Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QwentyJ)
    Hah! And you jumped very quickly to say that! :p:
    Of course. :p:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I am sure that Universities ARE NOT allowed to see applicants' ethnicities.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bubblyjubbly)
    GCSEs/AS Levels/A Levels are such a joke that it is quite conceivable that you can score heavily in them and be an Oxbridge failure - Oxbridge are responsible for allowing the public at large to think that 3As at dumbed-down A levels mean anything. A levels require a greater knowledge of the marking scheme than the subject and that is the real tragedy. I really don't think people like you, those who are clearly still wet behind the ears, are in any position to be discussing or commenting on admissions for such academically-demanding courses in institutions that you clearly aren't academically qualified to get into. There are plenty of very bright people who are rejected with excellent credentials (on paper) from LSE/Imperial/UCl and elsewhere, but the envy factor isn't quite there so nobody bothers to talk about it. Can we discuss why LSE takes just over 50% of its undergraduates from overseas ? Aren't they discriminating against the British ?
    There was quite a good article in the Guardian a few months ago, written by a woman who retook her A-Level English Literature to see if it really is easier now. Her conclusion was that it wasn't. It's easy for people to say that A-Levels are "dumbed down", but if by that you mean continuous assessment, which gives students less time to develop essay skills; more pressure at AS Level; and more of a focus on explaining why something happened rather than simply listing facts, then yes. A-Levels are what you make of them. I haven't looked at any of the mark schemes...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    Afro-Caribbean men have the lowest literacy and maths scores, from this its not suprising many do not go onto oxbridge. The uni does not even know the race so its got nothing to do with that.


    I love that this is getting negs despite I did not actually say anything racist.
    Hm...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pixiefairy)
    I am sure that Universities ARE NOT allowed to see applicants' ethnicities.
    True
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7085741.stm
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    They wouldn't have known he was black before rejecting him? Unless it stated "I AM BLACK" on his ps and they declined him he has more grounds

    Ok consider firstly that 1.5 million britons living in the UK are black. For a population of 60 million that's 2.5%... of the whole country. Over a million Black-British and Afro-Carribean live in London. Most of these areas of London (with white people aswell) are riddled with crime and gang culture. (I am not saying all the areas in any way, at all, but... well, look at N-dubz, ha) and education is less important. I read in my mum's teaching magazine that there are significantly less afro-carribeans continuing further education as well, which is sad obviously and needs to be tackled. Anyway... the amount of actual applicants to Oxford university next year is a very small minority of all the population if you think about it, so realistically there's only going to be a maximum of 40 black people applying anyway. Obviously, 1/40 does sound too low but we also have to consider: the amount of foreign students applying with far superior grades to any of us (chinese applicants in particular), the interview process, their love of the subject etc. If you get to the interview stage there's a 1/6 chance (i think?) of getting into the uni, although it may be higher. Therefore surely oxford would only take in a maximum of 6/7 people every year anyway? So while 1 is too low, those two objectives are estimates and I'm guessing that there may be less black people applying (i.e. 30) and higher difficulty to get in (i.e. 1/7) which would suggest about 3, 4 a year anyway.

    Tbh if they said "only 1 northern irish person" the results would probably be the exactly the same. I really don't think Oxbridge are racist, maybe individual interviewers perhaps, but even then there's more than one. These stupid, trumped-up claims of racism are ridiculous.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sovr'gnChancellor£)
    It must only be Afro-Caribbeans because I am African and I know a lot of other African boys who are really clever - taking into account that I also know a couple who were accepted into Harvard last year.

    P.S. The media likes to make a fanfare - the worrying thing is that they do not tell these type of stories to inform the public, but rather, they do so to further make those of Afro-Caribbean and African descent feel like they are inadequate and cannot be accepted into top universities and further try to bring us down. If the papers would like to know about top American universities, they should see that they are even accepting Black British students from over here! The world has changed - if Oxford has not: their loss. :
    Well the statistic is based I think on sat scores so tests taken around 11. Your going to find plenty of exceptions. But as has been noted in this thread the fact that most black people tend to apply to the most competitive courses likely has a lot to do with it more than these tests.

