I think that everyone with an Oxbridge degree is elitist.
Scroll to see replies
Original post by 7589200
Im sorry I'm being thick but I couldn't work out how! Thanks for that though.
Oxford, same subject, 43%. (as opposed to 15%)
http://www.medsci.ox.ac.uk/a100statistics
I have always felt the Oxford system is much better. Well it is for Medicine anyway.
Oxford, same subject, 43%. (as opposed to 15%)
http://www.medsci.ox.ac.uk/a100statistics
I have always felt the Oxford system is much better. Well it is for Medicine anyway.
I don't know enough about Oxford or Cambridge medicine to be able to defend either. But I think it's worth noting that a single quoted percentage can hide a lot. Two perfectly working admissions processes could yield very different percentages purely on the basis of how skewed applications to places are across the colleges.
To take an extreme example, if all applicants applied to just one college then the vast majority of students would come from the pool regardless of how fairly the process was actually working.
Original post by 7589200
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/universityeducation/9532912/Best-universities-for-high-starting-salaries.html?frame=2334366
This is a list of the 'Best Universities For High Starting Salaries'
1. LSE
2. Imperial
3. St Georges
4. UCL
5. RVC
And everyone knows that the majority of people only get into Oxbridge due to their wealthy backgrounds. These salaries are despite them fully utilising their family connections in industry. And they still couldn't get into the top 5.
This is a list of the 'Best Universities For High Starting Salaries'
1. LSE
2. Imperial
3. St Georges
4. UCL
5. RVC
And everyone knows that the majority of people only get into Oxbridge due to their wealthy backgrounds. These salaries are despite them fully utilising their family connections in industry. And they still couldn't get into the top 5.
60% of Oxbridge students are from non public schools, compare that to Bristol, where 60% are from public schools
Original post by james22
This applies to all of education and employment though, nothing special about Oxbridge.
Uh yes, so don't go telling me that, poor kids have the same chance as rich kids
Original post by danhirons
Whilst I agree, having personal tutors etc and being able to fund them will help, but oxbridge wise, the universities and colleges are doing absolutely everything they can to make sure they are admitting a fair number of state school students - by basing it purely on academic merits, and by providing a huge number of financial help to those who need it. I got grants from both the uni and my college since my parents wage was so low, and it really helped 
I think you'll find (as stated earlier) colleges like st john's are really really high in terms of state pupil percentages too...
I think you'll find (as stated earlier) colleges like st john's are really really high in terms of state pupil percentages too... The key thing to remember is "academic merit" is influenced by how wealthy you are. You have a bigger chance of getting in if you're wealthy. Of course you would still need the drive, but a rich kid who's has his eye on Oxbridge? Less well off candidates will have no chance.
And it's good that they offer bursaries etc etc, I hope that encourages more state schoolers to apply
Original post by 7589200
1. Yes it can... if you have a better teachers, your scores improve at least marginally. Especially with a focus on raising the standard rather than aiming for 100% A* - C or something silly like that.
And what does this have to do with Oxbridge?
2,4,5 - Stop talking about the internet. Having someone going through the STEP problems in front of you when you can ask them things you don't understand is the same as looking it up on that STEP solutions website?! Actually going through a mock interview is the same as reading about it online?!?!? Don't be ridiculous.
I know several people who did STEP (not loads as I'm at Oxford not Cambridge) and all of them did well, and it was all off their own backs. They didn't have teachers, they used the internet. Most teachers struggle with STEP, there is no way most of them can teach it.
As for interviews, mock interviews don't really help. The interviews at Oxbridge are very experianced in how to deal with everyone, and if you can be coached to answer the questions they ask you then you have basically been coached to be smart at your subject.
As for the applications process, it really is not that difficult. The websites explain it very clearly. Many schools (II know mine had this problem) have huge missconceptions about Oxbridge applications. You are far better off getting your information online that from your school. If you aren't resourceful enough to do the research, you shouldn't be applying.
6. Cambridge's pooling system is incredibly bad.
I don't know very much about Cambridge, but I know that at Oxford it evens out very smoothly.
7. Extracurriculars do matter to some extent even at Oxbridge; especially for Medicine/Vet Med.
They don't matter at all of they aren't subject relavent, and even if they are they aren't going to be impressive if it is obvious you got them due to connections. For medicine etc this problem exists at every university, so I don't know why you single out Oxbridge.
Original post by clh_hilary
Most are from state schools but not necessarily economically disadvantaged.
In the last three years, Oxford has accepted three times more students just from Eton compared to all applicants on free school meals.
In the last three years, Oxford has accepted three times more students just from Eton compared to all applicants on free school meals.
Before drawing any conclusions about this being a problem with Oxbridge, you have to take in to account the differences between those at Eton and those on free school meals. If you are at Eton you are already very clever (or royalty), and will be pushed to your limit. Oxbridge cannot help what happens to you at school, and there is no time on a degree to bring everyone up to the same standard.
Original post by Theafricanlegend
Uh yes, so don't go telling me that, poor kids have the same chance as rich kids
I never did. This thread is about Oxbridge specifically, not the general differences between the rich and the poor.
OP - Your confirmation bias is showing.
Did you ever stop to think that there might be a reason why every university in that top 10 list, apart from Oxford and Cambridge, is in London??? Does it not occur to you that London - being the capital city, and a thriving one at that - has:
a) lots of people (i.e. lots of graduates and even more employers)
b) plenty of employment opportunities (many of these well-paid)
...and is therefore well-placed to have highest starting salaries.
That doesn't say much at all about which universities are the best, not to mention that there are many other factors that you haven't considered.
Did you ever stop to think that there might be a reason why every university in that top 10 list, apart from Oxford and Cambridge, is in London??? Does it not occur to you that London - being the capital city, and a thriving one at that - has:
a) lots of people (i.e. lots of graduates and even more employers)
b) plenty of employment opportunities (many of these well-paid)
...and is therefore well-placed to have highest starting salaries.
That doesn't say much at all about which universities are the best, not to mention that there are many other factors that you haven't considered.
Well that's the idea, it's an elite institution.
Original post by james22
Before drawing any conclusions about this being a problem with Oxbridge, you have to take in to account the differences between those at Eton and those on free school meals. If you are at Eton you are already very clever (or royalty), and will be pushed to your limit. Oxbridge cannot help what happens to you at school, and there is no time on a degree to bring everyone up to the same standard.
I didn't say if it is a problem. I merely responded to the claim that most Oxford students are economically disadvantaged which is not true.
Original post by james22
Before drawing any conclusions about this being a problem with Oxbridge, you have to take in to account the differences between those at Eton and those on free school meals. If you are at Eton you are already very clever (or royalty), and will be pushed to your limit. Oxbridge cannot help what happens to you at school, and there is no time on a degree to bring everyone up to the same standard.
" If you are at Eton you are already very clever (or royalty), and will be pushed to your limit"
Yeah, so rich kids have it easier, they have more chance of getting in. And I don't blame oxbridge. Rich kids have a better education.
Original post by james22
And what does this have to do with Oxbridge?
I know several people who did STEP (not loads as I'm at Oxford not Cambridge) and all of them did well, and it was all off their own backs. They didn't have teachers, they used the internet. Most teachers struggle with STEP, there is no way most of them can teach it.
As for interviews, mock interviews don't really help. The interviews at Oxbridge are very experianced in how to deal with everyone, and if you can be coached to answer the questions they ask you then you have basically been coached to be smart at your subject.
As for the applications process, it really is not that difficult. The websites explain it very clearly. Many schools (II know mine had this problem) have huge missconceptions about Oxbridge applications. You are far better off getting your information online that from your school. If you aren't resourceful enough to do the research, you shouldn't be applying.
I don't know very much about Cambridge, but I know that at Oxford it evens out very smoothly.
They don't matter at all of they aren't subject relavent, and even if they are they aren't going to be impressive if it is obvious you got them due to connections. For medicine etc this problem exists at every university, so I don't know why you single out Oxbridge.
I know several people who did STEP (not loads as I'm at Oxford not Cambridge) and all of them did well, and it was all off their own backs. They didn't have teachers, they used the internet. Most teachers struggle with STEP, there is no way most of them can teach it.
As for interviews, mock interviews don't really help. The interviews at Oxbridge are very experianced in how to deal with everyone, and if you can be coached to answer the questions they ask you then you have basically been coached to be smart at your subject.
As for the applications process, it really is not that difficult. The websites explain it very clearly. Many schools (II know mine had this problem) have huge missconceptions about Oxbridge applications. You are far better off getting your information online that from your school. If you aren't resourceful enough to do the research, you shouldn't be applying.
I don't know very much about Cambridge, but I know that at Oxford it evens out very smoothly.
