Twenty-one Oxbridge colleges took no black students last year
Scroll to see replies
Original post by Zakky
On UCAS you put ethnic origin as well as Nationality...
But the uni doesn't get told this information until they had made a decision.
Its because there's a fair share of blacks in poverty-stricken enviornments; the poor are less likely to do well in education for obvious reasons. This is not a racial problem. Its a status problem. I cant remember the exact amount... but only a few students who had been on 'free lunches' got into Oxford/Camebridge last year.
Original post by TheSownRose
But the uni doesn't get told this information until they had made a decision.
How do you know this?
What about surnames?
Original post by Zakky
How do you know this?
What about surnames?
What about surnames?
It's on the UCAS site.
Surnames do get given, but aren't always telling.
Original post by Zakky
How do you know this?
What about surnames?
What about surnames?
Either way, it's pretty immaterial. Oxford subjects either:
Interview nearly everyone, with people only ruled out when they don't have the predicted grades.
Interview a smaller proportion, applying criteria based on entry tests or past exam results (e.g. GCSEs) in a transparent fashion.
Either way, it would be pretty detectable for anyone to be filtering out candidates on this basis at this stage and the consequences would be catastrophic in terms of bad press.
Even if you're convinced that racism in the selection process is the reason for black under-representation (rather than social class\education factors) this is an unlikely mechanism.
Original post by King-Panther
And you would know that wouldn't you because you're pink and that automatically makes you more superior, knowledgeable, and always right regardless and just generally better than every other ethnicity right?
No I think its more to do with the fact you are quite evidently an idiot
Original post by Cll_ws
I seriously doubt it's racially motivated, especially seeing as a lot of middle-eastern and Asian candidates are excepted, who aren't white.
Plus it says that an extremely low amount of Black people applied, soo...
Plus it says that an extremely low amount of Black people applied, soo...
hmm tbh Asian people are pretty much on par with white people when it comes to offering places... but I do agree very few black people apply... but thats because of the stereotype Cambridge applicant: weird asian/white posh kid from a private school.... that puts people off...
Original post by tpowertj
No I think its more to do with the fact you are quite evidently an idiot
Quite.
Interesting. I could have applied to Oxford but it wasn't something I felt like doing so didn't. All the other black/mixed people at my uni had AAA/good GCSEs. I definitely think many of us don't particulary want to be out of our comfort zone, so apply to uni's where we're able to be with people who are culturally alike- while getting a excellent education at some other top tier university.
That said, racism isn't about name calling, stringing black people up to a tree and shouting "dirty gollywog" at any given opportunity. Racism is subtle and so prevailent in this country despite what YOU think. Most of you people on this thread are so niave and will never ever understand the 'black experience' or racism in this country. Its because of this whishy washy attitude that black boys are 5 times more likely to be excluded from school, why ethnic minorities are more unlikely to be called in for an interview if they're name is 'foreign sounding', or why BME people are less likely to be promoted in a role. All of this has been proven to be discrimination, so please don't come back with "oh maybe they weren't good for the role". Why not find the root cause and deal with it. It's like you can't accept that black people are discrminated hugely in almost every sector of society. You hold this kind of "oh I hate the way they always scream racism" attitude, and then wonder why you walk into any given school/uni/college and wonder why all the BME people stay together and are untrusting of white people.
Now I'm no racist, I think we need to open up our eyes and see how British society is.
At least America has the guts to challenge things, and accept that racism is alive and kicking- and take pragmatic steps to make things better.
That said, racism isn't about name calling, stringing black people up to a tree and shouting "dirty gollywog" at any given opportunity. Racism is subtle and so prevailent in this country despite what YOU think. Most of you people on this thread are so niave and will never ever understand the 'black experience' or racism in this country. Its because of this whishy washy attitude that black boys are 5 times more likely to be excluded from school, why ethnic minorities are more unlikely to be called in for an interview if they're name is 'foreign sounding', or why BME people are less likely to be promoted in a role. All of this has been proven to be discrimination, so please don't come back with "oh maybe they weren't good for the role". Why not find the root cause and deal with it. It's like you can't accept that black people are discrminated hugely in almost every sector of society. You hold this kind of "oh I hate the way they always scream racism" attitude, and then wonder why you walk into any given school/uni/college and wonder why all the BME people stay together and are untrusting of white people.
Now I'm no racist, I think we need to open up our eyes and see how British society is.
At least America has the guts to challenge things, and accept that racism is alive and kicking- and take pragmatic steps to make things better.
(edited 13 years ago)
Original post by Roflhahalol
Do you really have to refer to us as "the blacks".... seriously?
Thank you. I feel so valued after reading this.
