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
- Can you do anything with a 2:1 in Oxford law?
- To All The Graduates: How Do I Decide On A Career?
- 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
- History at Oxford
- Manchest Met Uni or Oxford brooks
- PPE then law conversion??
- Oxford Parents Association
- AQA Triple Science revision guides - is CGP the gold standard?
Is it true you can BUY your way into Oxford?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by nulli tertius
You are looking at a different sort of corruption there and one that is fairly endemic across all universities.
From the top to the bottom of universities, it is a remarkable coincidence that the best appointee for many (perhaps most) posts is already working in the university concerned.
From the top to the bottom of universities, it is a remarkable coincidence that the best appointee for many (perhaps most) posts is already working in the university concerned.
Indeed, I guess it pays to know the person making the final decision eh?
Well obviously you much better chances if you're already at whichever place you're applying to, I just think sometimes its almost....to obvious when you can see someone pretty damn good passed over by someone else in the department nowhere near as good but certainly more adapt at the networking side.But then, you're right, I guess this is another topic all together. Overall I stick by my opinion regarding the whole thing, it was particularly in regards to the US system I wanted to post about anyway.
Original post by Square
sultan of brunei's son went to oxford as well i think, hes one of the richest men in the world.
Also the son of the Emperor of Japan. And the son of Pink Floyd guitarist David Gilmour got into Girton, Cambridge, to read history - he stated on oath in court that he did not recognise the Cenotaph in London (he was swinging off it) and had no idea of its significance. Difficult to believe the money and fame of his father had no bearing.
I would imagine the tutorial grapevines of Oxbridge colleges are always fully alive to the possibilities of (1) extra large donations to their institutions from grateful parents and (2) prestige derived from having the children of the famous and super-influential.
Don't know to what extent the above applies to Russian rich kids - there are some hazards about having them as well.
There are exceptions to every rule but on the whole I would say no, not anymore. It may have been more prevalent in the past. I may be naive.
However, I think it is important to note that the 'system' is set up so rich people are more likely get into Oxford and then donate to them after leaving. I don't think it would require purchasing in a direct manner. They go to private schools, get tutors, get better grades, they are more used to interviews, they get into Oxford. I think that is why Oxford has got better and better and making itself more inclusive so it isn't just a university for the Eaton brigade.
However, I think it is important to note that the 'system' is set up so rich people are more likely get into Oxford and then donate to them after leaving. I don't think it would require purchasing in a direct manner. They go to private schools, get tutors, get better grades, they are more used to interviews, they get into Oxford. I think that is why Oxford has got better and better and making itself more inclusive so it isn't just a university for the Eaton brigade.
(edited 12 years ago)
Well, I think you can. Look at it like this: universities like to advertise that from among their graduates are X nobel laureates, y heads of the states, z authors and so on. So I think young kids from families in power across the globe have often ended up at some of the best universities in the world! And listening to many of them speak: they aren't particularly bright.
Also, I think universities would want us to believe that their systems are fair, that only the best get in: that way they can build their prestige and glam quotient. The students often buy this tripe because it often gives them a head start in their careers, they network with alums who would crack jokes about their colleges and so on! So it is a self-perpetuating discourse in any way, meant to fulfill the benefits that students, past and present may expect to draw from the universities they went to. And not just milk what they learnt, but who they went with!
And lastly, I think donations count for a lot. The slain Libyan leader Gadaffi funding LSE's global centre made quite a lot of noise. See more of an overview here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LSE_Gaddafi_links
See more such here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-12644749
I am sure there are more which wait to be unearthed.
Also, I think universities would want us to believe that their systems are fair, that only the best get in: that way they can build their prestige and glam quotient. The students often buy this tripe because it often gives them a head start in their careers, they network with alums who would crack jokes about their colleges and so on! So it is a self-perpetuating discourse in any way, meant to fulfill the benefits that students, past and present may expect to draw from the universities they went to. And not just milk what they learnt, but who they went with!
And lastly, I think donations count for a lot. The slain Libyan leader Gadaffi funding LSE's global centre made quite a lot of noise. See more of an overview here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LSE_Gaddafi_links
See more such here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-12644749
I am sure there are more which wait to be unearthed.
Original post by cryptic-clues
Well, I think you can. Look at it like this: universities like to advertise that from among their graduates are X nobel laureates, y heads of the states, z authors and so on. So I think young kids from families in power across the globe have often ended up at some of the best universities in the world! And listening to many of them speak: they aren't particularly bright.
Also, I think universities would want us to believe that their systems are fair, that only the best get in: that way they can build their prestige and glam quotient. The students often buy this tripe because it often gives them a head start in their careers, they network with alums who would crack jokes about their colleges and so on! So it is a self-perpetuating discourse in any way, meant to fulfill the benefits that students, past and present may expect to draw from the universities they went to. And not just milk what they learnt, but who they went with!
And lastly, I think donations count for a lot. The slain Libyan leader Gadaffi funding LSE's global centre made quite a lot of noise. See more of an overview here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LSE_Gaddafi_links
See more such here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-12644749
I am sure there are more which wait to be unearthed.
Also, I think universities would want us to believe that their systems are fair, that only the best get in: that way they can build their prestige and glam quotient. The students often buy this tripe because it often gives them a head start in their careers, they network with alums who would crack jokes about their colleges and so on! So it is a self-perpetuating discourse in any way, meant to fulfill the benefits that students, past and present may expect to draw from the universities they went to. And not just milk what they learnt, but who they went with!
And lastly, I think donations count for a lot. The slain Libyan leader Gadaffi funding LSE's global centre made quite a lot of noise. See more of an overview here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LSE_Gaddafi_links
See more such here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-12644749
I am sure there are more which wait to be unearthed.
I think Oxford pride themselves in having educated so many prominent people because they nurtured talent which served these people well in later life, not because they drew from a pool of already privileged people. I don't think they'd be so desperate for famous alumni as to accept stupid/average people in powerful families for the sake of saying "Oh look here's another famous person". As a research institution it would be doing itself a disservice.
Oxford were asked by the British government to accept Gaddafi's son by the UK government - they replied that his application would not be likely to succeed. If the government can't sway them then I doubt many others can...
Original post by qwertyuiop1993
I think Oxford pride themselves in having educated so many prominent people because they nurtured talent which served these people well in later life, not because they drew from a pool of already privileged people. I don't think they'd be so desperate for famous alumni as to accept stupid/average people in powerful families for the sake of saying "Oh look here's another famous person". As a research institution it would be doing itself a disservice.
Oxford were asked by the British government to accept Gaddafi's son by the UK government - they replied that his application would not be likely to succeed. If the government can't sway them then I doubt many others can...
Oxford were asked by the British government to accept Gaddafi's son by the UK government - they replied that his application would not be likely to succeed. If the government can't sway them then I doubt many others can...
I think I am not making a gross statement that all Oxonians have bought their way in. Or no poor yet brilliant student has even managed to get into the hallowed portals. But something else: which seems to have been missed.
I am not saying that their reputations are not built on strong foundations or they don't have a significance in our contemporary times. They do, but part of institutional lives are also these: the pressures from governments, the need to maintain brands (whether real or imaginary or part both), the need tocarve niche for one's self to distinguish one's self from the homogenising tropes of modernity.
Just as they have excellent students, the excellent students also work hard to maintain their exclusivity.
And this idea of funded or donated research centres, schools and departments is not new. After all Oxford has Said. But we need to recognise that the funders have their own ideologies and interests to further: to legitimate their view points, their wealth, in some cases their gloablism, their claims to resisting the third world label fixed on them (TATA's have been funding LSE and Harvard for many years in many ways). And this also leads to a certain kind of discourse, a certain kind of education since the department's are endowed with certain historical legacies not entirely of their own making.
I think you can (like with most things in life) money and contacts can get you far. It may be more the contacts thing, a girl who I directly know in my class at a ****ty sixth form (she was posh and not very clever or hard working) told me straight out that she got into ucl for law because her mother is a lecturer there for another subject. She applyed though ucas and everythign but she told me even before she got her formal offer that she had definitly got a place.
Original post by Fantaisie
I think you can (like with most things in life) money and contacts can get you far. It may be more the contacts thing, a girl who I directly know in my class at a ****ty sixth form (she was posh and not very clever or hard working) told me straight out that she got into ucl for law because her mother is a lecturer there for another subject. She applyed though ucas and everythign but she told me even before she got her formal offer that she had definitly got a place.
Maybe she's exaggerating? I doubt it's that simple for a member of UCL staff to get another dept to accept their daughter come what may. She probably still had to make the grades, etc.
You always have to filter between fact and rumour in these things.
The position with college-based acceptance as at Oxbridge is more prone to "insider" manipulation I would suggest, because the small clubbable College worlds permit it. The desire to get the "right sort" seems to be an advertised part of their process - when they show the interviews on TV it often looks as if the "type" of person they have in front of them is the decisive issue more than quals or entry marks or ability to answer questions well. I think this is a strong explanation for the preponderance of white, upper-middle class students at Oxbridge, although that preponderance is also present across other Russell Group universities.
Original post by zara55
Maybe she's exaggerating? I doubt it's that simple for a member of UCL staff to get another dept to accept their daughter come what may. She probably still had to make the grades, etc.
You always have to filter between fact and rumour in these things.
The position with college-based acceptance as at Oxbridge is more prone to "insider" manipulation I would suggest, because the small clubbable College worlds permit it. The desire to get the "right sort" seems to be an advertised part of their process - when they show the interviews on TV it often looks as if the "type" of person they have in front of them is the decisive issue more than quals or entry marks or ability to answer questions well. I think this is a strong explanation for the preponderance of white, upper-middle class students at Oxbridge, although that preponderance is also present across other Russell Group universities.
You always have to filter between fact and rumour in these things.
The position with college-based acceptance as at Oxbridge is more prone to "insider" manipulation I would suggest, because the small clubbable College worlds permit it. The desire to get the "right sort" seems to be an advertised part of their process - when they show the interviews on TV it often looks as if the "type" of person they have in front of them is the decisive issue more than quals or entry marks or ability to answer questions well. I think this is a strong explanation for the preponderance of white, upper-middle class students at Oxbridge, although that preponderance is also present across other Russell Group universities.
no she wasn't. she got in without the required predicted grades and knew before applying that she had a place. It's that exactly shocking, lots of graduates get jobs because their parents have contacts, sadly I think that very apt to this topic cliche is true when it comes to educational and career opuntunities. It isn't rumour or I would have said as such.
(edited 12 years ago)
Original post by Fantaisie
no she wasn't. she got in without the required predicted grades and knew before applying that she had a place. It's that exactly shocking, lots of graduates get jobs because their parents have contacts, sadly I think that very apt to this topic cliche is true when it comes to educational and career opuntunities. It isn't rumour or I would have said as such.
Well, that's what she's told you - do you have any proof? It's very serious if true and UCL authorities should be questioned about it.
Original post by zara55
Well, that's what she's told you - do you have any proof? It's very serious if true and UCL authorities should be questioned about it.
haha what kind of proof would I have!? she's at UCL with lower grades, I really don't think it's a big deal. Seems an unsuprising and understandable if not etheical situation. I just don't she was lying, why would anyone? She was pretty sheepish about it, but I didn't think anything of it realy.
Original post by ellasmith
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?
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?
Something similar to this came to light a while back. The son of Colonel Gadaffi tried to get into Oxford University after the British Government had a word with them. They expressly said that they would not take him unless he went through the proper process and got selected. The government then turned to LSE and gladly took the student on.
Having said this, if the student is very well connected (in this case, if he has connections to the Russian government) then I think Oxford would take them. They'd be under alot of pressure from the government to do so.
Original post by Fantaisie
haha what kind of proof would I have!? she's at UCL with lower grades, I really don't think it's a big deal. Seems an unsuprising and understandable if not etheical situation. I just don't she was lying, why would anyone? She was pretty sheepish about it, but I didn't think anything of it realy.
What grades did she get?
Original post by Rennit
Something similar to this came to light a while back. The son of Colonel Gadaffi tried to get into Oxford University after the British Government had a word with them. They expressly said that they would not take him unless he went through the proper process and got selected. The government then turned to LSE and gladly took the student on.
Having said this, if the student is very well connected (in this case, if he has connections to the Russian government) then I think Oxford would take them. They'd be under alot of pressure from the government to do so.
Having said this, if the student is very well connected (in this case, if he has connections to the Russian government) then I think Oxford would take them. They'd be under alot of pressure from the government to do so.
More shame on LSE then. There seems to be general agreement that many of our Universities are eager to take the kids of international leaders, heads of state, miscellanous corrupt dictators, etc, on the basis that they "hope" to "obtain" future large cash settlements. In these hard-pressed times financially one can understand the temptation.
Original post by Fantaisie
haha what kind of proof would I have!? she's at UCL with lower grades, I really don't think it's a big deal. Seems an unsuprising and understandable if not etheical situation. I just don't she was lying, why would anyone? She was pretty sheepish about it, but I didn't think anything of it realy.
Haha Law is a very hard subject, especially at UCL. If this is true, and she's not smart, she'll be kicked out very quickly. More people leave UCL than Oxford.
(edited 12 years ago)
75% of students at Oxbridge do not get first even though its a standard requirement
Original post by smartycake101
75% of students at Oxbridge do not get first even though its a standard requirement
Firstly, this thread is 5 years old, so don't expect many replies
Secondly, what you said makes no sense to me? A first is a standard requirement for what exactly?
Original post by smartycake101
75% of students at Oxbridge do not get first even though its a standard requirement
Original post by MexicanKeith
Firstly, this thread is 5 years old, so don't expect many replies
And now closed
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
- Can you do anything with a 2:1 in Oxford law?
- To All The Graduates: How Do I Decide On A Career?
- 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
- History at Oxford
- Manchest Met Uni or Oxford brooks
- PPE then law conversion??
- Oxford Parents Association
- AQA Triple Science revision guides - is CGP the gold standard?
Latest
Trending
Last reply 9 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 9 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?
