Is Cambridge elitist?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by The Polymath
Did you apply to Oxbridge? It really isn't heavily weighted in favour of private school kids - what's your evidence for this?
Obviously a higher proportion of private school kids get in, but that's because they are objectively smarter on average. Even if admissions were completely unbiased, there were no interviews, and your background was hidden, we'd still expect a 70:30 split.
Anyone who disagrees with this has clearly not seen private education first-hand - those schools simply do a better job of producing intelligent students. That's not to say they're ALL intelligent, or that NO ONE from a state school is intelligent, though..
Intelligence is about nurture too, and private schools nurture like mad, providing a competitive environment with excellent teaching and resources.
Obviously a higher proportion of private school kids get in, but that's because they are objectively smarter on average. Even if admissions were completely unbiased, there were no interviews, and your background was hidden, we'd still expect a 70:30 split.
Anyone who disagrees with this has clearly not seen private education first-hand - those schools simply do a better job of producing intelligent students. That's not to say they're ALL intelligent, or that NO ONE from a state school is intelligent, though..
Intelligence is about nurture too, and private schools nurture like mad, providing a competitive environment with excellent teaching and resources.
People argue that it's biased towards private schoolers because of the interviews (in a setting that many state schoolers may be uncomfortable with) and because of the PS http://www.independent.co.uk/student/into-university/how-ucas-personal-statements-disadvantage-the-poor-8446381.html
Even arguably taking into account UMS so heavily - people with better teachers, not me necessarily the most intelligent will be able to get the highest marks.
I don't agree but I don't think you have to go through the process to believe this
Original post by zara55
They also still have amongst the highest proportions of private school students in the UK, not arguing that they haven't made changes, but that's a pittle different to them not continuing to show a bias towards the fee-paying sector.
I am not complaining as I went to private school and got rejected by Cambridge, but just to keep the record straight. Cambridge has the second highest ratio of private-to-state school students in the country, only beaten by Oxford.
I am not complaining as I went to private school and got rejected by Cambridge, but just to keep the record straight. Cambridge has the second highest ratio of private-to-state school students in the country, only beaten by Oxford.
I'm pretty sure one of the main reasons they have so many private school students is that so many apply. The number of private school applicants is in proportion with the number of private school entrants.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Just wanted to add an interesting piece of information: at Oxford, a student from state education is more likely to be made an offer than another who was privately educated and had the same grades.
Original post by tooambitious
People argue that it's biased towards private schoolers because of the interviews (in a setting that many state schoolers may be uncomfortable with) and because of the PS http://www.independent.co.uk/student/into-university/how-ucas-personal-statements-disadvantage-the-poor-8446381.html
Even arguably taking into account UMS so heavily - people with better teachers, not me necessarily the most intelligent will be able to get the highest marks.
I don't agree but I don't think you have to go through the process to believe this
Even arguably taking into account UMS so heavily - people with better teachers, not me necessarily the most intelligent will be able to get the highest marks.
I don't agree but I don't think you have to go through the process to believe this
1) All four of my interviews were fair - they hardly tested knowledge and were more about thinking skills. Even when I knew the answer, they still insisted on me showing them *how* I arrived at the answer, what thought processes I went through etc. The reason state schoolers *might* be uncomfortable with some questions is that their education is not geared towards critical thinking, evaluation, argument etc. and that's the whole point of the interviews - to filter out those who CAN learn in this way.
The only thing which I thought was knowledge based was some quizzing on European politics/history which I had no idea about, and it was a relatively awkward 3-4 minutes for both myself and my interviewer
However, clearly they recognised the fact that I didn't do History/Politics, even at GCSE, and didn't place much weight on it, as an offer came through the post last week.2) I've read loads of articles on the PS, and they're all rubbish. I spoke to a DoS about personal statements, and he told me that they don't really use it to judge you as an applicant, as they KNOW that private schoolers will be given loads of help. Instead, they use it as an insight into your interests, and to kickstart the interview.
3) As for taking into account UMS so heavily, that is not biased against state schools. Their number one aim is to get people who are the BEST at what they do, and their own statistics show that if you have higher UMS, you are FAR more likely to do well on the degree.
