Is it time to discriminate against and stop employing Oxbridge graduates?

Watch
LutherVan
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#1
There is common knowledge that there are some career sectors (e.g. Private Equity, Inns of court, National Politics, Diplomatic Service etc) where Oxbridge graduates monopolise the job opportunities and hardly do graduates of other universities in the UK are given a chance.

Obviously, on average, the best students in the UK are from Oxbridge but that does not mean other top students can't be found in other top universities like LSE, Imperial, UCL, KCL, Bristol, Edinburgh, Durham, Warwick, St Andrews and likes. Arguably the top 20% plus of students from these universities are as good as the Oxbridge students.

Is the snobbishness and discrimination in employment by Oxbridge students acceptable? Does it not reenforce the discrimination when those already in those career lines virtually only employ carbon copies of themselves with implicit coalition with their fellow alumni?

Is it time for students from the other top universities to reciprocate the discrimination? For example, if a Bristol grad that got into a Private Equity firm was to hire for a new opening and there are 4 candidates to pick from, 3 from Oxbridge and 1 from the other top universities, and they are roughly of equal calibre, the Bristol graduate should discriminate and hire the latter? Obviously if the Oxbridge grads have done far better in the interview process, they should be hired. But if they are all qualified and have done similarly well then reciprocate the discrimination?

Is that not the only way to dilute the power of Oxbridge graduates to discriminate and hold highly desirable roles to themselves? Otherwise the monopoly and discrimination would be perpetual?

Over time as there are less and less Oxbridge grads in these exclusive roles, then it would reduce the number of those desired roles unjustly being reserved for only Oxbridge grads.

What do you think? Play the game they play?
32
reply
cfhurley
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#2
Report 6 years ago
#2
I know what you mean. Some people from Oxbridge have had extreme privilege and every opportunity then there's students who have struggled through bad colleges/schools and worked to the bone for the same grades/degree.
You could argue that a student who has had the hard road and not managed to go to Oxbridge but has gone to a 'top uni' has more drive and character which could give them an edge over the other applicants.
Not that I'm saying all Oxbridge students were born with a silver spoon in their mouths, ofc there are those who struggled and worked as hard as anyone else.
I think there should be more of a break given to equally qualified people and this Oxbridge snobbery should be laid to rest. After all, RG unis turn out people just as educated as Oxbridge and take pupils just as bright and capable.
5
reply
mattmattmatt
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#3
Report 6 years ago
#3
This sounds like a really well thought out idea that would be fair and easy to implement in reality. well done. :ahee:
7
reply
Kiss
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#4
Report 6 years ago
#4
Reverse discrimination is still discrimination. The interviews should be based upon the grades, characteristics and abilities of the person being interviewed rather than where they come from. To discriminate otherwise on the basis of a person coming from Oxbridge would still condone discrimination.
7
reply
Gorwell
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#5
Report 6 years ago
#5
Everyone deserves credit for their work- just because someone has the same grade from another uni in a lesser ranking than Oxbridge doesn't mean they should be given any less of an opportunity. However if a candidate isn't suitable they should be singled out during the interview process. Whatever uni someone went to shouldn't make a difference if they have good grades and the determination.
0
reply
LutherVan
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#6
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#6
(Original post by Kiss)
Reverse discrimination is still discrimination. The interviews should be based upon the grades, characteristics and abilities of the person being interviewed rather than where they come from. To discriminate otherwise on the basis of a person coming from Oxbridge would still condone discrimination.
But if you don't the discrimination would still exist.

Does the end not justify the means?

You have a counter discrimination and then when things balance out, the discrimination would be neutralised.

You do nothing and you have the historic discrimination continuing and will not change.
2
reply
LutherVan
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#7
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#7
(Original post by Levingne)
Everyone deserves credit for their work- just because someone has the same grade from another uni in a lesser ranking than Oxbridge doesn't mean they should be given any less of an opportunity. However if a candidate isn't suitable they should be singled out during the interview process. Whatever uni someone went to shouldn't make a difference if they have good grades and the determination.
In certain very exclusive jobs, some would not even get to the interview stage once their CV does not show they attended Oxbridge. Some even tell them in the advert not to bother to apply.
0
reply
angel2
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#8
Report 6 years ago
#8
Well Oxbridge graduates can also be people from worse off financial backgrounds and they may have worked really hard to get in and graduate from Oxbridge coming from public schools...do you want to discriminate against them too?
opportunities are given to the lucky but what about all the hard workers that fight for them
4
reply
ryanb97
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#9
Report 6 years ago
#9
i think this already happens

i think an employer will weigh an engineering grad from imperial and cambridge fairly equally
similarly
an economics grad form LSE and oxford

its a matter of course and uni ...not simply uni name tbh

Ryan
0
reply
Kiss
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#10
Report 6 years ago
#10
(Original post by LutherVan)
But if you don't the discrimination would still exist.

