with rich parents would not manage to "buy" a place. The vast majority of my friends who got in have gone on to get firsts.
http://www.etoncollege.com/userfiles/file/GCE%20A2%20Summer2011.pdf
http://www.etoncollege.com/userfiles/file/GCSE%20Statistics%20Summer2011.pdf
http://www.etoncollege.com/userfiles/file/Destination%20of%20Leavers%202008.pdf

Winchester, St Paul's and Westminster are similarly competitive and boys go to them from all over the country and from abroad.

Funnily enough many of their parents worry that in the current climate going to a private school would be a disadvantage when it came to decisions. Almost nobody got in without virtually perfect grades and very many of my friends had 100% in one or more A2.

People who spout nonsense about buying places are talking nonsense. The sad thing is they put people off applying, and so these rumours do enormous harm to the efforts to widen access. If you want to make it harder for rich parents' kids to get in, you need to encourage people from schools where they don't know anybody else who ever applied that it is worth a go.

You can't buy your way into Oxbridge.

I understand where you're coming from but I still disagree. There is some truth in what you are saying - regular, mature academic discussion over the course of A-levels will help interview performance, and perhaps helps to explain the extreme success of Eton and its ilk in Oxbridge admissions (what with the excellent teachers and good student:staff ratios).

But when looked at more broadly, this just isn't borne out by statistics. It'd be quite easy to weight the success rates of the private/state sectors by subject applied to, and if you did that and accounted for other ancillary factors, I suspect the disparity would be negligible. Given this, I don't think a state-schooled applicant has to be any more exceptional than any other Oxbridge applicant to do well in interview. I think the tutors are pretty good at cutting through the nonsense and actually getting to the heart of what a student knows, how intelligent they are, and how they think. Social niceties and things will have a pretty small impact if the interviewers are focussed on the academics. One caveat is that perhaps it's easier to bull**** through an arts interview than a science one, but I still don't buy the idea that, on a significant scale, practice makes perfect for an Oxbridge interview. It's about intelligence - nothing more, nothing less.

I'm really not sure about this interviewer cutting to what the student knows lark - my mate, ie the blondest most ditsy girl in my school, who no-one could work out how she got high grades (She once asked in year 12 'do cells multiply or just grow bigger') Got into Oxford to do Biology. All the interview asked her about was the fact she played the saxophone..

Or, all that she told people about the interview was that they asked her about the saxophone... She may have been embarrased about her answers and not mentioned other stuff. or, she may have completely blanked afterwards and only remembered a small part of what she was asked- I know that afterwards I could only remember half the things we talked about...
And, I know plenty of very clever people who come out with the ditsy questions ever just like the cells question! you can get into oxford and still come out with totally stupid stuff if you speak without engaging brain first

I'm really not sure about this interviewer cutting to what the student knows lark - my mate, ie the blondest most ditsy girl in my school, who no-one could work out how she got high grades (She once asked in year 12 'do cells multiply or just grow bigger') Got into Oxford to do Biology. All the interview asked her about was the fact she played the saxophone..

Sounds like bull to me. Either she lied or the story got exaggerated in retelling.

He was a sax player himself. Hence the interest.
All I have to go on is what she said, but I had no reason not to believe her on it.

Didn't our heir to the throne go up to Oxford with D D ? Read History I think.