They are not inherently biased towards private schools, it's just that private schools tend to be more capable of meeting Oxbridge's top two criteria - independent thinking, and high scores in AS-levels.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by The Polymath
1) All four of my interviews were fair - they hardly tested knowledge and were more about thinking skills. Even when I knew the answer, they still insisted on me showing them *how* I arrived at the answer, what thought processes I went through etc. The reason state schoolers *might* be uncomfortable with some questions is that their education is not geared towards critical thinking, evaluation, argument etc. and that's the whole point of the interviews - to filter out those who CAN learn in this way.
2) I've read loads of articles on the PS, and they're all rubbish. I spoke to a DoS about personal statements, and he told me that they don't really use it to judge you as an applicant, as they KNOW that private schoolers will be given loads of help. Instead, they use it as an insight into your interests, and to kickstart the interview.
3) As for taking into account UMS so heavily, that is not biased against state schools. Their number one aim is to get people who are the BEST at what they do, and their own statistics show that if you have higher UMS, you are FAR more likely to do well on the degree.
They are not inherently biased towards private schools, it's just that private schools tend to be more capable of meeting Oxbridge's top two criteria - independent thinking, and high scores in AS-levels.
2) I've read loads of articles on the PS, and they're all rubbish. I spoke to a DoS about personal statements, and he told me that they don't really use it to judge you as an applicant, as they KNOW that private schoolers will be given loads of help. Instead, they use it as an insight into your interests, and to kickstart the interview.
3) As for taking into account UMS so heavily, that is not biased against state schools. Their number one aim is to get people who are the BEST at what they do, and their own statistics show that if you have higher UMS, you are FAR more likely to do well on the degree.
They are not inherently biased towards private schools, it's just that private schools tend to be more capable of meeting Oxbridge's top two criteria - independent thinking, and high scores in AS-levels.
Thanks, I know all of this, my point was that whether you go through the process or not, I think you can see both sides, becuse you said to someone 'have you been through the process' I don't think it makes that much of a difference, going through the process didn't change my mind at all, I didn't think private schools were advantaged before and I don't now
Original post by tooambitious
Thanks, I know all of this, my point was that whether you go through the process or not, I think you can see both sides, becuse you said to someone 'have you been through the process' I don't think it makes that much of a difference, going through the process didn't change my mind at all, I didn't think private schools were advantaged before and I don't now
I was just putting it out there for others, I appreciate you knew it already
if it only accepts the "elite" then why wouldn't it be
Original post by The Polymath
I was just putting it out there for others, I appreciate you knew it already
Fair enough
They would say not if you mean by elitist,exclusive.
They strive to be inclusive.
But, the whole Oxbridge idea is to take exceptional thinkers and give them a space where they may blossom.
This may mean that many of the "soft" skills other universities afford students such as how to cook, clean wash clothes etc may be lost on the students who are unable to self cater at such establishments.
However the argument to support this nurturing environment is that Oxbridge graduates are looking to futures where such mundane life skills may be unnecessary since they may always be looked after in life.
I would be interested to hear from Oxford and Cambridge graduates (who are not in the Armed Services) to know if this aspect of their university life was of benefit or a hindrance,
They strive to be inclusive.
But, the whole Oxbridge idea is to take exceptional thinkers and give them a space where they may blossom.
This may mean that many of the "soft" skills other universities afford students such as how to cook, clean wash clothes etc may be lost on the students who are unable to self cater at such establishments.
However the argument to support this nurturing environment is that Oxbridge graduates are looking to futures where such mundane life skills may be unnecessary since they may always be looked after in life.
I would be interested to hear from Oxford and Cambridge graduates (who are not in the Armed Services) to know if this aspect of their university life was of benefit or a hindrance,
Original post by Eboracum
Bristol or LSE will do fine for private school kids, Oxbridge should be for state school kids.
Places at Oxford and Cambridge should be reserved for state schoolers. This is equal opportunities? Private schools don't reinvent children - the grades they come out with are their own. They can't be blamed for their parents' wealth or their willingness to work.
First time I've heard someone propose positive discrimination. You make us state schoolers sound silly.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by fluteflute
Just wanted to add an interesting piece of information: at Oxford, a student from state education is more likely to be made an offer than another who was privately educated and had the same grades.