Does the end not justify the means?

You have a counter discrimination and then when things balance out, the discrimination would be neutralised.

You do nothing and you have the historic discrimination continuing and will not change.
You're still discriminating and trying to call it something else - it just makes you a hypocrite.
0
reply
LutherVan
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#11
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#11
(Original post by Kiss)
You're still discriminating and trying to call it something else - it just makes you a hypocrite.
So it makes sense to just accept to be discriminated against? So you are saying one should basically be a righteous prick and take it as your fate?
0
reply
Arketec
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#12
Report 6 years ago
#12
Why not just ban all public schools? And oxbridge itself.
1
reply
LutherVan
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#13
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#13
(Original post by angel2)
Well Oxbridge graduates can also be people from worse off financial backgrounds and they may have worked really hard to get in and graduate from Oxbridge coming from public schools...do you want to discriminate against them too?
opportunities are given to the lucky but what about all the hard workers that fight for them
I don't believe I mentioned anything about wealth or background, so don't see the relevance of your question.
0
reply
Zenomorph
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#14
Report 6 years ago
#14
No disagree.

A top 20% grad from the lower universities do not = Oxbridge o/w they would have been there in 1st place.

Yes I know the haters will neg but this is my opinion and like that other thing it may stink but I have a righ to it.
5
reply
Kiss
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#15
Report 6 years ago
#15
(Original post by LutherVan)
So it makes sense to just accept to be discriminated against? So you are saying one should basically be a righteous prick and take it as your fate?
This could easily just be said by the Oxbridge students who would get discriminated against.
0
reply
bananarama2
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#16
Report 6 years ago
#16
As a state schooler starting at Cambridge in October I find your suggestion quite insulting. I worked to get my grades and I worked to get in, why should I then be discriminated against?
2
reply
angel2
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#17
Report 6 years ago
#17
(Original post by LutherVan)
I don't believe I mentioned anything about wealth or background, so don't see the relevance of your question.
yes but you implied it with words such as "snobbish" and mentioning other top uni's that statistically accept more public school candidates ...either way your idea if used would still be based on discrimination against graduates from a particular uni (the very thing that you are against)...
0
reply
LutherVan
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#18
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#18
(Original post by Kiss)
This could easily just be said by the Oxbridge students who would get discriminated against.
That does not answer my questions.

There is an existing discriminatory system that has existed for well over 200 years at least and is unlikely to change. Are you saying it makes sense to just accept to be discriminated against? To be a righteous prick and take it as your fate?
0
reply
Kiss
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#19
Report 6 years ago
#19
(Original post by LutherVan)
That does not answer my questions.

There is an existing discriminatory system that has existed for well over 200 years at least and is unlikely to change. Are you saying it makes sense to just accept to be discriminated against? To be a righteous prick and take it as your fate?
Are you saying the solution to discrimination is more discrimination?
1
reply
LutherVan
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#20
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#20
(Original post by Zenomorph)
No disagree.

A top 20% grad from the lower universities do not = Oxbridge o/w they would have been there in 1st place.

Yes I know the haters will neg but this is my opinion and like that other thing it may stink but I have a righ to it.
If you thought before you said this, you will realise that:

- Oxbridge has only a limited number of places.

- Tutors can be bias during Oxbridge selection stages as they are human.

- Some places go to affluent people with less merit like royal family members or wards of significant donors.

- Some people fail the interview due to nerves or the unfamiliar settings.

- People have different development stages (because of intrinsic and extrinsic factors), not everyone is at their intellectual peak before age 18.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise

Regarding Ofqual's most recent update, do you think you will be given a fair grade this summer?

Yes (144)
30.13%
No (334)
69.87%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed