Is the admission process for Cambridge and Oxford universities fair? Watch

Goldfish4343
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 1 year ago
#1
I just want to know what you think. I don't really know how these work but I know there are people on here that will have opinions on both sides.
0
quote
reply
RedGiant
  • Community Assistant
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#2
Report 1 year ago
#2
no
0
quote
reply
Doonesbury
  • Section Leader
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#3
Report 1 year ago
#3
(Original post by Goldfish4343)
I just want to know what you think. I don't really know how these work but I know there are people on here that will have opinions on both sides.
Define fair.
0
quote
reply
James1997c
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#4
Report 1 year ago
#4
Oxford is still very classist IMO. If you're a smart person from a disadvantaged background your best bet is Cambridge.
0
quote
reply
username1865079
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#5
Report 1 year ago
#5
Both sides of the argument.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b099ypqt
0
quote
reply
Connor27
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#6
Report 1 year ago
#6
(Original post by James1997c)
Oxford is still very classist IMO. If you're a smart person from a disadvantaged background your best bet is Cambridge.
This is a common misunderstanding - Oxford is not "classist" at all, that is just a media stereotype; if you have the grades and then show potential in an interview as well as your admissions test; then you'll get in.

In fact, both of the two have implemented some "positive" discrimination (hate that phrase...) against wealthier kids in recent years.
3
quote
reply
DYoverDX
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#7
Report 1 year ago
#7
(Original post by goldfish4343)
i just want to know what you think. I don't really know how these work but i know there are people on here that will have opinions on both sides.
noooooooooooooooo
1
quote
reply
James1997c
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#8
Report 1 year ago
#8
(Original post by Connor27)
This is a common misunderstanding - Oxford is not "classist" at all, that is just a media stereotype; if you have the grades and then show potential in an interview as well as your admissions test; then you'll get in.

In fact, both of the two have implemented some "positive" discrimination (hate that phrase...) against wealthier kids in recent years.
Evidently Oxford finds itself in a position to suggest the contrary.
0
quote
reply
OregonHooligan
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#9
Report 1 year ago
#9
Just because people cannot get in doesn't mean that it's not fair. Bunch of whiners crying for fairness when it's already FAIR.
0
quote
reply
loletta
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#10
Report 1 year ago
#10
(Original post by Connor27)
This is a common misunderstanding - Oxford is not "classist" at all, that is just a media stereotype; if you have the grades and then show potential in an interview as well as your admissions test; then you'll get in.

In fact, both of the two have implemented some "positive" discrimination (hate that phrase...) against wealthier kids in recent years.
I would disagree to say that the "positive" discrimination isn't a big thing. I went to a private school for sixth form, and 1/2 of the people who applied to Oxbridge got in, instead of the average 1/5 chance of getting in.
0
quote
reply
GovernmentEarner
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#11
Report 1 year ago
#11
Logically, the Oxbridge admissions process is merely a reflection of all educational inequalities. Oxbridge's job is to pick the best candidates presented to them in line with a few basic government targets. If Oxbridge stopped selecting candidates from private schools, what would the point of private schools be? Oxbridge and a few other top unis have the power to heavily upset the power balance of some parts of the education system, and they really have to be careful with this. Which is why very gradual integration of more state school students and BAME students at Cambridge is very important. I think Oxford is lacking in this sense. If you were to just throw in a bunch of state schoolers, what about the parents who have double jobs etc just to put their kids into private school while their kid has worked hard from the age of 11 or whatever who gets rejected because his parents paid for his schooling. This is also unfair and unequal. The balance needs to shift slowly, and I do think Cambridge is working towards that, Oxford appears underlyingly hostile, however. The ideal outcome would be where private schools still are slightly disproportionate, maybe at 30% so have a higher chance but this doesn't reform the whole education system, as that could cause a massive backlash.
2
quote
reply
Royal Oak
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#12
Report 1 year ago
#12
Oxbridge in general is very overrated. Neither university is immune from the mess the UK university system has become.
1
quote
reply
Pidge Gunderson
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#13
Report 1 year ago
#13
Yes. If you didn't get in, you probably weren't capable enough. People replying no are just salty they didn't perform up to par during the interview/test.
0
quote
reply
GovernmentEarner
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#14
Report 1 year ago
#14
(Original post by Volibear)
Oxbridge in general is very overrated. Neither university is immune from the mess the UK university system has become.
I'm actually someone who dislikes the concept of 'prestige' but Oxbridge is not overrated. 1 to 1 teaching with the worlds leading academics is an amazing prospect. Furthermore, I have friends at Cambridge and also at LSE and Imperial (the unis are traditionally seen as just under Oxbridge) and they work much much less than those at Cambridge. There's a reason it's so tough to get in and has great graduate prospects.
0
quote
reply
RogerOxon
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#15
Report 1 year ago
#15
(Original post by James1997c)
Oxford is still very classist IMO. If you're a smart person from a disadvantaged background your best bet is Cambridge.
What are you basing that assertion on?

