This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Academic vs Extra curricular contribution

http://people.pwf.cam.ac.uk/jsag3/thick.pdf

Ok, this article is a total spoof, but seriously - how important do you think it is to be involved in uni activities other than on an academic front? Should admissions tutors activly seek students who will contribute to uni life on a broader scale or should it not be a factor?

Let us know your thoughts!

Reply 1

Squishy

11

I've sometimes wondered what universities expect to get out of their students. I suppose if they accept and train decent people, then those people will go on to be successful, and the university's image benefits from their fame, and they can also benefit from financially successful alumni's donations.

So from a cynical (and practical) point of view, it's in any university's best interests to accept students who will do one of those two: become famous or become rich or both. Whether they do that by becoming academics or otherwise doesn't really matter...I suppose the university should take extracurricular achievement into account if it has money-making or reputation-making potential in the future (like if someone is an Olympic-standard rower). Plus having just super-academics with no life at a university doesn't make for a fun place. It doesn't seem fair that Cambridge should keep its academic reputation if not everyone meets a certain academic standard though, and I think that that should still come first.

Oh, and that spoof is quite good... :biggrin:

Reply 2

MadNatSci

12

Love it

If they took sport that seriously they would never have accepted me.

Reply 3

Brown Patrick Bateman

10

Let's just say if you leave Cambridge or Oxford with a 2.1 and no extracurriculars then you're going nowhere.

Reply 4

MadNatSci

12

I'm sure if I went into teaching they'd really care about whether I'd been a rowing Blue :rolleyes:

Reply 5

Squishy

11

Well, if you were planning on teaching rowing... :biggrin:

Reply 6

Tyler Durden

17

Nice atricle :tongue:

I reckon Cambridge should choose on a purely academic basis.

Having said that a first from Cambridge means nothing if you don't do anything apart from work.

Reply 7

priya

14

englishstudent

Nice atricle :tongue:

I reckon Cambridge should choose on a purely academic basis.

Having said that a first from Cambridge means nothing if you don't do anything apart from work.

i have to disagree i'm afraid....people who don't do anything apart from a levels have no life....how can they? the uni wants interesting people (yes i'm probaby nicking lines from the prospectus but hey) if you can't be sociable and do something other than your degree you won't go far in the employment market...which will then reflect badly on the uni you got your First from

Reply 8

chermitron

i feel that cambridge should take into account extra-curriculars and adopt maybe a little more of an american approach to admissions. HYP and the other ivies in America look for not only intelligent, but interesting students and they seem to have been doing a good job creating diverse and interesting incoming classes. You can't only take into consideration academics when evaluating a person's likelihood for acheivement in life (whether that acheivement be monetary, political, artistic etc.) there are many other things that must be taken into account when trying to guage one's chances for future success like leadership positions and memberships on teams...heh just my two cents

Reply 9

Helenia

20

Jools

Let's just say if you leave Cambridge or Oxford with a 2.1 and no extracurriculars then you're going nowhere.

Yeah, I'm going nowhere :rolleyes:

(though I don't want a 2:1)

Reply 10

MadNatSci

12

chermitron

i feel that cambridge should take into account extra-curriculars and adopt maybe a little more of an american approach to admissions. HYP and the other ivies in America look for not only intelligent, but interesting students and they seem to have been doing a good job creating diverse and interesting incoming classes. You can't only take into consideration academics when evaluating a person's likelihood for acheivement in life (whether that acheivement be monetary, political, artistic etc.) there are many other things that must be taken into account when trying to guage one's chances for future success like leadership positions and memberships on teams...heh just my two cents

Yeah, but their stunning personality doesn't necessarily get the university lots of firsts. Which is what they like!

Reply 11

Tyler Durden

17

priya

i have to disagree i'm afraid....people who don't do anything apart from a levels have no life....how can they? the uni wants interesting people (yes i'm probaby nicking lines from the prospectus but hey) if you can't be sociable and do something other than your degree you won't go far in the employment market...which will then reflect badly on the uni you got your First from

The most boring person I have ever met got into Cambridge because he's damn clever. If he had been judged on personality or extra-curricular activities, he'd have lost to a soggy cabbage leaf.

They go for people who love/are awesome at their subject. Luckily most people combine that with other interests.

Reply 12

Bumblebee3

OP

8

That's one soggy cabbage leaf I'd like to meet... I think if one ends up "going nowhere" after Oxbridge then it would have more to do with the fact that the candidate didn't have the necessary skills to be successful in the kind of career that Jools would consider 'going somewhere', (and these are often the same skills that are displayed and developed through socialising and extra curricular activities) than what class said candidate achieves in the end. A 2:2 from Oxbridge will get you into many places if you talk a good game.

Naturally I don't believe applicants should have to be sporting heros too before they're admitted (hell, I've never picked up an oar in my life) however the potential to communicate with and contritute to a wider environment should be an important factor. Those who don't leave their rooms for three years, whilst providing us with those amusing-yet-tragic stories about curtains being stapeled shut, make a narrow contribution to the uni and to their own general education. Having said that, I can't justify the rejection of candidates who are clearly going to take this approach if they have a genuinly keen interest in the subject. Hopefully, as has been pointed out, the majority of candidates are likely to lead fairly balanced lives in the end.

Reply 13

chermitron

uhhh this probably sounds reeeeaallly dumb, but what's a 1st and how does that affect people getting jobs? sorry stupid american here

Reply 14

Helenia

20

chermitron

uhhh this probably sounds reeeeaallly dumb, but what's a 1st and how does that affect people getting jobs? sorry stupid american here

It's how our degrees are classified - like getting A, B, C in school, at university it goes:

First
Upper Second (2:1)
Lower Second (2:2)
Third

Pass (only at some universities, not Cambridge)

Fail.

There are some people who think that an Oxbridge First will be the answer to everything and you'll walk straight into all the brilliant jobs in the world.

Haz - I completely agree with what you've said! Brilliant. I'd have stood no chance if they took into account sporting skills, but then again I'm not just someone who stays in their room all year (maybe if I was, I'd have got a first, but who cares?)

Reply 15

Squishy

11

chermitron

uhhh this probably sounds reeeeaallly dumb, but what's a 1st and how does that affect people getting jobs? sorry stupid american here

I'm guessing it's kind of like the cum laude classifications you can get your degree in.

Do you think Oxbridge should favour the children of alumni who give generously to the university? Because I think all the top American universities practise this discrimination, and they do so quite openly.

Reply 16

RetiredAccount89

18

Jools

Let's just say if you leave Cambridge or Oxford with a 2.1 and no extracurriculars then you're going nowhere.

Your mum!

Reply 17

shiny

12

chermitron

uhhh this probably sounds reeeeaallly dumb, but what's a 1st and how does that affect people getting jobs? sorry stupid american here

Our version of a GPA > 3.8 (?)

Reply 18

Helenia

20

Squishy

Do you think Oxbridge should favour the children of alumni who give generously to the university? Because I think all the top American universities practise this discrimination, and they do so quite openly.