The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Just had argument about this, not sure what I think really.Seems to me that it is another way in which the rich enable thier children to become rich.
POINT ONE: Elite universitys create an elite class who have great influence over how we are ruled.
My understanding is that a degree from Oxford or Cambridge is more likely to get you a job than one from Manchester, Nottingham, Bristol etc. Therefore, top jobs in positions of power (or positions from which you can progress to power) are going to go to Oxbridge graduates. Although there are obviously exceptions, it makes logical sense that there are going to be a significant amount of Oxbridgers in positions of power.
By positions of power, I suppose I mean things like polititians, but I also mean people in the buisness world. I admit that I'm ignorant about the workings of things like this, but I assume that they employ people who work up through the ranks to eventually be on boards, be major shareholders, executives and things like that. Top of the heierarchy of the company, people whose decisions affect things.
Let's take the Murdoch corporation as an example. A job there will have loads of applicants, so the company can pick and choose and, given that a 1st from Oxford in Buisness is better than a 1st from Sussex in Buisness, Oxbridge people will get the job. Hence Oxbridge people being in power. In power in the Murdoch corporation means having a degree of influence over what the British population think, since thinking is controlled in part at least by the media.
All these people will know each other. There will be a network of powerful people who know each other from Oxford / Cambridge university. You went to Cambridge, and now your son wants a job - you speak to an old friend who is powerful within the Murdoch corpoatation. You went to Bognor Regis Uni, and now your son wants a job - there is none waiting within such an organisation.
(Please bear with me)
OK, that doesn't sound so bad. The most intelligent/hard working are in positions of power. Here is my second attempt at a point.
POINT TWO: IT IS NOT THE MOST INTELLIGENT WHO ARE ABLE TO GET IN TO OXFORD AND CAMBRIDGE.
I'm fairly sure about this. I am not saying it is possible to be completely thick and get into these unis. It isn't. Getting AAA, or AAAA, or AAAAA at A-Level is bloody hard. However, your chances of doing so are relative to your wealth.
If you go to a rubbish, low achieving sixth form / college (which tend to be found in poorer areas, yes?) it will be harder to achieve excellent grades due to quality of teaching, resources, etc. Actually, scratch that. These will play a part, but it will be harder to achieve grades if your college is that which places the emphesis on educating you rather than training you for exams.
If you go to a private school, you will be exam trained to perfection. I know, I have a girlfreind at one. That is what these places are for.
Getting tired now, please poke holes in my argument, that is why I have bothered to type it out. It needs clarification, I know, but this is the jist of it.
Ta for reading.
POINT ONE: Elite universitys create an elite class who have great influence over how we are ruled.
My understanding is that a degree from Oxford or Cambridge is more likely to get you a job than one from Manchester, Nottingham, Bristol etc. Therefore, top jobs in positions of power (or positions from which you can progress to power) are going to go to Oxbridge graduates. Although there are obviously exceptions, it makes logical sense that there are going to be a significant amount of Oxbridgers in positions of power.
By positions of power, I suppose I mean things like polititians, but I also mean people in the buisness world. I admit that I'm ignorant about the workings of things like this, but I assume that they employ people who work up through the ranks to eventually be on boards, be major shareholders, executives and things like that. Top of the heierarchy of the company, people whose decisions affect things.
Let's take the Murdoch corporation as an example. A job there will have loads of applicants, so the company can pick and choose and, given that a 1st from Oxford in Buisness is better than a 1st from Sussex in Buisness, Oxbridge people will get the job. Hence Oxbridge people being in power. In power in the Murdoch corporation means having a degree of influence over what the British population think, since thinking is controlled in part at least by the media.
All these people will know each other. There will be a network of powerful people who know each other from Oxford / Cambridge university. You went to Cambridge, and now your son wants a job - you speak to an old friend who is powerful within the Murdoch corpoatation. You went to Bognor Regis Uni, and now your son wants a job - there is none waiting within such an organisation.
(Please bear with me)
OK, that doesn't sound so bad. The most intelligent/hard working are in positions of power. Here is my second attempt at a point.
POINT TWO: IT IS NOT THE MOST INTELLIGENT WHO ARE ABLE TO GET IN TO OXFORD AND CAMBRIDGE.
I'm fairly sure about this. I am not saying it is possible to be completely thick and get into these unis. It isn't. Getting AAA, or AAAA, or AAAAA at A-Level is bloody hard. However, your chances of doing so are relative to your wealth.
If you go to a rubbish, low achieving sixth form / college (which tend to be found in poorer areas, yes?) it will be harder to achieve excellent grades due to quality of teaching, resources, etc. Actually, scratch that. These will play a part, but it will be harder to achieve grades if your college is that which places the emphesis on educating you rather than training you for exams.
If you go to a private school, you will be exam trained to perfection. I know, I have a girlfreind at one. That is what these places are for.
Getting tired now, please poke holes in my argument, that is why I have bothered to type it out. It needs clarification, I know, but this is the jist of it.
Ta for reading.
Page:
gerrid wrote:
> Oxbridge isn't biased toward rich people, that's just a misconception.
> They take people on interview, the minimum qualification is usually
> AAA or whatever, but it's your interview + personal statement that
> get you in, not your education.
If you go public, you're more likely to get AAA. I suppose my problem is more with private schools than Oxbridge.
> Oxbridge isn't biased toward rich people, that's just a misconception.
> They take people on interview, the minimum qualification is usually
> AAA or whatever, but it's your interview + personal statement that
> get you in, not your education.
If you go public, you're more likely to get AAA. I suppose my problem is more with private schools than Oxbridge.
Oxford isn't even that good for teaching anymore. In the Sunday Times university list, there are a few universities that have beaten it for "teaching excellence" for a few years now. Cambridge still does better than the rest though.
I don't think they're at all biased towards privately taught pupils, it's just that they take the best of the people that apply, and generally public schools are better than state ones.
I don't think they're at all biased towards privately taught pupils, it's just that they take the best of the people that apply, and generally public schools are better than state ones.
No you aren't
yeah but if you get a sensible degree from there you are sorted for life
Miserableman wrote:
> Oxford and Cambridge are not modern Universities, they are a law unto
> themselves. For that reason I wouldn't consider going there or
> encouraging others to go there.
> Oxford and Cambridge are not modern Universities, they are a law unto
> themselves. For that reason I wouldn't consider going there or
> encouraging others to go there.
damn then for rejecting me. lousy interview was about chem and i applied for law. bah
Oxbridge isn't biased toward rich people, that's just a misconception. They take people on interview, the minimum qualification is usually AAA or whatever, but it's your interview + personal statement that get you in, not your education.
It's the same with jobs, really, if you interview better than someone from Oxford, and you went to De Montfort, then they'll give you the job. Often graduates from Oxbridge fail to get jobs as they set their sights too high.
It's also true that Oxford and Cambridge are not the best for a lot of subjects, and people know this
It's the same with jobs, really, if you interview better than someone from Oxford, and you went to De Montfort, then they'll give you the job. Often graduates from Oxbridge fail to get jobs as they set their sights too high.
It's also true that Oxford and Cambridge are not the best for a lot of subjects, and people know this
Less than half for the UK's top university is unexpectedly low, I'd say.
Obviously, there are exceptions. 45% from private schools though, still high.
Blank wrote:
> One of my friends just got into Cambridge. Not rich at all, completely
> state educated.
> One of my friends just got into Cambridge. Not rich at all, completely
> state educated.
Page: