Oxford appliations: fair?

OP

Original post by dutchmaths

So wouldn't this be more of a problem within schools than it is a problem within Oxbridge? Universities can't force people to apply, the public school in this case should clearly have encouraged more of its students to apply to an Oxbridge university. Also do you have any statistics on how many people from the schools actually got in in this case? Any sources to back your statements up in general?

I've seen the 8 times more likely statistic in a couple of places, this could be one of them.
http://www.suttontrust.com/public/documents/sutton-trust-he-destination-report-final.pdf

Reply 23

OP

Original post by Limebuddhist

They're complaining about the unfair system, maybe, regardless of their own personal circumstances?

At my grammar school, bright working class children rarely get in, because middle class parents pay for lots of practice for the 11 plus. They send their kids to private school from 5 years old and the private schools prepare the kids for the 11 plus. By the time the exam comes round, very few working class kids have had the same preparation and very few get in.
Out of a 1000 pupils in my school only 6 are on free school meals, that's way way down on the average state school for my area.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 24

Original post by Limebuddhist

They're complaining about the unfair system, maybe, regardless of their own personal circumstances?

The system isn't unfair. Oxford select the best candidates, but already give a 'leg up' to those from a poor area, poor school, or if they've been in care. How could Oxford get around the fact that some families send their children to incredibly good fee-paying schools who provide a superior education for 12 years of their life, which inevitably makes a massive difference in shaping the academic abilities of the students?

Reply 25

dreamer959

4

I 'love it' how these days every discussion eventually turns into a debate about the plight of the working-class/lack thereof. It's funny how in my school they told us that we'd have harder time getting in, because they know that we had better opportunities to prepare etc.

Reply 26

Original post by dreamer959

I 'love it' how these days every discussion eventually turns into a debate about the plight of the working-class/lack thereof. It's funny how in my school they told us that we'd have harder time getting in, because they know that we had better opportunities to prepare etc.

Actually, every time I've seen this bought up on the Applicants thread it's been bull**** posted by Stonedlove.

Reply 27

Limebuddhist

8

Jfc I was trying to stay neutral and now I've been attacked by both sides :/

Reply 28

OP

Original post by dreamer959

I 'love it' how these days every discussion eventually turns into a debate about the plight of the working-class/lack thereof. It's funny how in my school they told us that we'd have harder time getting in, because they know that we had better opportunities to prepare etc.

You're 7% of UK school kids and 45% of the Oxbridge places go to you. Society at large is waking up to these discrepancies.

Reply 29

shoshin

10

Original post by Stonedlove

I've seen the 8 times more likely statistic in a couple of places, this could be one of them.
http://www.suttontrust.com/public/documents/sutton-trust-he-destination-report-final.pdf

Could you give the actual quote from this document that you believe supports your '8 times' stat? It's a bit needle in haystack for us otherwise.

Reply 30

dreamer959

4

Original post by Noble.

Actually, every time I've seen this bought up on the Applicants thread it's been bull**** posted by Stonedlove.

You're right that it's bull****. Someone mentioned that it's just another way of justifying one's failure to get in and I'm tempted to comply with this idea. And truth be told, this isn't just the case with Oxbridge applicants on tsr. Whenever I talk to people who have opinions different than me, they blame those differences on my supposed bias acquired at school and I'm getting sick of the fact that people constantly need excuses and can't be objective about anything.

Reply 31

OP

Original post by Noble.

Actually, every time I've seen this bought up on the Applicants thread it's been bull**** posted by Stonedlove.

I was reading a book written by an African-American about the gate keeper behaviour that he has seen exhibited by newly affluent members of his community.

Reply 32

BeautifulPotato

9

Original post by Noble.

Yes, because they performed better in the interview and admissions tests. Also, there's more than 'a few' working-class students at Oxford. It just sounds like you're trying to convince yourself if you get rejected it's because you're "working class" as opposed to the reality - you just weren't as good as other applicants.

EDIT: We also haven't seen where you've got this statistic from.

Actually I read in 'The Week' that private school pupils are 55 times more likely to get an Oxbridge place than a state school pupil. 55 times.

Reply 33

Original post by BeautifulPotato

Actually I read in 'The Week' that private school pupils are 55 times more likely to get an Oxbridge place than a state school pupil. 55 times.

Based on what?

Reply 34

dreamer959

4

Original post by BeautifulPotato

Actually I read in 'The Week' that private school pupils are 55 times more likely to get an Oxbridge place than a state school pupil. 55 times.

Can you people just get over the fact that there are good Oxbridge applicants and better Oxbridge applicants and that it's the latter who get in? If you perform better than others in the admissions process, you'll get in, period. 30 pple from my private school applied last year and four got offers. The other 26 were bright too, but apparently there were some state school pupils brighter than them and coming from a more affluent background didn't help my friends anyhow. Why don't you go and read the Communist Manifesto instead of the Week if the dreamt-up statistics bother you this much?

Reply 35