Interesting because Cambridge research shows that UMS marks are a good predictor of success in Tripos exams and are not affected by background or schooling. Oxford of course take more note of GCSE grades which Cambridge showed are less good predictors of degree success except that very good GCSEs from a poor school was independently a good marker of somebody who was likely to do well.
http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/offices/admissions/research/
As for why there are so many southern accents maybe because most of the population lives in the South East? 8 million in London, 8 million in the south east only 2 million in say the North East. If you took the population of those who went to any university it would be even more skewed to the South East & London. Nonetheless there are more state pupils at Cambridge than private and the chances of an applicant getting in is about the same.
Original post by Colmans
Interesting because Cambridge research shows that UMS marks are a good predictor of success in Tripos exams and are not affected by background or schooling. Oxford of course take more note of GCSE grades which Cambridge showed are less good predictors of degree success except that very good GCSEs from a poor school was independently a good marker of somebody who was likely to do well.
http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/offices/admissions/research/
http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/offices/admissions/research/
Original post by TimmonaPortella
Oxbridge's admissions system is weighted towards the best candidates. Private schools often do a better job of creating the best candidates. This is not Oxbridge's problem. The problem is state education.
Oxbridge's admissions system is weighted towards the best candidates. Private schools often do a better job of creating the best candidates. This is not Oxbridge's problem. The problem is state education.
It isn't. Oxbridge's admissions system is skewed towards private school students. I've known many who have admitted this. At private schools, students are theoretically coached as to how to get into Oxbridge. When they turn up, they know what they are getting. My brother had an interview, and wasn't told by his college what it would be, he just thought he was turning up for a chat.
Oxbridge have to come to the realisation that somebody posh, polished and well groomed isn't necessarily a better candidate than somebody coming in with the same grades and a regional accent from a state school. Needs badly changing. I'd abolish admissions and do it from Number 10, if they failed to change.
Original post by The Polymath
Did you apply to Oxbridge? It really isn't heavily weighted in favour of private school kids - what's your evidence for this?
Obviously a higher proportion of private school kids get in, but that's because they are objectively smarter on average. Even if admissions were completely unbiased, there were no interviews, and your background was hidden, we'd still expect a 70:30 split.
Anyone who disagrees with this has clearly not seen private education first-hand - those schools simply do a better job of producing intelligent students. That's not to say they're ALL intelligent, or that NO ONE from a state school is intelligent, though..
Intelligence is about nurture too, and private schools nurture like mad, providing a competitive environment with excellent teaching and resources.
Obviously a higher proportion of private school kids get in, but that's because they are objectively smarter on average. Even if admissions were completely unbiased, there were no interviews, and your background was hidden, we'd still expect a 70:30 split.
Anyone who disagrees with this has clearly not seen private education first-hand - those schools simply do a better job of producing intelligent students. That's not to say they're ALL intelligent, or that NO ONE from a state school is intelligent, though..
Intelligence is about nurture too, and private schools nurture like mad, providing a competitive environment with excellent teaching and resources.
No i didn't.
Somebody goes to a private school for one reason, and one reason only. Their parents can afford it (not talking about people on full scholarships) They are not objectively smarter than state school children. If 7% of students in the country go to private schools, then in theory (although I'm not calling for absolute implementation of this policy) then 7% of Oxbridge should be private school.
I'm not doubting private school education is better. But that must be taken into consideration during the application process.
It is easier to get better grades at private school. I'm sorry it just is.
Original post by Bodgy
Places at Oxford and Cambridge should be reserved for state schoolers. This is equal opportunities? Private schools don't reinvent children - the grades they come out with are their own. They can't be blamed for their parents' wealth or their willingness to work.
First time I've heard someone propose positive discrimination. You make us state schoolers sound silly.
First time I've heard someone propose positive discrimination. You make us state schoolers sound silly.
It does go against my Thatcherite conservative views but it's something that has always bugged me. When I hear of really clever state school kids being turned away from Oxbridge, something has to be done.
Interesting article by the way: http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2013/jan/19/oxford-university-st-hughs-sued-student-fees
Original post by Eboracum
Somebody goes to a private school for one reason, and one reason only. Their parents can afford it (not talking about people on full scholarships) They are not objectively smarter than state school children. If 7% of students in the country go to private schools, then in theory (although I'm not calling for absolute implementation of this policy) then 7% of Oxbridge should be private school.
I'm not doubting private school education is better. But that must be taken into consideration during the application process.