They don't matter at all of they aren't subject relavent, and even if they are they aren't going to be impressive if it is obvious you got them due to connections. For medicine etc this problem exists at every university, so I don't know why you single out Oxbridge.
"Many schools (II know mine had this problem) have huge missconceptions about Oxbridge application"
"You are far better off getting your information online that from your school. If you aren't resourceful enough to do the research, you shouldn't be applying."
You seem to be blaming schools quite a lot. And I agree with you a lot of them DO have misconceptions about the applciation process. The schools that are knowledgeable are the private independent, elitist schools. I.E eton, Harrow etc.
"I know several people who did STEP (not loads as I'm at Oxford not Cambridge) and all of them did well, and it was all off their own backs. They didn't have teachers, they used the internet. Most teachers struggle with STEP, there is no way most of them can teach it."
Oh right thanks for telling about your arbitrary friends, who did well in STEP and managed to get in. Really supports you argument. Again like I said, you will get people who are smart driven and come from the lower social strata, but they are the exception and not a rule.
"Most teachers struggle with STEP, there is no way most of them can teach it."
Yeah they do, and that's why you have accredited tutors, who charge extortionate amounts that only wealthy people can afford.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by Theafricanlegend
" If you are at Eton you are already very clever (or royalty), and will be pushed to your limit"
Yeah, so rich kids have it easier, they have more chance of getting in. And I don't blame oxbridge. Rich kids have a better education.
Yeah, so rich kids have it easier, they have more chance of getting in. And I don't blame oxbridge. Rich kids have a better education.
Of course being rich gives you more of a chance of getting in, simply because you will have had a better eduction. However given equal qualities it does not help much. There are loads of poor people at Oxford.
Original post by Theafricanlegend
"Many schools (II know mine had this problem) have huge missconceptions about Oxbridge application"
"You are far better off getting your information online that from your school. If you aren't resourceful enough to do the research, you shouldn't be applying."
You seem to be blaming schools quite a lot. And I agree with you a lot of them DO have misconceptions about the applciation process. The schools that are knowledgeable are the private independent, elitist schools. I.E eton, Harrow etc.
"You are far better off getting your information online that from your school. If you aren't resourceful enough to do the research, you shouldn't be applying."
You seem to be blaming schools quite a lot. And I agree with you a lot of them DO have misconceptions about the applciation process. The schools that are knowledgeable are the private independent, elitist schools. I.E eton, Harrow etc.
They do, but the application process is not difficult. All the information is very clearly stated online, you can't gain much of an advantage by having tons of experiance with the applications system.
"I know several people who did STEP (not loads as I'm at Oxford not Cambridge) and all of them did well, and it was all off their own backs. They didn't have teachers, they used the internet. Most teachers struggle with STEP, there is no way most of them can teach it."
Oh right thanks for telling about your arbitrary friends, who did well in STEP and managed to get in. Really supports you argument. Again like I said, you will get people who are smart driven and come from the lower social strata, but they are the exception and not a rule.
Oh right thanks for telling about your arbitrary friends, who did well in STEP and managed to get in. Really supports you argument. Again like I said, you will get people who are smart driven and come from the lower social strata, but they are the exception and not a rule.
You don't need STEP for Oxford, so the correlation between doing well at STEP and getting in is due to general mathematical ability and not an inevitability of it being a requirement.
"Most teachers struggle with STEP, there is no way most of them can teach it."
Yeah they do, and that's why you have accredited tutors, who charge extortionate amounts that only wealthy people can afford.
Yeah they do, and that's why you have accredited tutors, who charge extortionate amounts that only wealthy people can afford.
Cambridge have found a very strong correlation between STEP performance and degree performance, so if you can be coached to do much better at STEP than you normally would (I doubt you can be coached more than a single grade) then you have basically been coached to be great at the degree, in which case you are an ideal candidate.
Original post by clh_hilary
I'm not saying they don't deserve it. I was responding to a post that has the majority come from state schools and economically disadvantaged backgrounds. The former is true but the latter is not. Oxford only accepts 50-60 students on free school meals in the past three years.
Just on the FSM issue...
Cambridge, from 2011:
http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/offices/admissions/behindtheheadlines/schoolmeals.html
And a further comment in 2013:
http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/offices/admissions/responses/FSM_statement_for_Newsnight.pdf
Specifically: "Around 10% of our current undergraduate body meets the household income threshold for FSM entitlement"
Original post by jneill
Just on the FSM issue...