Totally because they are black. 
Original post by PearlyWhites
Interesting. I could have applied to Oxford but it wasn't something I felt like doing so didn't. All the other black/mixed people at my uni had AAA/good GCSEs. I definitely think many of us don't particulary want to be out of our comfort zone, so apply to uni's where we're able to be with people who are culturally alike- while getting a excellent education at some other top tier university.
That said, racism isn't about name calling, stringing black people up to a tree and shouting "dirty gollywog" at any given opportunity. Racism is subtle and so prevailent in this country despite what YOU think. Most of you people on this thread are so niave and will never ever understand the 'black experience' or racism in this country. Its because of this whishy washy attitude that black boys are 5 times more likely to be excluded from school, why ethnic minorities are more unlikely to be called in for an interview if they're name is 'foreign sounding', or why BME people are less likely to be promoted in a role. All of this has been proven to be discrimination, so please don't come back with "oh maybe they weren't good for the role". Why not find the root cause and deal with it. It's like you can't accept that black people are discrminated hugely in almost every sector of society. You hold this kind of "oh I hate the way they always scream racism" attitude, and then wonder why you walk into any given school/uni/college and wonder why all the BME people stay together and are untrusting of white people.
Now I'm no racist, I think we need to open up our eyes and see how British society is.
At least America has the guts to challenge things, and accept that racism is alive and kicking- and take steps to pragmatic make things better.
That said, racism isn't about name calling, stringing black people up to a tree and shouting "dirty gollywog" at any given opportunity. Racism is subtle and so prevailent in this country despite what YOU think. Most of you people on this thread are so niave and will never ever understand the 'black experience' or racism in this country. Its because of this whishy washy attitude that black boys are 5 times more likely to be excluded from school, why ethnic minorities are more unlikely to be called in for an interview if they're name is 'foreign sounding', or why BME people are less likely to be promoted in a role. All of this has been proven to be discrimination, so please don't come back with "oh maybe they weren't good for the role". Why not find the root cause and deal with it. It's like you can't accept that black people are discrminated hugely in almost every sector of society. You hold this kind of "oh I hate the way they always scream racism" attitude, and then wonder why you walk into any given school/uni/college and wonder why all the BME people stay together and are untrusting of white people.
Now I'm no racist, I think we need to open up our eyes and see how British society is.
At least America has the guts to challenge things, and accept that racism is alive and kicking- and take steps to pragmatic make things better.
This.
Original post by Miss_Scarlet
Would you prefer that they gave students a place just because of their skin colour?
Those colleges get SO MANY applications, they will choose the students who impress them the most, whatever race they are.
Those colleges get SO MANY applications, they will choose the students who impress them the most, whatever race they are.
Miss Scarlett and others- now I am not saying that Oxford is racist - but I do think it is possible that subtle changes in tone of voice, non verbal behaviour and underlying expectations of performance can alter a panellists' behaviour and therefore a candidates' response. I also think it possible that some undergraduate tutors, like many schoolteachers (as research has demonstrated) may simply not register an excellent answer from a black person in an interview setting. As to only certain subjects being applied for, I think this interesting. I was allowed to love English Literature because my original schooling was not in England. My son was treated like a cretin at his English school in a way which to this day I think is criminal (he is gifted and talented etc)- because any non white expressing a love of language simply was not heard to the same extent
. I protested of course and may have helped to change the attitude.
Firstly not many Black people apply to Oxford.
Secondly where the concentrated areas of Black People have poor schools.
Thirdly, compared to the Caucasian Middle Classes who expect University out of their children, the expectations are different of Black Teenagers from their parents simply because their parents didn't all have the opportunity to go.
Fourthly In Oxford's case, when so few Black people apply, just one person's rejection causes a large percentage decrease.
Also they have accepted Black People. If they were overly racist then there woul be zero black People at Oxford. Do you see how many internationals go to Oxford?
Also due to the collegiagate system complicates things. So each college may have for a course 16-20 people applying, 3 places to give. One Black person applying to the college, then chances are low. And most of the shortlisting is based on entrance exams/written work/gcses. So these are data you can't be based on colour of the skin.
Fifthly, I don't know why but there just seems to be more nerdy caucasian people than nerdy Black people.
Secondly where the concentrated areas of Black People have poor schools.
Thirdly, compared to the Caucasian Middle Classes who expect University out of their children, the expectations are different of Black Teenagers from their parents simply because their parents didn't all have the opportunity to go.
Fourthly In Oxford's case, when so few Black people apply, just one person's rejection causes a large percentage decrease.
Also they have accepted Black People. If they were overly racist then there woul be zero black People at Oxford. Do you see how many internationals go to Oxford?
Also due to the collegiagate system complicates things. So each college may have for a course 16-20 people applying, 3 places to give. One Black person applying to the college, then chances are low. And most of the shortlisting is based on entrance exams/written work/gcses. So these are data you can't be based on colour of the skin.
Fifthly, I don't know why but there just seems to be more nerdy caucasian people than nerdy Black people.
(edited 13 years ago)
Original post by mummyperson
Miss Scarlett and others- now I am not saying that Oxford is racist - but I do think it is possible that subtle changes in tone of voice, non verbal behaviour and underlying expectations of performance can alter a panellists' behaviour and therefore a candidates' response. I also think it possible that some undergraduate tutors, like many schoolteachers (as research has demonstrated) may simply not register an excellent answer from a black person in an interview setting. As to only certain subjects being applied for, I think this interesting. I was allowed to love English Literature because my original schooling was not in England. My son was treated like a cretin at his English school in a way which to this day I think is criminal (he is gifted and talented etc)- because any non white expressing a love of language simply was not heard to the same extent. I protested of course and may have helped to change the attitude.
. I protested of course and may have helped to change the attitude.I forgot to say I am not black. It is also possible that my son's school treated all boys the same.
Original post by mummyperson
Miss Scarlett and others- now I am not saying that Oxford is racist - but I do think it is possible that subtle changes in tone of voice, non verbal behaviour and underlying expectations of performance can alter a panellists' behaviour and therefore a candidates' response. I also think it possible that some undergraduate tutors, like many schoolteachers (as research has demonstrated) may simply not register an excellent answer from a black person in an interview setting. As to only certain subjects being applied for, I think this interesting. I was allowed to love English Literature because my original schooling was not in England. My son was treated like a cretin at his English school in a way which to this day I think is criminal (he is gifted and talented etc)- because any non white expressing a love of language simply was not heard to the same extent. I protested of course and may have helped to change the attitude.
. I protested of course and may have helped to change the attitude.May I ask whether\why you prefer this explanation to one that concentrates on social class, poorer outcomes in the state sector and the fact that black applicants are more likely to apply to the most competitive subjects?
Also how this sort of unconscious prejudice applies so differentially to Black Caribbean applicants (Success rate 2.9% in 2009) vs. Black African applicants (13.4%) and Black Other applicants (21.5%). Similarly Indian applicants (16.5%) vs. Bangladeshi applicants (9.5%). It requires quite a sophisticated bias.
I don't doubt that there is racism in society, both the individual and institutional kind. My case is that demographic, class and economic factors make more of a difference when it comes to university admissions, that universities make a lot of effort to level the playing field whilst under immense scrutiny (in the case of Oxford\Cambridge, a disproportionate amount when outcomes are similar elsewhere) and that it's difficult to see what they can do at the point of admission other than apply discrimination in favour of certain groups, a measure which I'd opposed.
(edited 13 years ago)
Original post by PearlyWhites
That said, racism isn't about name calling, stringing black people up to a tree and shouting "dirty gollywog" at any given opportunity. Racism is subtle and so prevailent in this country despite what YOU think. Most of you people on this thread are so niave and will never ever understand the 'black experience' or racism in this country. Its because of this whishy washy attitude that black boys are 5 times more likely to be excluded from school, why ethnic minorities are more unlikely to be called in for an interview if they're name is 'foreign sounding', or why BME people are less likely to be promoted in a role. All of this has been proven to be discrimination, so please don't come back with "oh maybe they weren't good for the role". Why not find the root cause and deal with it. It's like you can't accept that black people are discrminated hugely in almost every sector of society. You hold this kind of "oh I hate the way they always scream racism" attitude, and then wonder why you walk into any given school/uni/college and wonder why all the BME people stay together and are untrusting of white people.
Now I'm no racist, I think we need to open up our eyes and see how British society is.
At least America has the guts to challenge things, and accept that racism is alive and kicking- and take pragmatic steps to make things better.
Now I'm no racist, I think we need to open up our eyes and see how British society is.
At least America has the guts to challenge things, and accept that racism is alive and kicking- and take pragmatic steps to make things better.
- 5 times more likely to be excluded doesn't signal automatic racism. There's insufficient information there.
- Considering almost EVERYONE (i'm not joking- like 35/40 people) at my Imperial interview had ethnic names, including myself, I will be asking you to provide a source for this idea that ethnic names mean you're less likely to be interviewed... Remember the statistical difference has to be "statistically significant". Don't bother commenting on my own anecdotal evidence by the way, I know it's not reliable.
- White people group together when they're in foreign countries from what I know. Although I think that was a very minor point of yours, I just thought I'd point that out.
