This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- Prize Vault McDonald's Monopoly: What did you get?
- Is it ok to reject Oxford?
- For modern history, is Oxford or Cambridge better?
- Official: Oxford A100 2024 Entry Applicants
- Dropping a 4th A-level when UCAS is submitted
- To All The Graduates: How Do I Decide On A Career?
- Can you do anything with a 2:1 in Oxford law?
- Oxford Medical Electives
- Oxford or Cambridge ?
- I don’t think I should have been accepted to oxford
- How bad is it to get 65?
- Applying to PPE at Oxford Tips?
- St Hugh's Oxford vs Girton Cambridge, Mathematical Physics/Part III
- The most prestigious college at Oxford University?
- Oxbridge
- PPE then law conversion??
- History at Oxford
- Manchest Met Uni or Oxford brooks
- Oxford Parents Association
- Parent Chat Thread
Is it true you can BUY your way into Oxford?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by silverbolt
4) OP is right.
Money talks and opens a lot of doors, Id say its perfectly possible
Money talks and opens a lot of doors, Id say its perfectly possible
Well if you'd say it it must be true.
Original post by TimmonaPortella
That's very solid evidence (offers that could have been given to anyone) over a compelling sample size (six people) you have there, from very recent times (no later than the '80s), bro
If you told me there are only 5 primes, I only need to find a 6th to disprove you. I don't need to list all of them, in any case it's impossible since there are infinitely many.
So what constitutes a compelling sample size?
With regard to providing samples from recent times, I know of some but since they're not famous, wouldn't mean much to you.
One such case would be someone I personally knew who got in with ABB for law at Cambridge in the 90s, when the off was AAA.
Original post by curiousquest
If you told me there are only 5 primes, I only need to find a 6th to disprove you. I don't need to list all of them, in any case it's impossible since there are infinitely many.
So what constitutes a compelling sample size?
With regard to providing samples from recent times, I know of some but since they're not famous, wouldn't mean much to you.
One such case would be someone I personally knew who got in with ABB for law at Cambridge in the 90s, when the off was AAA.
So what constitutes a compelling sample size?
With regard to providing samples from recent times, I know of some but since they're not famous, wouldn't mean much to you.
One such case would be someone I personally knew who got in with ABB for law at Cambridge in the 90s, when the off was AAA.
Your evidence is terrible. You're basically saying "some rich/influential people got low offers, therefore their richness/ influence got them those offers". This is nonsense. You realise that they vary their offers all the time, right? I know people who've had all A* offers and others who have had offers that've left out an A* requirement, both from various backgrounds. A couple of low offers proves entirely nothing. Indeed, a lot of low offers proves entirely nothing, given especially as is well known that high socio-economic backgrounds correlate with good levels of knowledge and interview ability.
No-one on here arguing that it is possible to buy one's way into Oxford has done anything more than asserted that this is the case, or if not provided very weak evidence which could have a variety of explanations. You're going to need more than that, sorry.
edit: the A* offers are Cambridge offers, obviously. I assume we're taking them as equal for these purposes, though I recognise there's a good chance the Oxons are more corrupt.
(edited 12 years ago)
Original post by TimmonaPortella
Well if you'd say it it must be true.
oh dont be so obtuse. I said possibly (and id lean toward almost certainly - humans are greedy after all)
Original post by TimmonaPortella
Your evidence is terrible. You're basically saying "some rich/influential people got low offers, therefore their richness/ influence got them those offers". This is nonsense. You realise that they vary their offers all the time, right? I know people who've had all A* offers and others who have had offers that've left out an A* requirement, both from various backgrounds. A couple of low offers proves entirely nothing. Indeed, a lot of low offers proves entirely nothing, given especially as is well known that high socio-economic backgrounds correlate with good levels of knowledge and interview ability.
No-one on here arguing that it is possible to buy one's way into Oxford has done anything more than asserted that this is the case, or if not provided very weak evidence which could have a variety of explanations. You're going to need more than that, sorry.
edit: the A* offers are Cambridge offers, obviously. I assume we're taking them as equal for these purposes, though I recognise there's a good chance the Oxons are more corrupt.
No-one on here arguing that it is possible to buy one's way into Oxford has done anything more than asserted that this is the case, or if not provided very weak evidence which could have a variety of explanations. You're going to need more than that, sorry.
edit: the A* offers are Cambridge offers, obviously. I assume we're taking them as equal for these purposes, though I recognise there's a good chance the Oxons are more corrupt.
You misread my quote.
The person achieved ABB grades when the offer was AAA, yet still got in! It's not that the person got a low offer in the first place but something happened between obtaining the grades and getting in.
(edited 12 years ago)
There have been high-profile cases in the media where somebody posing as a wealthy businessman gets some unsuspecting don to say they'll allow people in for a "donation" but it's worth noting that these "stings" get turned back by most colleges and having a verbal agreement is not the same as actually placing a student into the college.
It's going to be a rare sight these days. You give somebody a place for a bung and you either get a bit of money for your college or lose your job. Self interest is favouring not letting people buy their way though at large institutions you're going to get some corruption. It's about keeping it to a minimum.
It's going to be a rare sight these days. You give somebody a place for a bung and you either get a bit of money for your college or lose your job. Self interest is favouring not letting people buy their way though at large institutions you're going to get some corruption. It's about keeping it to a minimum.
Original post by curiousquest
You misread my quote.
The person achieved ABB grades when the offer was AAA, yet still got in! It's not that the person got a low offer in the first place but something happened between obtaining the grades and getting in.
The person achieved ABB grades when the offer was AAA, yet still got in! It's not that the person got a low offer in the first place but something happened between obtaining the grades and getting in.
Still, this happens quite often. If the person got a decent A grade and some high B grades that'd be entirely usual.
Original post by medic_armadillo7
...Err, "reptitive sophistry"? What is repetitive about my comment to nulli tertius?... Evidently, you're one of these lovely people on this interesting forum that loves to post remarks without reading and digesting peoples prior comments or else you would have seen the 3 times I have made my standpoint on OP question, before this proxy-argument ensued.
Lol. ;-)
Lol. ;-)
I didn't say that you were repetitive in your specific comment to nulli tertius. I was referring to the totality of your contribution, which I had read. As a medic, I'm sure that you will agree that whether or not something is digestible depends on the food as well as the stomach.
Nor did I say that you had not hitherto presented a standpoint. Homeopathists have a standpoint, do you find it convincing? What I was looking for was an explanation for the evidence or rationale underpinning your standpoint. You clearly feel very strongly about this issue, and you may bring me round to your point of view. I can explain my initial position on this if it helps, or I can get my coat if you prefer.
Original post by TimmonaPortella
Still, this happens quite often. If the person got a decent A grade and some high B grades that'd be entirely usual.
It was before the days of modular and you didn't know the exact percentage.
There was some "wrangling" along the way as well.
Original post by curiousquest
It was before the days of modular and you didn't know the exact percentage.
There was some "wrangling" along the way as well.
There was some "wrangling" along the way as well.
Right, so you think before exact percentages were known everyone would be turned down if they didn't meet the offer, unless they were rich? How would that be workable? No, then, as now, they'd let in the best candidates, all things considered, of the ones who missed their offers, to the extent that the courses would otherwise end up underpopulated. They'd just be without one piece of information they'd have today. You've still proven nothing.
Original post by shoshin
I didn't say that you were repetitive in your specific comment to nulli tertius. I was referring to the totality of your contribution, which I had read. As a medic, I'm sure that you will agree that whether or not something is digestible depends on the food as well as the stomach.
Nor did I say that you had not hitherto presented a standpoint. Homeopathists have a standpoint, do you find it convincing? What I was looking for was an explanation for the evidence or rationale underpinning your standpoint. You clearly feel very strongly about this issue, and you may bring me round to your point of view. I can explain my initial position on this if it helps, or I can get my coat if you prefer.
Nor did I say that you had not hitherto presented a standpoint. Homeopathists have a standpoint, do you find it convincing? What I was looking for was an explanation for the evidence or rationale underpinning your standpoint. You clearly feel very strongly about this issue, and you may bring me round to your point of view. I can explain my initial position on this if it helps, or I can get my coat if you prefer.
In all honesty, I've explained the rationale behind why I believe what I believe on this topic over and over and have supplied evidence of this through numerous links to exposés featured in several reputable periodicals. This, in conjunction with my experiences of and social relationships with such people within such circles, in my home life, private school and from redbrick universities (including Oxford and Cambridge) and prestigious universities in the US and the rest of the world, by way of a process of induction, extrapolation and acknowledgement of the effect's of human nature in everyday quid pro quo situations, leads me to believe that buying your way into many institutions (not least of all Oxford), is more than plausible; in fact, I believe it happens all the time just on a small scale. And again, this focus on just Oxford and undergraduate/postgraduate places is slightly narrow-minded, in the sense that it doesn't include such parties vested interests, which plausibly might not be a place at Oxford for their son/daughter. (E.g., trying to hold sway with the workings of a powerful academic institution).
If you are expecting me to post a leaked memorandum up, I can only say that a) I don't have one and b) if I had a leaked memorandum to hand, showing this, I would post it up willingly, but with such gold dust, which is high in confidence and strength of evidence, relating to such potential scandals being difficult to come by (for obvious reasons as shown by recent issues, e.g. the Leveson inquiry and the expenses scandal), much of what I say rest upon the accumulation of evidence, I've amassed from periodicals and personal experience, which although is of a "lower strength" statistically speaking than a signed memo saying "I bought my way into Oxford", is still a pretty reliable source.
Just to point out, I've listed my sources below (periodicals only), before people start claiming I haven't supplied any evidence
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011...rd-gaddafi-son
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/...rafsanjani-son
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education...Cambridge.html
http://www.varsity.co.uk/news/3112
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/ed...e-2236294.html
http://cleancash.org/isyourcashclean.html
(edited 12 years ago)
Original post by TimmonaPortella
Right, so you think before exact percentages were known everyone would be turned down if they didn't meet the offer, unless they were rich? How would that be workable? No, then, as now, they'd let in the best candidates, all things considered, of the ones who missed their offers, to the extent that the courses would otherwise end up underpopulated. They'd just be without one piece of information they'd have today. You've still proven nothing.
Unless it's a mathematical proof, nothing is conclusive and can constitute proved.
How can you prove Bush is not worthy of his Yale degree, despite it's well known his IQ is only 98?
I am giving one such case where I conclude the candidate's acceptance had something to do with "external factors".
I was there, you weren't, so I can say I can see the picture clearer.
Original post by medic_armadillo7
...much of what I say rest upon the accumulation of evidence, I've amassed from periodicals and personal experience, which although is of a "lower strength" statistically speaking than a signed memo saying "I bought my way into Oxford", is still a pretty reliable source.
Just to point out, I've listed my sources below (periodicals only), before people start claiming I haven't supplied any evidence
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011...rd-gaddafi-son
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/...rafsanjani-son
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education...Cambridge.html
http://www.varsity.co.uk/news/3112
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/ed...e-2236294.html
http://cleancash.org/isyourcashclean.html
Just to point out, I've listed my sources below (periodicals only), before people start claiming I haven't supplied any evidence
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011...rd-gaddafi-son
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/...rafsanjani-son
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education...Cambridge.html
http://www.varsity.co.uk/news/3112
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/ed...e-2236294.html
http://cleancash.org/isyourcashclean.html
Most of these links are not related to Oxford, are they? As the Woolf enquiry established, Gaddafi's son was rejected by Oxford for academic reasons, despite pressure from the British Government to accept him and the prospect of £1.5m of funding. This proved too much of a temptation for LSE. Thus, you are citing a case which rebuts rather than supports your view, a case which should also demonstrate to you that it is illogical to use allegations relating to other universities as 'evidence' of Oxford's culpability.
Basically no, but you do get corruption everywhere so maybe it happens sometime. But basically it's not in tutors' interests to admit someone unless they're intelligent enough. If you're not getting a 2.1 questions get asked. And I imagine it's quite difficult for people to overturn tutors' decisions.
I've heard a story of a guy who wasn't too bright but his dad gave a big donation to a Cambridge college and he got an offer. It was the standard offer though and he didn't get it so didn't go. I think a BBB offer would get noticed by the faculty, you'd have to have a good reason for offering that...
I've heard a story of a guy who wasn't too bright but his dad gave a big donation to a Cambridge college and he got an offer. It was the standard offer though and he didn't get it so didn't go. I think a BBB offer would get noticed by the faculty, you'd have to have a good reason for offering that...
Original post by shoshin
Most of these links are not related to Oxford, are they? As the Woolf enquiry established, Gaddafi's son was rejected by Oxford for academic reasons, despite pressure from the British Government to accept him and the prospect of £1.5m of funding. This proved too much of a temptation for LSE. Thus, you are citing a case which rebuts rather than supports your view, a case which should also demonstrate to you that it is illogical to use allegations relating to other universities as 'evidence' of Oxford's culpability.
They related to top unis in generally, mainly Oxford and Cambridge. Before you take a categorical "computer cannot compute" approach, just bear in mind at the discussion had evolved and redbrick unis were being discussed.
