I’m wondering as to wether Cambridge or Oxford takes contextual data more seriously. For context, I’d be apart of the “most serious disadvantaged” group for Oxford and I would get several flags for Cambridge. On one hand, Cambridge does have the august pool but Oxford interviews are quite important. Does anyone have any tips?
Cambridge does a lot for access and contextual, much more than just August Reconsideration. I can't say much about Oxford as I don't know their processes well enough.
Cambridge does a lot for access and contextual, much more than just August Reconsideration. I can't say much about Oxford as I don't know their processes well enough.
My understanding is that each of the universities puts a lot of effort into widening access, through university-wide measures and college activities.
Whatever they do will never be enough for some, because Oxford and Cambridge are easy targets for lazy-minded critics who may disregard the wider picture.
Two universities cannot by themselves change the fundamental inequalities in the UK's educational systems and society in general, but Oxford and Cambridge do at least try to redress some imbalances.
At the other end, those who have fallen for the nonsense propagated by the Times and the Telegraph, and believe that Oxford and Cambridge are biased against privately educated pupils, should look at the numbers and realise that the newspapers are spinning a line.
The dull reality is that most of the people who obtain places at Oxford, Cambridge, and other competitive universities are middle class people from broadly affluent or at least comfortable backgrounds, who attended good schools whether state or private.
Braying poshos whose families own Shropshire are probably rarer than striving working class kids from tough backgrounds, but most of the students are somewhere in between.