The Student Room Group

Oxbridge = Inaccessible to most students?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by itsfantanoo
Millions? cmon that's a complete lie.

All they need to do is provide more information and clarity about the interview. A few specimen papers isnt enough.

Their summer schools are nothing, all top unis offer some sort of scheme similar to that.

They're doing nowhere near enough, sorry


Nope - Oxford alone (and that's the university itself, not including the colleges' individual spending) pays for "outreach programmes costing £4m a year, summer schools and £8m annually in financial support." Cambridge says " It is estimated that, in 2017–18, overall expenditure [on widening participation and outreach] by the collegiate University will be approximately £9.5m, including bursaries and other financial measures."

Yes, isn't it good that other universities now participate in a scheme originally just run at Oxbridge!

What more is there to say about the interview when every one is unique? Depending on subject you will be asked about an unseen text you had a half hour to read beforehand, or asked to solve a problem, or asked about something on your personal statement.

What do you think they should do then?
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by itsfantanoo
Millions? cmon that's a complete lie.

All they need to do is provide more information and clarity about the interview. A few specimen papers isnt enough.

Their summer schools are nothing, all top unis offer some sort of scheme similar to that.

They're doing nowhere near enough, sorry


Yes millions, Cambridge:

"In 2013-14, in addition to the £6.5
million distributed to students from
low income households through the
Cambridge Bursary Scheme, the
University, Colleges and Cambridge
University Students’ Union (CUSU)
spent £4.4 million delivering
outreach initiatives"

Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Doonesbury
Yes millions, Cambridge:

"In 2013-14, in addition to the £6.5
million distributed to students from
low income households through the
Cambridge Bursary Scheme, the
University, Colleges and Cambridge
University Students’ Union (CUSU)
spent £4.4 million delivering
outreach initiatives"

Posted from TSR Mobile


That's bursary and all those proceeds go to kids who meet the offer and actually go to Cambridge. Im talking about evening the playing field for applicants.

Okay yeah I know millions is unrealistic but there's still room for improvement imo :/
Original post by Etoile
Nope - Oxford alone (and that's the university itself, not including the colleges' individual spending) pays for "outreach programmes costing £4m a year, summer schools and £8m annually in financial support." Cambridge says " It is estimated that, in 2017–18, overall expenditure [on widening participation and outreach] by the collegiate University will be approximately £9.5m, including bursaries and other financial measures."

Yes, isn't it good that other universities now participate in a scheme originally just run at Oxbridge!

What more is there to say about the interview when every one is unique? Depending on subject you will be asked about an unseen text you had a half hour to read beforehand, or asked to solve a problem, or asked about something on your personal statement.

What do you think they should do then?


Okay well summer schools as I said is standard at top unis. But oxbridge application is different.

NOTE: Im specifically talking just about applicants and the application process. Which schools that have high number of students going to oxbridge have an advantage in. You're yet to admit how unfair it is.
Original post by itsfantanoo
Okay well summer schools as I said is standard at top unis. But oxbridge application is different.

NOTE: Im specifically talking just about applicants and the application process. Which schools that have high number of students going to oxbridge have an advantage in. You're yet to admit how unfair it is.


It's not really that different - I had an interview at UCL too and I don't hear anyone criticising them. Schools that perform well, especially academically selective schools (and the top private schools are highly selective) do appear to have an advantage because they produce high-achieving applicants. I don't see what Oxbridge can do about that other than saying they won't accept more than x students from a certain school regardless of how good they are, and they won't do that because it's not fair on the other students that go there that their place goes to a lesser applicant from a different school. My comprehensive state school was deemed inadequate by Ofsted so I filled out an extenuating circumstances form to make sure that was clear to Cambridge, and they automatically take the school into account as part of the general contextual data anyway.
Original post by itsfantanoo
That's bursary and all those proceeds go to kids who meet the offer and actually go to Cambridge. Im talking about evening the playing field for applicants.