To complain about "racism" in the UK completely makes it seem like that's the only facet of appearance that gets judged. You think being of a certain race gets you judged, try being an unattractive person of any race. I think "racism" was worthy of its own regard when it was an institutionalised practice. Now when it's as subtle and subdued as all other discrimination, why do we still single it out?
(edited 13 years ago)
Britain is not a racism free country, the royal family would have you murdered if you were a prince and even considered marrying someone beyond upper-middle class nevermind non-white.... no joke. It's no lie that the royal family is inbred to an extent and will never see a black person in the family photos.
It can be the same in society, see it first hand regularly and it's no lie for me to say I am 100% not racist it's in some cases instinctive and in some ways conscious.
Racism will never go away, it's like poverty or disease.
It can be the same in society, see it first hand regularly and it's no lie for me to say I am 100% not racist it's in some cases instinctive and in some ways conscious.
Racism will never go away, it's like poverty or disease.
Original post by innerhollow
- 5 times more likely to be excluded doesn't signal automatic racism. There's insufficient information there.
- Considering almost EVERYONE (i'm not joking- like 35/40 people) at my Imperial interview had ethnic names, including myself, I will be asking you to provide a source for this idea that ethnic names mean you're less likely to be interviewed... Remember the statistical difference has to be "statistically significant". Don't bother commenting on my own anecdotal evidence by the way, I know it's not reliable.
- White people group together when they're in foreign countries from what I know. Although I think that was a very minor point of yours, I just thought I'd point that out.
To complain about "racism" in the UK completely makes it seem like that's the only facet of appearance that gets judged. You think being of a certain race gets you judged, try being an unattractive person of any race. I think "racism" was worthy of its own regard when it was an institutionalised practice. Now when it's as subtle and subdued as all other discrimination, why do we still single it out?
- Considering almost EVERYONE (i'm not joking- like 35/40 people) at my Imperial interview had ethnic names, including myself, I will be asking you to provide a source for this idea that ethnic names mean you're less likely to be interviewed... Remember the statistical difference has to be "statistically significant". Don't bother commenting on my own anecdotal evidence by the way, I know it's not reliable.
- White people group together when they're in foreign countries from what I know. Although I think that was a very minor point of yours, I just thought I'd point that out.
To complain about "racism" in the UK completely makes it seem like that's the only facet of appearance that gets judged. You think being of a certain race gets you judged, try being an unattractive person of any race. I think "racism" was worthy of its own regard when it was an institutionalised practice. Now when it's as subtle and subdued as all other discrimination, why do we still single it out?
Well I'm glad to know that Imperial is so ethnically diverse. But that's just a mere drop in the ocean, considering the discrimination faced on a WIDER, NATIONAL SCALE.
Clearly you are not grasping the points which I have raised.
Firstly, I'm sure that I mentioned that racism is NOT EXPLICIT. Rather, it is subtle and more destructive than mere name calling. The fact that certain races do disproportionately worse than others is a good signifier that something is going wrong.
Yes people stick together in the midst of oppression. That does not make it right, but it happens both ways I agree.
How closed minded do you have to be, to sit there and compare racism with being judged because you are considered to be "unattractive". This completely undermines the Civil Rights movements and everything that Malcolm X, Martin Luther King and Rosa Parks fought for. You have the audacity to undermine racism and compare it to something as subjective as appearance. It is for this reason why I made my original post.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- HSPS at Cambridge: What are the chances of making it?
- MHAW- Experiencing stress at Oxbridge
- Oxbridge must help pupils from state schools
- which Cambridge college should I apply to
- Should I turn down LSE to reapply for Oxford?
- Oxbridge Admissions
- Is it advisable to take a gap year after getting Oxbridge rejection?
- Has anyone ever rejected Oxbridge?
- Easy Colleges in Cambridge to get in - should this be allowed
- More likely to get into oxbridge after gap year?
- A levels subjects
- GCSE Options (please read and help me)
- Exeter or Durham?
- A level subjects for computer science at oxford n other unis
- Ucl upc questions pls help me
- How old is the average A level student?
- Too old to start studying?
- kicked out of sixth form?!!!
- Durham University Offer-Holders 2023
- Oxbridge applicants for modern languages - 2025 entry (applying in 2024)
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 hour ago
Oxbridge applicants for modern languages - 2025 entry (applying in 2024)Last reply 4 hours ago
Weidenfeld Hoffmann Trust (WHT) Scholarship Notification (2024-2025)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 1 hour ago
Oxbridge applicants for modern languages - 2025 entry (applying in 2024)Last reply 4 hours ago
Weidenfeld Hoffmann Trust (WHT) Scholarship Notification (2024-2025)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?