They are as fair as they can be. There is variability in both exams and interviews, but that's just how it is. It's not in their interests to admit people that will struggle, whatever their background.
0
quote
reply
Royal Oak
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#16
Report 1 year ago
#16
(Original post by GovernmentEarner)
I'm actually someone who dislikes the concept of 'prestige' but Oxbridge is not overrated. 1 to 1 teaching with the worlds leading academics is an amazing prospect. Furthermore, I have friends at Cambridge and also at LSE and Imperial (the unis are traditionally seen as just under Oxbridge) and they work much much less than those at Cambridge. There's a reason it's so tough to get in and has great graduate prospects.
If that's what you're looking for in a university great. But I went to a school that churned out and praised Oxbridge offer holders and as a consequence, I considered Oxbridge (well Oxford) because that was the thing to do given my environment. I had a deep think about it and realised that despite all the supposed benefits, it wasn't the university for me and I wouldn't have coped. I instead chose one of the 'just under Oxbridge' universities and have never regretted my choice. For my friends who went to, and graduated from, Oxford/Cambridge, the hype wore off very quickly. Yeah they were proud they got in but at the end of the day a lot of them are in the position of wondering if university was worth it, or if they just went because it was the expected thing at the time in the environment we grew up in, the same as many of the other thousands of university students across the country.
0
quote
reply
GovernmentEarner
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#17
Report 1 year ago
#17
(Original post by Volibear)
If that's what you're looking for in a university great. But I went to a school that churned out and praised Oxbridge offer holders, and as a consequence, I considered Oxbridge (well Oxford) because that was the thing to do given my environment. I had a deep think about it and realised that despite all the supposed benefits, it wasn't the university for me and I wouldn't have coped. I instead chose one of the 'just under Oxbridge' universities and have never regretted my choice. For my friends who went to, and graduated from, Oxford/Cambridge, the hype wore off very quickly. Yeah they were proud they got in but at the end of the day a lot of them are in the position of wondering if university was worth it, or if they just went because it was the expected thing at the time in the environment we grew up in, the same as many of the other thousands of university students across the country.
I agree its not for everyone and most of those people it's not for end up getting rejected. I commend you for not getting drawn into the hype and I think hype/prestige shouldn't even be a factor in my opinion. I think Oxbridge (and top unis in general) should be about cultivating your thinking and making you great in whatever field you want to enter, and clearly Oxbridge are ridiculously good at this, shown by there alumni and world-leading research. But certainly, places like LSE or Imperial provide a world-class education and shouldn't be underestimated (Particularly as I may be going to LSE haha).
1
quote
reply
the bear
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#18
Report 1 year ago
#18
yes
0
quote
reply
paolamt
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#19
Report 1 year ago
#19
How long does it take for oxford to confirm whether your application was successful? (or not)
0
quote
reply
Doonesbury
  • Section Leader
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#20
Report 1 year ago
#20
(Original post by paolamt)
How long does it take for oxford to confirm whether your application was successful? (or not)
Final decisions are on 10th January. If you've not been shortlisted for interview you will usually find out in November.
0
quote
reply
X

Reply to thread

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
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

Do you like exams?

Yes (146)
18.27%
No (486)
60.83%
Not really bothered about them (167)
20.9%

Watched Threads

View All