Okay yeah I know millions is unrealistic but there's still room for improvement imo :/


The £4.4 million isn't bursary (that was the £6 million). It's directly on Outreach, specifically:

"Through these
initiatives, we were able to deliver
approximately 167,000 student and
17,000 teacher interactions through 3,400 events.

"Of the 90,000 students we have
engaged with and been able to track
over the last three years, almost
20,000 went on to apply to the
University, with just fewer than 5,600
being admitted."



Posted from TSR Mobile
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by Etoile
It's not really that different - I had an interview at UCL too and I don't hear anyone criticising them. Schools that perform well, especially academically selective schools (and the top private schools are highly selective) do appear to have an advantage because they produce high-achieving applicants. I don't see what Oxbridge can do about that other than saying they won't accept more than x students from a certain school regardless of how good they are, and they won't do that because it's not fair on the other students that go there that their place goes to a lesser applicant from a different school. My comprehensive state school was deemed inadequate by Ofsted so I filled out an extenuating circumstances form to make sure that was clear to Cambridge, and they automatically take the school into account as part of the general contextual data anyway.


Because UCL's not Oxbridge. And the rigorous prep done by academically selective schools/privates is clear.

I am EXTREMELY lucky in that I go to a school near harrow school and so we do preparation there and I see a noticeable difference in preparation. From very well written mock papers to thorough interviews with made up question is oxbridge style.

The difference really is clear.
Class war is so last century, guys. C'mon grow up and just be secure in yourselves and show a bit less hate toward people (parents) who want the best for their children. After all isn't that exactly what you're going to want?
Original post by Doonesbury
The £4.4 million isn't bursary (that was the £6 million). It's directly on Outreach, specifically:

"Through these initiatives, we were able to deliver approximately 167,000 student and 17,000 teacher interactions through
3,400 events.

"Of the 90,000 students we have engaged with and been able to track over the last three years, almost 20,000 went on to apply to the University, with just fewer than 5,600 being admitted."



Posted from TSR Mobile


I've been on one of the events they organised. First of all it's really not helpful for the specific application process. It helps to understand Cambridge as a uni if you know nothing about it. Speaking to students was my only real opportunity to understand how to prepare for the process that really helped.
Original post by TimmonaPortella
In this sense -- by far the most important and pertinent sense -- Oxbridge is completely accessible to all.


It's more accurate I think to say it aspires to be, or at least, officially aspires to be. Clearly it isn't in practise, like it or not, there are cultural or actual blockages to students having access to Oxford and Cambridge from a wide range of backgrounds and areas across the country, even if they in all probability possess the relevant levels of academic merit, intellect and achievement. The filters set up to control who has access work selectively against them and that is clear, regardless of the intent behind them, or the extent to which those filters are tweaked to meet the stated aspiration.

I say this a little cynically, as I don't think it's true that the majority or even most academics within Oxbridge running the selection process are exactly in favour of sudden increases in breadth of access. They undoubtedly favour some modest ameliorations and revisions whilst essentially maintaining the status quo of a white, upper middle class Oxbridge student body, related by blood, school or culture, wherever possible, to the previous ones. This is partly human nature and partly the defence of vested interest. Labour politicians are right to attack it.
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by itsfantanoo
Because UCL's not Oxbridge. And the rigorous prep done by academically selective schools/privates is clear.

I am EXTREMELY lucky in that I go to a school near harrow school and so we do preparation there and I see a noticeable difference in preparation. From very well written mock papers to thorough interviews with made up question is oxbridge style.

The difference really is clear.


My point is that OXBRIDGE CAN'T STOP SCHOOLS FROM DOING THAT which is why they spend so much money on ways to prepare students through tasters, summer schools, workshops etc. and target underrepresented schools for it. The country is divided up by colleges and each region and area of London has a specific college that is responsible for outreach there, with a list of schools to focus on. What do you want them to do, pay for people to coach students from comprehensives?