If you want some links about controversial donations at Oxford, due to the influence and control their donors have on the spending, construction, curricular formation and naming of institutes, which has upset staff and students at the university as they feel it should be a university decision, here are some listed below. And before you say, "this is not about admissions of rich students", the underlying uneasiness that these stories generate is, if donors can hold sway about the naming of a building and the curriculum, and can implicitly veto the decisions of academics at that student on such matters, where does their sway end? The level of forced input, also may imply that the donation isn't as transparent and philanthropic as what first thought, though I understand this is conjecture. What I do know, from previous examples of recipient institutions is that such large transactions, especially where there is political and/or industrial representation involved, aren't without their caveats. Oxford I am guessing is no exception.
I am not for or against this practice, I am just saying it's naïve to think that donations from some of the most influential people in the world, holds no sway on matters relating to spheres of life within top universities (which such powerful individual often have vested interest in) and I stand by my statement, despite your attempt to negate the valid reasoning behind it.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/jul/25/anger-trafigura-graham-sharp-donation
http://www.cherwell.org/news/topstories/2012/02/09/complaints-about-proposal-to-name-building-after-thatcher
http://www.studenttimes.org/st_news/st_article1.php?article_id=1999
http://www.ox.ac.uk/media/news_stories/2010/100617.html
Original post by Extricated
Three theories.
1) You're lying to perpetuate myths about Oxford.
2) He's lying about his "offer."
3) He seems quiet to you but may be excellent at his subject and felt more comfortable talking to people who share the same passion for his subject, excelling at interview.
1) You're lying to perpetuate myths about Oxford.
2) He's lying about his "offer."
3) He seems quiet to you but may be excellent at his subject and felt more comfortable talking to people who share the same passion for his subject, excelling at interview.
4th theory for you: There's an admissions tutor in oxford driving a maserati.
I'm not saying I believe it, but all this "Oh no such a fine historical institution? Impossible!" business is narrow-minded, for lack of a better expression.
I know at the Ivies for example there's even an expected donation size if you're aiming for buying admission.
And to a certain extent you can buy your way into any UK uni: just look at the bias in favour of international students paying three times the fees.
Is this true? I certainly hope not, places at Oxford for deserving students are rare enough as it is (I say that in full recognition that I am undeserving and accept my rejection without bitterness). But is it impossible? Of course not.
(edited 12 years ago)
Skimming through some of these comments, I fail to understand why some people cannot accept that even fine institutions like Oxford University can unfortunately be guilty of corruption in the sense that OP was talking about.
There are so many examples of people who have got below average offers from Oxbridge Universities, and coincidentally come from influential or high status families/backgrounds.
Obviously most Oxford students have worked incredibly hard to get there, and were not given special privileges. But it is daft to say that it doesn't happen sometimes.
The phrase 'it's not what you know, but who you know' springs to mind.
There are so many examples of people who have got below average offers from Oxbridge Universities, and coincidentally come from influential or high status families/backgrounds.
Obviously most Oxford students have worked incredibly hard to get there, and were not given special privileges. But it is daft to say that it doesn't happen sometimes.
The phrase 'it's not what you know, but who you know' springs to mind.
Related discussions
- Prize Vault McDonald's Monopoly: What did you get?
- Is it ok to reject Oxford?
- For modern history, is Oxford or Cambridge better?
- Official: Oxford A100 2024 Entry Applicants
- Dropping a 4th A-level when UCAS is submitted
- To All The Graduates: How Do I Decide On A Career?
- Can you do anything with a 2:1 in Oxford law?
- Oxford Medical Electives
- Oxford or Cambridge ?
- I don’t think I should have been accepted to oxford
- How bad is it to get 65?
- Applying to PPE at Oxford Tips?
- St Hugh's Oxford vs Girton Cambridge, Mathematical Physics/Part III
- The most prestigious college at Oxford University?
- Oxbridge
- PPE then law conversion??
- History at Oxford
- Manchest Met Uni or Oxford brooks
- Oxford Parents Association
- Parent Chat Thread
Latest
Trending
Last reply 6 hours ago
Weidenfeld Hoffmann Trust (WHT) Scholarship Notification (2024-2025)Last reply 1 day ago
Oxbridge applicants for modern languages - 2025 entry (applying in 2024)Last reply 1 week ago
Will I get into Oxford with my GCSE results? - EngineeringLast reply 3 weeks ago
will 5 a levels give me a better chance at getting into oxford?Trending
Last reply 6 hours ago
Weidenfeld Hoffmann Trust (WHT) Scholarship Notification (2024-2025)Last reply 1 day ago
Oxbridge applicants for modern languages - 2025 entry (applying in 2024)Last reply 1 week ago
Will I get into Oxford with my GCSE results? - EngineeringLast reply 3 weeks ago
will 5 a levels give me a better chance at getting into oxford?