    A lot can change between 11 and 17
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bubblyjubbly)
    GCSEs/AS Levels/A Levels are such a joke that it is quite conceivable that you can score heavily in them and be an Oxbridge failure - Oxbridge are responsible for allowing the public at large to think that 3As at dumbed-down A levels mean anything. A levels require a greater knowledge of the marking scheme than the subject and that is the real tragedy. I really don't think people like you, those who are clearly still wet behind the ears, are in any position to be discussing or commenting on admissions for such academically-demanding courses in institutions that you clearly aren't academically qualified to get into. There are plenty of very bright people who are rejected with excellent credentials (on paper) from LSE/Imperial/UCl and elsewhere, but the envy factor isn't quite there so nobody bothers to talk about it. Can we discuss why LSE takes just over 50% of its undergraduates from overseas ? Aren't they discriminating against the British ?
    If you are resorting to petty insults when I have said nothing, then I think we can see who is and isnt qualified. I happen to agree with you that A-Levels are significantly dumbed down. I also believe the same is true for GCSE's. But to insult me and say I am not capable of getin into Oxbridge, when I was advised to apply there - is insulting and not necessary when we both agree that they should go on what they think, not exam results.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Bubblyjubbly,

    A) I'd never retake an A-Level, especially because it's massively looked down upon by top universities.

    B) I'd get better marks doing coursework myself than asking my parents to do it. AS History doesn't actually include coursework any more.

    C) An A-Level candidate who "can do little more than write their name on the paper" is hardly going to get anything above a U, or a G.

    D) You sound like you're spouting straight from the Daily Mail, or the Sun. Are you sure you don't work there?
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bubblyjubbly)
    Whether we agree or not is not the issue. The fact is that you are not an Oxbridge graduate nor an academic there and your comments, like those of others, are of no consequence. What do you know of the demands of an Oxbridge degree ?
    Are you really so stubborn you can't even follow a very basic discussion? Don't answer that.
    No I am not an Oxbridge graduate. My two uncles however, are. They have told me quite a large amount of the maths side of Oxford - or at least what it was like, and I also have several friends who are at oxbridge at the moment.
    Also, my comments have perfect reasoning, and are perfectly valid. At no point did I say that I knew anyhting about an Oxbridge degree -- infact, I never even mentioned it. All I stated was that Oxbridge do not base their decisions soleyl on GCSE's and A-Levels. Or could you not read that bit and thought insulting me was a better idea?
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bubblyjubbly)
    If you find criticism insulting then you need to toughen up. The bottom line is that you are not an Oxbridge graduate (and it shows) and inventing friends/relatives who are, knowing that you can be who you want on the net, does nothing to advance your facile non-argument.
    So saying 'you clearly aren't academically qualified to get into' isn't even 1 little bit insulting? Especially when I reckon I have better qualifications than you - please tran dprove I don't. Just grow up.
    Once again, you are repeating what appears to be your only form of argument, that I am not an Oxford graduate. Well done sherlock. However, how could I be, I'm not at uni yet. It was suggested I apply to Oxford, however I preferred the course at Durham, and have got all my offers, very quickly.
    Also, I do have friends there - and can get you contact info if I cared in the least. My uncle did both a maths degree and a masters at Merton. Also, I have over 6 teachers who went there, and often talk about it.

    As for 'non-argument' perhaps the only intelligent thing that has come out of your mouth! I'm not arguing with you. I made one point. You then repeat my point, and then have a go at me. Once again, I repeat. Grow up. Also, as one of my Oxford educated teachers has said for many a year 'it took him 30 years to form his predjudices, don't go making yours so early.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Bubblyjubbly, I agree with your points, but telling people that their arguments have no credibility because they're not an Oxbridge graduate isn't going to convince anyone that you're right.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bubblyjubbly)
    I seem to have convinced you according to what you have written. I daresay someone who hasn't even been to university, let alone obtained an Oxbridge degree, is in no position to comment on with any authority on what Oxbridge look for, what they should be looking for or the content of their courses - that should be common sense.
    I already thought the same as you, but I didn't like the way you put your argument across. I love TSR snobbery on here - the idea that anyone who hasn't been to Oxbridge "is in no position to comment on... what Oxbridge look for", and is supposed to take everything written by ex-Oxbridge students as gospel. A 24 year old Cambridge Theology graduate told me that GCSEs and A Levels didn't really matter much, and if you get mediocre grades then you can easily salvage things with your personal statement. Statistics say otherwise, but surely she should know best, being an Oxbridge graduate?
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.