Cambridge, from 2011:
http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/offices/admissions/behindtheheadlines/schoolmeals.html
And a further comment in 2013:
http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/offices/admissions/responses/FSM_statement_for_Newsnight.pdf
Specifically: "Around 10% of our current undergraduate body meets the household income threshold for FSM entitlement"
Cambridge, from 2011:
http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/offices/admissions/behindtheheadlines/schoolmeals.html
And a further comment in 2013:
http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/offices/admissions/responses/FSM_statement_for_Newsnight.pdf
Specifically: "Around 10% of our current undergraduate body meets the household income threshold for FSM entitlement"
This is making me think Cambridge is more meritocratic than Oxford.
Original post by Asexual Demigod
This is making me think Cambridge is more meritocratic than Oxford.
On what basis (genuine curiosity, I only have experiance of one of them so don't know myself which does better)?
Original post by james22
On what basis (genuine curiosity, I only have experiance of one of them so don't know myself which does better)?
According to clh_hilary. The number admitted to Oxford on FSM seems much lower than that at Cambridge as shown by the above poster, jneill.
Original post by Asexual Demigod
According to clh_hilary. The number admitted to Oxford on FSM seems much lower than that at Cambridge as shown by the above poster, jneill.
Just be slightly careful with my quote. Camb said 10% would have met the qualifying criteria for free school meals, but actually only approx 50ish (in that year's entry) where actually on FSM. (The detail was in the linked PDF)
But yes, they do seem to strive to be as meritocratic as they can.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by jneill
Just be slightly careful with my quote. Camb said 10% would have met the qualifying criteria for free school meals, but actually only approx 50ish (in that year's entry) where actually on FSM. (The detail was in the linked PDF)
But yes, they do seem to strive to be as meritocratic as they can.
Posted from TSR Mobile
But yes, they do seem to strive to be as meritocratic as they can.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Moreso than Oxford anyway...
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Oxbridge Gap year Admissions??
- Has anyone ever rejected Oxbridge?
- Worth applying to Trinity as a state comprehensive student
- Which universities are targeted by employers?
- Russell Group Universities
- A levels for Languages degree at Oxbridge
- Intenships (Finance sector)
- How good/elite is the University of St. Andrews?
- is a law degree as bad as everyone says?
- what degree should I study? (oxbridge)
- Obsessed with Oxbridge?
- Honest opinions on Cardiff University?
- Applying at Oxford, Cambridge and Russells group
- Scared to apply for uni because of my GCSEs.
- would a masters in Law in Oxbridge more appealing to top law firms
- St Andrews vs Oxbridge
- Medicine
- Should I do 4 A-levels and an EPQ?
- Computer Science at manchester
- Applied Psychology and Economic Behaviour (Bath) VS Behavioural Science (Durham)
Latest
Last reply 1 minute ago
ATAS (Academic, Technology, Approval Scheme) Certificate 2023/2024Last reply 1 minute ago
Official Dental Hygiene and Therapy (Oral Health Science) 2024 Entry ThreadDentistry
2931
Last reply 4 minutes ago
Turner and Townsend Degree Apprenticeships 2024Last reply 5 minutes ago
Worried about the acceptance of my A level Qualifications. Need an answerLast reply 6 minutes ago
Google level 4 software development apprenticeshipLast reply 7 minutes ago
Manchester computer science foundation year academic assessmentLast reply 9 minutes ago
Accommodation for University of Birmingham - medical school applicant :)Last reply 10 minutes ago
MPhil Advanced Computer Science Cambridge - 2024 EntryLast reply 18 minutes ago
Official Veterinary Medicine Applicants thread 2024 entryLast reply 20 minutes ago
went from 3s to 9s with (literally) night before revision - ask me anythingGCSEs
57
Last reply 20 minutes ago
The Official King's College London Applicants for 2024 Entry ThreadLast reply 23 minutes ago
LSE anthropology and law 2024Trending
Last reply 16 hours ago
Weidenfeld Hoffmann Trust (WHT) Scholarship Notification (2024-2025)Last reply 19 hours 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 2 weeks ago
will 5 a levels give me a better chance at getting into oxford?Trending
Last reply 16 hours ago
Weidenfeld Hoffmann Trust (WHT) Scholarship Notification (2024-2025)Last reply 19 hours 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 2 weeks ago
will 5 a levels give me a better chance at getting into oxford?
