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

    20
    ReputationRep:
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/...quirements-row

    The government is on a collision course with some of Oxford University's most prominent dons over demands that they "dramatically increase" the intake of disadvantaged pupils from the state sector.

    The Observer has learned of growing resistance to the government's plans within the university's academic community, elements of which are outraged that the institution has been asked to accept a wider range of students in return for charging the maximum tuition fees of £9,000.

    One leading scholar described an intervention by the deputy prime minister, Nick Clegg, in which he said universities planning to charge the top level fees would have to "prove" their ability to broaden their intake, as "*******s".
    who's going to blink first?

    Is clegg blowing hot air or will he really coerce Britain's elite unis into admitting greater numbers of state schooled applicants?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    nickclegglol

    Oxford will choose who gets the grades needed and is most promising. Sadly in this country the best extra-curricular activities as well as the grades generally come from well off students, so even if a disadvantaged student made it to Oxbridge, they probably wouldn't fit in, as some threads in the past have shown around here.

    Social mobility, we hasn't any.

    Oxbridge is more of a novelty to go to, there are great universities and the most important thing about a university is the intelligence within a student's brain and how the university can unleash it, not their money, not the grades they achieved and not the professor who's ass everyone is licking to get a hand in with their research.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Those with the most passion and best academic grades should be accepted regardless of age, race, religion or social class.
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    Nick Clegg is such a prick for even asking this. It's absurd and the dons are right to be up in arms.

    I say this as someone who ticks a lot of those minority boxes (schooling, class, ethnicity, disability)/applied via the Access Scheme/attended Oxford on the full £10K bursary/spent 3 years doing lots of Access-related volunteering :yes:
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by Joinedup)
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/...quirements-row

    who's going to blink first?

    Is clegg blowing hot air or will he really coerce Britain's elite unis into admitting greater numbers of state schooled applicants?
    Clegg needs to realise the top institutions take the best out of the best, regardless of what school they come from.

    If a disproportionate number of individuals come from private schools it says either or both of these things:

    *Private schools are doing something right
    *State (comprehensive) schools are doing something wrong

    (General statement, don't knock me down for this).
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by chrislpp)
    nickclegglol

    Oxford will choose who gets the grades needed and is most promising. Sadly in this country the best extra-curricular activities as well as the grades generally come from well off students, so even if a disadvantaged student made it to Oxbridge, they probably wouldn't fit in, as some threads in the past have shown around here.

    Social mobility, we hasn't any.

    Oxbridge is more of a novelty to go to, there are great universities and the most important thing about a university is the intelligence within a student's brain, not their money, not the grades they achieved and not the professor who's ass everyone is licking to get a hand in with their research.
    Oxford doesn't give a **** about irrelevant ECs: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education...ctivities.html

    But otherwise, you are right. The ECs you will get at private schools are generally unrivalled compared to your average state comprehensive school.

    Isn't it obvious why?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by im so academic)
    Clegg needs to realise the top institutions take the best out of the best, regardless of what school they come from.

    If a disproportionate number of individuals come from private schools it says either or both of these things:

    *Private schools are doing something right
    *State (comprehensive) schools are doing something wrong

    (General statement, don't knock me down for this).
    I'm sorry but can you not accept that a world leading institution like Oxbridge will do whatever it deems necessary to to remain that way? Whether it is by accepting only rich students or accepting only poor students that have the grades?

    There will always be bias, we just have to work out what the bias is against!

    If there is one thing I know, when money is involved, people will go against every fabric of their existence.

    (Original post by im so academic)
    Oxford doesn't give a **** about irrelevant ECs: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education...ctivities.html

    But otherwise, you are right. The ECs you will get at private schools are generally unrivalled compared to your average state comprehensive school.

    Isn't it obvious why?
    What I mean by EC activities is this.

    Student A). Got A*A*A*
    Student B). Got A*A*A* and reugularly attends seminars, workshops, actively goes out in search of the knowledge relating to the course they apply to.

    It's also one thing to be given EC activities like this like some schools provide, but it's another thing to go out in search of it independently and really appreciate it!
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by chrislpp)
    I'm sorry but can you not accept that a world leading institution like Oxbridge will do whatever it deems necessary to to remain that way? Whether it is by accepting only rich students or accepting only poor students that have the grades?

    There will always be bias, we just have to work out what the bias is against!

    If there is one thing I know, when money is involved, people will go against every fabric of their existence.
    They accept those who fulfil admission requirements, do well in the interview/entrance test/written work - irrespective of your background.

    You need more than grades to get in. So, no, a state-schooler with A*A*A* is not guaranteed entry. Same could be said for a private-schooler with A*A*A* as well.
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by chrislpp)
    I'm sorry but can you not accept that a world leading institution like Oxbridge will do whatever it deems necessary to to remain that way? Whether it is by accepting only rich students or accepting only poor students that have the grades?
    I'm proof that they don't do either :yeah:
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by im so academic)
    They accept those who fulfil admission requirements, do well in the interview/entrance test/written work - irrespective of your background.

