How Preppy is York?

Poll

How Preppy is York?

Nicbleet

Compared to say Durham, St Andrews, London Unis??

Eh?

Preppy?

St Andrews= 'prep' heaven, if by preppy u mean snobbish/'rah'.
London Unis= not at all really
York= idk :s-smilie:

Reply 4

bosejiu

not preppy at all ( notabene i though that 'preppy' is an american term... )

Reply 5

cullmac

Jeez, for the last time certain Universities don't attract certain people. There are people from all walks of life.

Reply 6

Melana

14

I answered and then saw 'compared to these other unis'. Yeah, it's not preppy really anyway, let alone in comparison to those.

Reply 7

Ribbits

15

Jeez, for the last time certain Universities don't attract certain people. There are people from all walks of life.

False. True, but to varying degrees.

Or perhaps certain universities repel certain people rather than attract. Same thing essentially.

Reply 8

Dez

20

Well either way, York has over 85% of state school students, so posh people are going to be very much in the minority.

Reply 9

River85

17

Nicbleet

Compared to say Durham, St Andrews, London Unis??

Preppy? What are we? Americans? :confused:

What you probably mean is the posh "Rah" stereoytype. But even at universities that have the Rah stereotype like Oxford, Cambridge, Durham, Bristol etc. they are in the minority (just a vocal minority :p:

)

All of our top universites, whether UCL, Durham, Bristol or York has a high private educated and middle class student body (as well as plenty of "Oxbridge rejects"). All are amongst the strongest after Oxbridge, so it's only natural. York does have a higher state intake than those other "top ten" universities but "Rahs" can be found on either side of the state/private bracket. Someone who is public school educated is not a Rah and you can get stuck up, posh people from state school backgrounds (as don't forget state school includes many excellent schools, including selective schools, not just mediocore comps). My advice is not to get too obsessed with these stereotypes and what is, quite frankly, inverse snobbery.

Reply 10

Economic Historian 1

River85

Preppy? What are we? Americans? :confused:

No, we're British. :smile:

Reply 11

Schmokie Dragon

17

River85

Preppy? What are we? Americans? :confused:

What you probably mean is the posh "Rah" stereoytype. But even at universities that have the Rah stereotype like Oxford, Cambridge, Durham, Bristol etc. they are in the minority (just a vocal minority :p:

)

All of our top universites, whether UCL, Durham, Bristol or York has a high private educated and middle class student body (as well as plenty of "Oxbridge rejects"). All are amongst the strongest after Oxbridge, so it's only natural. York does have a higher state intake than those other "top ten" universities but "Rahs" can be found on either side of the state/private bracket. Someone who is public school educated is not a Rah and you can get stuck up, posh people from state school backgrounds (as don't forget state school includes many excellent schools, including selective schools, not just mediocore comps). My advice is not to get too obsessed with these stereotypes and what is, quite frankly, inverse snobbery.

Spot on.

Reply 12

-Ian-

average, less so than oxbridge (obviously) and durham.

Reply 13

KerriT

9

Depends on the subject. History and History of Art = lots, Computer Science = none.

Reply 14

Ribbits

15

All of our top universites, whether UCL, Durham, Bristol or York has a high private educated and middle class student body (as well as plenty of "Oxbridge rejects"). All are amongst the strongest after Oxbridge, so it's only natural.

I agree with everything you said and know what you meant, but I think 'natural' is an unfortunate choice of word. I would say that it is pretty unnatural that someone of mediocre intelligence will probably achieve far more depending on where and into which income band they are born. This isn't to say that they aren't hard working, of course, but the best university places and jobs do not nessecarily go to the most naturally capable or intelligent, at the moment. My most intelligent friends with only genuine interests and passion did not apply to the best universities because they felt put off or thought they wouldn't get in, which is ridiculous - but less naturally intelligent friends of mine who were not born into the same socio-economic backgrounds do apply and get places.
This is only from my limited bubble of experience but I personally feel it is a real shame.

Reply 15

thefruitbat

Ribbits

I agree with everything you said and know what you meant, but I think 'natural' is an unfortunate choice of word. I would say that it is pretty unnatural that someone of mediocre intelligence will probably achieve far more depending on where and into which income band they are born. This isn't to say that they aren't hard working, of course, but the best university places and jobs do not nessecarily go to the most naturally capable or intelligent, at the moment. My most intelligent friends with only genuine interests and passion did not apply to the best universities because they felt put off or thought they wouldn't get in, which is ridiculous - but less naturally intelligent friends of mine who were not born into the same socio-economic backgrounds do apply and get places.
This is only from my limited bubble of experience but I personally feel it is a real shame.

Mmm I'd agree with you here, very well put Ribbits.. I've seen this to hold true from my own "experience bubble" too, the same's happened with the people that I've known, I've watched as more naturally intelligent friends are completely put off from applying to the best universities, worrying that they won't get in, and on the offchance that they did, they wouldn't fit in.. the fact remains that there are a lot more factors at work in winning places at top universities than just intelligence and capability, which leaves some people horribly disadvantaged still.