The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

Reply 41
Original post by Fullofsurprises
Yes, the thread is old news. Where is Goldsmiths though? They are posh. :teehee:


Goldsmiths isn't posh!
Original post by pairofjeans
Imagine being privately educated then paying 9k a year to study music

But most of those people have been to private music schools from year 7 so are trained to get into these places. Unfortunate for other people auditioning.
(speaking as a music college auditionee from a state sixth form college)
Original post by cambio wechsel
I bound to wonder what Bristol Polytechnic ever had.


Were you a wet bob at Eton ?
Original post by Ladbants
Why would a privately educated guy study agriculture lol


They may own Land which requires Agricultual knowledge.
Original post by Voi
I'll tell you what. Let's just go to the most deprived schools and chuck all their under-performers into Oxbridge in the name of political correctness. Then we'll see them all flourish... or not.


I'm concerned if that's what you're getting from all this. That isn't a feasible suggestion, and no one is putting anything like that forward. That doesn't solve the issue at hand. The fact that there are a disproportionate amount of privately educated students at top institutions is symptomatic of a disparity between fee-paying schools and state-funded schools.

What needs to be addressed is the standard of education and the environment at state-funded schools. Of course, universities have to be selective and those who have obtained places have done so by merit (arguable, but generally), therefore they aren't - nor should they ever be - obliged to accept poorly performing students.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by SinsNotTragedies


What needs to be addressed is the standard of education and the environment at state-funded schools. Of course, universities have to be selective and those who have obtained places have done so by merit (arguable, but generally), therefore they aren't - nor should they ever be - obliged to accept poorly performing students.


Some of these figures are not at all surprising and I do not think it is anything to do with the standards in state-funded schools.

I am a very mature student - back when I was an undergrad and university was free I studied at Newcastle - at their agriculture department, a good number of the students were from farming families who could afford to send their sons to complete secondary education in the city. I can't see why that would change.

I can imagine that higher numbers of students from wealthier families study art or music. These are families that can afford private education and can afford the lessons that got the students good enough in art or music in the first place. These subjects do not have well-established career options, apart from teaching. So you have got to have a lot of money to know that your parents are happy to subside your studies for three or four years - and the chance of you actually making a successful career are very slim.

I would have thought that the only way to redress the imbalance is to lower the cost of further education.
Can i just say that not everyone who went to a private school is 'posh'...

I got sent to one from years 7-11 and my parents sacrificed so much for me to be able to go there. No i did not have nice clothes, nice things because all the money was spent on my school fees! As well as that... I had a bursary so paid 40% less than everyone else at that place...yet still struggled. We didn't have fancy cars or ipads/iphones nice clothes (that many state school kids i see have...not all but just making a point) and we didn't go on holiday anywhere at all for 4 years.......I think it's important to remember that people have different priorities in life and that was just my parents priority....

Either way though I ended up hating it because (not all but some people were just so snobby and had no idea about real problems and some of the teachers interfered WAY too much) so now I'm in a FE college studying a BTEC..YES A BTEC GET ME.......but either way it's gotten me into st georges for midwifery, a very competitive course so not complaining there :smile: Xxxxxxxxxx
Reply 48
Original post by Fullofsurprises
Yes, the thread is old news. Where is Goldsmiths though? They are posh. :teehee:


Goldsmiths :')
Original post by JohnGreek
, then the only explanation would be the higher % of people living at home in London during uni, which anecdotally doesn't seem to be the case.


Really? I'm from London but I don't know a single person from my sixth form who went to a uni in london and moved out of their homes.

They all commuted to uni. Which is a shame as I feel like you miss out a bit by not staying in a uni accommodation. But it can't be helped because London prices are disgusting.
Reply 50
Original post by Ladbants
Why would a privately educated guy study agriculture lol


It's because farmers have lots of high-tech machinery and the land has been passed down from generations.
Reply 51
Original post by Ladbants
Why would a privately educated guy study agriculture lol

This is hilarious. The funniest comment I have read in a long time
Reply 52
Original post by Reality Check
I found it depressing that some major arts institutions are still regularly appearing in these lists. Nothing seems to change.


It's usually people with more money who could afford private lessons from a young age though
Can i just say guys, I was at a private school until year 11 them moved to the best state school in my city. People at my private weren't all posh, middle income and some people REALLY scrimped to send their ids there. And at my state i feel academically i get more support and will do better for moving. We need to compare public boarding schools with poor state schools- outstanding, small state schools and average private schools aren't drastically different. If i was contrasting Marlborough with my local 'special measures' school that'd be different.
Reply 54
Original post by Ladbants
Nah it kind of does


It doesn't because not all private schools are posh in the same way as not all state schools are underperforming
Its just a normal natural thing to do for people from that background. Everyone has to be true to their roots.
Reply 56
I am absolutely certain people on this forum only go to a university based on how other people will judge you for it.
Original post by r3035
I am absolutely certain people on this forum only go to a university based on how other people will judge you for it.


Well that's part of the point. Employers are more likely to pick out candidates that went to universities they know to be good. For a lot of people university is simply a means to an end


Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 58
Original post by Underscore__
Well that's part of the point. Employers are more likely to pick out candidates that went to universities they know to be good. For a lot of people university is simply a means to an end


Posted from TSR Mobile


Nope. Employers are more likely to pick good candidates no matter which university they went to. They care MUCH more about you and what you can offer them, than your university "brand" name.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Doonesbury
Nope. Employers are more likely to pick good candidates no matter which university they went to. They care MUCH more about you and what you can offer them, than your university "brand" name.


Posted from TSR Mobile


Given that graduate roles are so over applied for often having particular things will make your application more likely to considered. Seeing a name like Durham, for example, on application will be a good first impression.

Also the industry your applying for is relevant. If you're applying for a training contract (legal role) or a graduate role at an investment bank the simple fact is you're not going to even be considered unless you've been to a good university


Posted from TSR Mobile

Latest

Trending

Trending