All of that prep by schools is unnecessary anyway - students should be preparing themselves. I didn't really have prep sessions and I got in because I took it upon myself to look at the test beforehand, learn vocab, look up the first year reading list and read stuff off it to put on my personal statement, etc. That initiative is one of the traits you need to succeed at Oxbridge!
Original post by Etoile
My point is that OXBRIDGE CAN'T STOP SCHOOLS FROM DOING THAT which is why they spend so much money on ways to prepare students through tasters, summer schools, workshops etc. and target underrepresented schools for it. The country is divided up by colleges and each region and area of London has a specific college that is responsible for outreach there, with a list of schools to focus on. What do you want them to do, pay for people to coach students from comprehensives?

All of that prep by schools is unnecessary anyway - students should be preparing themselves. I didn't really have prep sessions and I got in because I took it upon myself to look at the test beforehand, learn vocab, look up the first year reading list and read stuff off it to put on my personal statement, etc. That initiative is one of the traits you need to succeed at Oxbridge!


Well my point is that they can make more of that sort of stuff publicly accessible and have more resources to help. Maybe they can send it out to schools to offer more clarit and help better prepare students. That's literally it. A couple specimen papers isnt gonna cut it.

Well guess what! none of the harrow boy tw ats that get in took "initiative" they got everything fed with a silver spoon.
Original post by itsfantanoo
Well my point is that they can make more of that sort of stuff publicly accessible and have more resources to help. Maybe they can send it out to schools to offer more clarit and help better prepare students. That's literally it. A couple specimen papers isnt gonna cut it.

Well guess what! none of the harrow boy tw ats that get in took "initiative" they got everything fed with a silver spoon.


It is all publicly accessible on their websites! They literally run courses to help teachers know how to better prepare their students!

That'll be why state school students do better in their degrees...
Original post by Etoile
It is all publicly accessible on their websites! They literally run courses to help teachers know how to better prepare their students!

That'll be why state school students do better in their degrees...


Well looking at the stats its not working.

Yes, because Oxbridge is obviously going to follow the trend of the rest of the unis even though it's the best 2...
Original post by itsfantanoo
It helps to understand Cambridge as a uni if you know nothing about it.


Bingo.
Original post by itsfantanoo
Well looking at the stats its not working.

Yes, because Oxbridge is obviously going to follow the trend of the rest of the unis even though it's the best 2...


Going back to my original post, the biggest problem they currently face is the vox populi that says Oxbridge isn't for certain groups of people. They are certainly doing as much as they can to attract working class students and they also do a lot to support those students when they arrive in the form of bursaries and scholarships (including book grants, travel grants etc too that most universities don't offer).
Original post by itsfantanoo
Well looking at the stats its not working.


What? The proportion of public schooled students at Cambridge has been falling steadily.

41.2% in 2011
37.5% in 2016
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by Doonesbury
What? The proportion of public schooled students at Cambridge has been falling steadily.

41.2% in 2011
37.5% in 2016
Do you have the figures for comprehensive schooled students as well? As I posted earlier, the proportion of grammar school students (and in comparison the lack of comp schooled students) did really surprise me when I was an undergrad.
Original post by DFranklin
Do you have the figures for comprehensive schooled students as well? As I posted earlier, the proportion of grammar school students (and in comparison the lack of comp schooled students) did really surprise me when I was an undergrad.


Relatively few comps have sixth forms, so you need to aggregate comps, sixth forms and fe colleges. But yes it's on the pdf on the admissions stats page.

Edit: total share of applications from Home grammar students was 17.8%, eventually taking up 22.2% of Home places.
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by Carbon Dioxide
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-41664459
...OK, so I've hardly come up with Fermat's Last Theorem there, but according to FOI data acquired by David Lammy (a Labour MP), Oxford and Cambridge are understood to be mostly sending offers to the more well-off regions of England (mostly southern, some northern - about half of ALL offers go to those in London and the south-east).


Except this data is all publicly available and didn't need an FOI at all. Not the first time Mr Lammy has insincerely claimed to have personally acquired data. No mention in the article applauding Oxbridge for acquiring and keeping such extensive data at their own expense, of course. I wonder if that's why these articles never have a non-Oxbridge uni for comparison. Oxbridge mainly gets its students from the South East. I wonder if Manchester mainly gets its students from the North West?

Quick Reply

Latest