It is easier to get better grades at private school. I'm sorry it just is.
I'm not doubting private school education is better. But that must be taken into consideration during the application process.
It is easier to get better grades at private school. I'm sorry it just is.
I didn't say they were more intelligent before they enrolled - private schools make students more intelligent, and more importantly, more suitable for university education. Intelligence is also determined by nurture, and the private schools provide excellent nurturing for students.
Yes, the system is a little flawed due to the grades not being directly correlated with intelligence, but even if it were to be perfected, we would still find that more than 7% of the top 10% of intelligence would be in the private sector, and this is coming from someone who has seen both private and state education.
Original post by Eboracum
It isn't. Oxbridge's admissions system is skewed towards private school students. I've known many who have admitted this. At private schools, students are theoretically coached as to how to get into Oxbridge. When they turn up, they know what they are getting. My brother had an interview, and wasn't told by his college what it would be, he just thought he was turning up for a chat.
Oxbridge have to come to the realisation that somebody posh, polished and well groomed isn't necessarily a better candidate than somebody coming in with the same grades and a regional accent from a state school. Needs badly changing. I'd abolish admissions and do it from Number 10, if they failed to change.
No i didn't.
Somebody goes to a private school for one reason, and one reason only. Their parents can afford it (not talking about people on full scholarships) They are not objectively smarter than state school children. If 7% of students in the country go to private schools, then in theory (although I'm not calling for absolute implementation of this policy) then 7% of Oxbridge should be private school.
I'm not doubting private school education is better. But that must be taken into consideration during the application process.
It is easier to get better grades at private school. I'm sorry it just is.
It does go against my Thatcherite conservative views but it's something that has always bugged me. When I hear of really clever state school kids being turned away from Oxbridge, something has to be done.
Interesting article by the way: http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2013/jan/19/oxford-university-st-hughs-sued-student-fees
Oxbridge have to come to the realisation that somebody posh, polished and well groomed isn't necessarily a better candidate than somebody coming in with the same grades and a regional accent from a state school. Needs badly changing. I'd abolish admissions and do it from Number 10, if they failed to change.
No i didn't.
Somebody goes to a private school for one reason, and one reason only. Their parents can afford it (not talking about people on full scholarships) They are not objectively smarter than state school children. If 7% of students in the country go to private schools, then in theory (although I'm not calling for absolute implementation of this policy) then 7% of Oxbridge should be private school.
I'm not doubting private school education is better. But that must be taken into consideration during the application process.
It is easier to get better grades at private school. I'm sorry it just is.
It does go against my Thatcherite conservative views but it's something that has always bugged me. When I hear of really clever state school kids being turned away from Oxbridge, something has to be done.
Interesting article by the way: http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2013/jan/19/oxford-university-st-hughs-sued-student-fees
So why is it that students with the same UMS do equally well at Cambridge regardless of which school they came from?
Why is it that Cambridge advise admissions tutors not to put too much weight on the interview but rely heavily on the paper record.
The 7% figure is a huge misuse of statistics. It is not 7% of those doing 3 Alevels let alone 7% of those who get A*AA. Then even further reduced by those who don't do the subjects that make them able to do certain subjects at degree level.
The statistics show that about 2/3 of those getting A*A*A (still below the average for those who get offers) come from state schools. This is much nearer to the admitted proportion.
http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/offices/admissions/research/docs/offa_pi_report.pdf
Go on read it!
Cambridge have shown that a major reason for missing state schools is people being put off applying and comments like yours just dissuade people from trying.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Eboracum
If 7% of students in the country go to private schools, then in theory (although I'm not calling for absolute implementation of this policy) then 7% of Oxbridge should be private school.
If 7% of students in the country go to private schools, then in theory (although I'm not calling for absolute implementation of this policy) then 7% of Oxbridge should be private school.
Don't be absurd. Private schools vary enormously, as do state schools. A lot of private school kids are at a disadvantage to the pupils at top state schools.
They're not necessarily cleverer. That's why Oxbridge interview them and test them as individuals, rather than taking the utterly stupid step of judging them purely upon what kind of education they've come from.
Original post by Eboracum
I'm not doubting private school education is better. But that must be taken into consideration during the application process.
I'm not doubting private school education is better. But that must be taken into consideration during the application process.