    You need more than grades to get in. So, no, a state-schooler with A*A*A* is not guaranteed entry. Same could be said for a private-schooler with A*A*A* as well.
    I keep editing to keep up with replies haha
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by chrislpp)
    What I mean by EC activities is this.

    Student A). Got A*A*A*
    Student B). Got A*A*A* and reugularly attends seminars, workshops, actively goes out in search of the knowledge relating to the course they apply to.

    It's also one thing to be given EC activities like this like some schools provide, but it's another thing to go out in search of it independently and really appreciate it!
    You don't have to be at private school to do that however. Definitely not

    Also, doing that is by no means a guarantee of admission. You still have to fulfil subject-specific requirement, in addition to any entrance tests/written work that may be compulsory.

    Remember, there is a reason why Oxbridge interview.

    For someone who did not have those opportunities (let's say), the interview is a way for them to show their potential and what not.
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    I don't know why we're focusing on ECs. It's not like they in themselves help people get offers. The only subjects where ECs would be important and necessary are Music and Fine Art, really. In others they might be handy but hardly vital :nah:
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by The_Lonely_Goatherd)
    I don't know why we're focusing on ECs. It's not like they in themselves help people get offers. The only subjects where ECs would be important and necessary are Music and Fine Art, really. In others they might be handy but hardly vital :nah:
    And really, Music and Art, well, they have different admission procedures compared with the likes of Economics, History, Chemistry.

    E.g. Oxford has blatantly said they do not want a second-rate historian who happens to play the flute at grade 8. But, that EC, of course would be relevant to the Music course.

    I.e. you cannot generalise all Oxbridge courses. Just because it's "Oxbridge" it doesn't mean it's the same procedure for every subject. Similar, but definitely not the same. Even between Oxford Maths and Cambridge Maths it's different.
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    Well even for Oxford and Cambridge Music, being a great player isn't important. Most of them are but the audition is a formality. Neither course allows much scope for performance within the course, in comparison with other unis :nah:

    Fine Art, I can't really comment on. Musical activities can often be hugely subsidised. Granted my mum was my piano teacher, but I had 70% off my violin lessons and 50% off tour costs. EMA was saved up and used with a scholarship award to buy me my nice piano :love: I was in a fee-paying orchestra that costed well over £1K but their bursary meant we only needed to pay £100. That was paid by a local charity.

    I never went to a junior conservatoire but had I auditioned and got a place, I would have been eligible for scholarships. Also, had I wanted to attend St Paul's Girls school, I could have applied for a music scholarship :yes:

    Admittedly being in London provides more opportunities and more opportunities to receive support :yes:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    More people in private schools get the better grades though, surely? Also they're more likely to get better advice & interview preperation.
    The issue isn't really with Oxford, it's with state schools in general (like mine :p: ) being a bit ****
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by im so academic)
    And really, Music and Art, well, they have different admission procedures compared with the likes of Economics, History, Chemistry.

    E.g. Oxford has blatantly said they do not want a second-rate historian who happens to play the flute at grade 8. But, that EC, of course would be relevant to the Music course.

    I.e. you cannot generalise all Oxbridge courses. Just because it's "Oxbridge" it doesn't mean it's the same procedure for every subject. Similar, but definitely not the same. Even between Oxford Maths and Cambridge Maths it's different.
    I've been offered an unconditional place to a top ranking uni with not great academic qualifications. I firmly believe it's because the things in my PS that relate to the subject and me going out an finding it.

    Mind you it probably is not the most subscribed course and needs people like me who have an active interest, but a world leading facility no doubt, other unis that would be considered ''nightlife'' unis straight up declined me. Were lower in rankings on several different sites and international league tables.

    What I lack in academic qualifications I had to make up for in ''look im not a lazy **** trying to avoid the fees rise''



    Also had to do it in the flesh at an interview, it's nice being in a stuffy room with a guy set on doing one thing, seeing whether you are a bull****ter or not.

    I've been told time and time again that lecturers don't want you to come to the university thinking it's the be all end all, they want to see people who can engage positively with the subject and a long term goal with what they are going to learn! Would that not be what any Oxbridge tutor would want to see? Or is it a showboat of pretentious people who got A's all their life?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Difficult topic. It will help Oxbridge in the long run if they are forced to diversify though. Either that or risk stagnation.
 
 
 
  • 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
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
    Useful resources
    Uni match

    Applying to uni?

    Our tool will help you find the perfect course

    Articles:

    Debate and current affairs guidelinesDebate and current affairs wiki

    Quick link:

    Educational debate unanswered threads

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • 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

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