Oxbridge social exclusion - Mary Beard comments

Interesting article by Mary Beard on the issue of social exclusion from Oxbridge - Alan Milburn, the Social Mobility Czar, was talking about this and the need for all levels of the education system to stop pointing the finger at each other as responsible, whilst at the same time not losing the usual opportunity to blame Oxbridge. Mary Beard disagrees.

A lot of very good comments as well, on all sides, and TSR gets a mention (indeed I think I was one of the nerdish reviewers of old admissions stats).

I don't think anyone can doubt the effort that Oxbridge has put in but is it the case that but for that effort the position would have been even worse or should Oxbridge have spent the money trying to pay off the national debt for all the good it has done over the last 40 years?

Some of the usual specious arguments are there - particularly the dubious statistics about the relative prospects for Oxbridge entry at age 12 in different school types/areas of the country, etc. That's not to say there isn't some truth in them.

Mary Beard's blog is enjoyable, she is a lively, interesting, topical blogger, as she is a TV presenter.

I work at a Russell Group redbrick, and I really feel as though there is less of a social mix here now than there was at Oxford in the 1970s - it's pretty depressing.

I accept that entirely. Last year I was at an Oxford dinner sitting next to a couple of contemporaries, all three of us comp lads; one from the Valleys, one a Geordie and me. They are partners in City law firms, I have a provincial firm. Obviously there were lots of present day students and recent grads. The girls were straight out of Country Life and the boys, not many boys, had that floppy haired look about them. The most striking thing though, and I notice this when out and about in Oxford as well, is the absence of regional accents.

Looking at this document myths about what is required for Oxbridge entry even permeate elite private schools. http://www.kcs.org.uk/system/files/page/73/Web_UCAS%20Offers%20%20%25%20Success%20by%20university%202011-12.pdf

I think there can be a culture that it's simply 'not for us' at some, possibly most, schools. I remember my sister saying she didn't think she'd fit in there when she was at the end of Yr. 11 after a family friend mentioned it to her. She changed her mind, but if someone from a thoroughly middle class background (both parents fairly senior teachers) can get that impression what hope is there for a kid on FSM?

Looking at this document myths about what is required for Oxbridge entry even permeate elite private schools. http://www.kcs.org.uk/system/files/page/73/Web_UCAS%20Offers%20%20%25%20Success%20by%20university%202011-12.pdf

It is hard to know whether this is about managing parental expectation. Schools that really understand the Oxbridge admissions system, know the pupils who do not cut the mustard. Due to the quality of teaching many of their also ran students will exceed the scores at which successful Oxbridge applications are made. Setting a high bar, at least nominally, may stop parents demanding futile applications.

The 'fitting in' thing seems to be very important, I suspect the influence of grotesque misrepresentations from the media play a big role. There should be a pack sent out to all A Lev students, something like 'real life at Oxford/Cambridge as opposed to what you've seen on TV/heard from people'. Maybe other 'top' universities need to do the same. I don't think this type of misapprehension is solely an Oxbridge issue.

I think there can be a culture that it's simply 'not for us' at some, possibly most, schools. I remember my sister saying she didn't think she'd fit in there when she was at the end of Yr. 11 after a family friend mentioned it to her. She changed her mind, but if someone from a thoroughly middle class background (both parents fairly senior teachers) can get that impression what hope is there for a kid on FSM?
-snip-

you've reminded me of the johnny griffiths incident last year. Mr griffiths is the maths teacher criticised by gove's advisors and the daily nail for blogging about advising a pupil to not worry about cambridge and go somewhere where he'd be happy instead.
it turned out Mr griffiths was himself an unhappy cambridge graduate.

Perhaps the belief that oxbridge isn't a very nice place for the clever state schooler could be quite well founded, perhaps it took the blip in admission of state schooled students that we're now worried about the tail end of to get the word out

(I'm not sure what sort of school mr griffiths attended)

There should be a pack sent out to all A Lev students, something like 'real life at Oxford/Cambridge as opposed to what you've seen on TV/heard from people'.

I really do think it is JUST a belief - I have been surrounded by clever state schoolers. Some of them definitely managed happiness. A few even seemed positively cheerful. Seriously, loads and loads of state schoolers get on just fine. It is sooo stereotyped that somehow the colleges remain some kind of branch-in-chief of the upper private schools.

I really do think it is JUST a belief - I have been surrounded by clever state schoolers. Some of them definitely managed happiness. A few even seemed positively cheerful. Seriously, loads and loads of state schoolers get on just fine. It is sooo stereotyped that somehow the colleges remain some kind of branch-in-chief of the upper private schools.

stereotypes can persist for good reasons.


wrt mary's blog

I agree about the importance of A level choice - there's the trinity list and the RG 'informed choices' pamphlet which says almost the exact same thing in a user friendly and less baffling way afaict. probably it's be good to encourage A level choosers to read that stuff but I'm not sure schools should be compelled to shove russell group propaganda down peoples throats.

Are there any stats about the effectiveness of the cam area link scheme anywhwere? Mary's blog links to a web page that says it's been running since 2000 so it's not like it should be too early to tell.

My brain gets a bit jammed by oxbridge saying they keep trying things to improve access but not publishing research that shows what works.

you've reminded me of the johnny griffiths incident last year. Mr griffiths is the maths teacher criticised by gove's advisors and the daily nail for blogging about advising a pupil to not worry about cambridge and go somewhere where he'd be happy instead.
it turned out Mr griffiths was himself an unhappy cambridge graduate.

Perhaps the belief that oxbridge isn't a very nice place for the clever state schooler could be quite well founded, perhaps it took the blip in admission of state schooled students that we're now worried about the tail end of to get the word out

(I'm not sure what sort of school mr griffiths attended)

I was saying the same thing at the top of the thread. Universities, this is not solely about Oxbridge, want an A for effort and some of them at least seem to be comfortable with trying and not achieving.

I read Mr Griffiths' comments in TES, and they actually made sense. He was talking about a pupil he found working in the library at 6.00, as he was leaving to go home - this boy was working himself into the ground.

I think if there's an issue I think it's more with the schools than with Oxbridge. In my personal experience the universities have put in a lot of effort to dispelling myths around their applications and broadening their appeal, and also seem to have some of the best financial support out of any universities, along with lower living costs since they can afford to subsidise so much. Meanwhile, in some schools there appears to be an attitude right from the start that Oxbridge will be out of their students' reach, and too much of a focus on consolidating their position by bringing the bottom up rather than encouraging those with ambition to succeed. At my sixth form college a friend of mine was discouraged from applying to Oxbridge because his application 'wasn't strong enough', and ultimately didn't apply. In the end though he got grades that would surely have seen him in, and in my (admittedly perhaps biased) opinion, the correct kind of attitude and work ethic to fit in perfectly; but he was put off by the whole 'our students don't get into Oxbridge' attitude that the staff had. As it stands private schools are far better equipped to give their brightest pupils the guidance and 'pushing' that they need - most likely because they are used to getting students into these institutions and know how to approach the situation, rather than being drawn in by the mythology that you need 6A*s and a parent in the Freemasons.

The motto of the Order of Canada is "DESIDERANTES MELIOREM PATRIAM" whcih translates as "They desire a better country". The answer to it is "They will have to make do with Canada".

I tend to think of this every time universities blame schools for lack of access. The problems with the state school system are a given. What are universities achieving to increase access despite the problems with the school system?