Gutted with a 2.1 in Prelims

I agree with Oxfossil that this is an invidious system, but it also isn't an Oxford-wide problem. I've never been at a college providing such a list of benefits to scholars. There is an entitlement to a long gown and some smallish financial gain, but this is comparable to benefits that come the way of top musicians and athletes. It's a shame some few colleges are still operating such a system.

A post that contains so much more than first appears. The privilege system that accords 'scholars' visible status symbols as well as tangible rewards like higher places in room ballots is invidious. Students have been railing against it for many years, but it persists.

A post that contains so much more than first appears. The privilege system that accords 'scholars' visible status symbols as well as tangible rewards like higher places in room ballots is invidious. Students have been railing against it for many years, but it persists. Why? Is it because it's proved an effective way to get lazy students to work harder? Is it because opposition is often effectively silenced by awarding dissidents a scholarship? Or does it reveal the truth that Oxford's attempts to become more inclusive are mere window dressing for an instituion that is actually structurally wedded to inequality? What is the purpose of higher education, after all - to educate us in matters of fact, to furnish us with a well-stocked mind, or to learn how to play the game? It's also a neat demonstration that one's well being depends more on comparisons with those one considers to be one's peers than any absolute measure (cf 'absolute' v 'relative' poverty). Clearly, the real reason it endures is because it provides an effortless way for PPE tutors to get tutorial students who've evidently done no reading to fill a whole hour with animated discussion.

I worked my ass off in first year, missing social events and missing out on other parts of my life with the goal of getting a first. I got a 2.1 and so a pass, missing out on the distinction. I won’t get a special gown. I won’t get a better room. I won’t get the financial reward. I won’t get the free dinners.

I was 1 mark away from all that. Honestly, I know it’s plain stupid, but Oxford as a system builds everything on getting a 1st.

Most colleges have discontinued room ballot preferences for distinctions in the Prelim (first public examination), including Brasenose. More generally, we can’t see anything wrong with celebrating academic achievement. That doesn’t preclude recognising other types of achievement.

But, as the man said, "Que scay-je?"

Indeed, only the most obtuse and mean-spirited ideologue would object to 'celebrating academic achievement'. But a good result in Prelims should be reward enough in itself, and as @Oxford Mum implies, few employers will care about scholarships that mean little to anyone outside the university itself. It's the petty privileging of the scholar (including the the special gown) that is problematic, as it is especially designed to make distinctions within the student body. That many colleges have taken steps to remove certain favours - as you point out - is a tacit acknowledgement of the downside of the practice. A student at my daughter's old college was devastated to find that, after Prelims, he was the only one of her friendship group still with a Commoner's gown. It reinforced his sense of 'imposter syndrome' and demotivated him. A practicing Christian, he was also keen to read Grace at the start of Hall, but that was denied him, as it's a privilege reserved for scholars. There is a particular perversity attached to additional book prizes being given not to those students who are struggling and need extra help, but to those who are already excelling.
But, as the man said, "Que scay-je?"