It is taken into account. Obviously. There's a difference, though, between taking something into account in deciding who is the most intelligent, enthusiastic and prepared student, and giving one student a free ticket in over a better one because their parents don't have as much money as the other's.
Original post by Jacob :)
Is Cambridge elitist? Is there any sort of prejudice to state school pupils?
Is it full of 'toffs'? Or people who 'are spending the weekend on daddy's boat'?
I don't mean to offend anyone just want to know what it's like.
Is it full of 'toffs'? Or people who 'are spending the weekend on daddy's boat'?
I don't mean to offend anyone just want to know what it's like.
My 'Daddy' (well, step-dad) has two boats and I go to a state school. You should hear the colourful language what comes out of his mouth when the boat scraps the bottom of the river
. It doesn't mean we're rich and we're definitely not toffs- it just means he likes them. Also, don't you think people who go to Cambridge would be spending the weekend revising as they're not allowed home at weekends. Very stereotypical as I'm sure there's people at University of Portsmouth who comes from a private school or owns a boat. I'll be at Portsmouth in September if any toffs wants to compare boats or what not. Both of mine are white and go fast...
Original post by Eboracum
My brother had an interview, and wasn't told by his college what it would be, he just thought he was turning up for a chat.
Original post by Jacob :)
Is Cambridge elitist? Is there any sort of prejudice to state school pupils?
Is it full of 'toffs'? Or people who 'are spending the weekend on daddy's boat'?
I don't mean to offend anyone just want to know what it's like.
Is it full of 'toffs'? Or people who 'are spending the weekend on daddy's boat'?
I don't mean to offend anyone just want to know what it's like.
They weigh students' A-level results against the average from their schools. If anything, Cambridge's criteria are weighted against those who come from privilege. They want to identify the people who are best on their own merits, even if that hasn't always been the case.
Original post by Eboracum
My brother had an interview, and wasn't told by his college what it would be, he just thought he was turning up for a chat.
I call bull**** - you get details on your interviews with the invitation letter, for crying out loud.
The only problem with state schools is that not enough people are encouraged to apply. There are plenty of people I know who could have gotten in with a bit of extra work, but they were either completely ignorant of how the admissions system worked, or they were lazy and didn't fancy getting mentally flogged for 4 years
(edited 11 years ago)
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Worth applying to Trinity as a state comprehensive student
- Niche question: NatSci course accreditation by SNS - why no Cambridge?
- What is The Best Cambridge College for Me?
- Oxbridge Gap year Admissions??
- Has anyone ever rejected Oxbridge?
- Russell Group Universities
- is a law degree as bad as everyone says?
- 5 alevels is it too much ?
- Computer Science at manchester
- NARIC equivalences and GCSE equivalences (Maths and English)
- Conflicted Degree Choices
- Oxford college help
- Durham BA Accounting and Finance Vs Bristol BSc Finance
- Nottingham trent! Actually a good university?!
- Confused about which uni to go to
- Exeter vs SOAS
- Uni of Leicester vs Uni of Kent
- A level choices struggles
- Best universities for magic circle law firms
- Coursemate being given modified grading criterion
Latest
Trending
Last reply 7 hours ago
March 2024 Cambridge Mature Colleges Round - Anybody?Last reply 12 hours ago
MPhil Advanced Computer Science Cambridge - 2024 EntryLast reply 2 weeks ago
Easy Colleges in Cambridge to get in - should this be allowedLast reply 2 weeks ago
Could I get into Oxford or Cambridge without studying A-level background??Last reply 2 weeks ago
MPhil in Machine Learning and Machine Intelligence at Cambridge 2024Last reply 2 weeks ago
Cannot find funding for Cambridge, is it worth getting a loan?Trending
Last reply 7 hours ago
March 2024 Cambridge Mature Colleges Round - Anybody?Last reply 12 hours ago
MPhil Advanced Computer Science Cambridge - 2024 EntryLast reply 2 weeks ago
Easy Colleges in Cambridge to get in - should this be allowedLast reply 2 weeks ago
Could I get into Oxford or Cambridge without studying A-level background??Last reply 2 weeks ago
MPhil in Machine Learning and Machine Intelligence at Cambridge 2024Last reply 2 weeks ago
Cannot find funding for Cambridge, is it worth getting a loan?
