Working class? Don't think that Oxbridge is for you.

*to should be too

Callistemon21

By perpetuating the social mores that achieving a place at Oxford or Cambridge is the pinnacle of achievement, as some are doing on this thread, is devaluing the achievements of the majority of society.

Exactly but those who are applauding are to blind to see or acknowledge it.

By perpetuating the social mores that achieving a place at Oxford or Cambridge is the pinnacle of achievement, as some are doing on this thread, is devaluing the achievements of the majority of society.

it has less of a place now than it did years ago

Certainly less of a place, but it's still there.

PS. I know that not everybody has a high level of intelligence, which is why I wrote "if they are highly intelligent and motivated".

Of course I know Oxford and Cambridge (or any university course) isn't for everybody, including the children of some middle-class families, who wouldn't consider any other option, and pay out thousands of pounds to ensure their offspring get the best chance.

The point I was making is that Birbalsingh had no need to mention "poorer" children. She seems to be acknowledging that they have poorer education and their aspirations are low. As a former teacher, I tried to ensure that family background never held any child back from looking at all opportunities. Of course, Oxford and Cambridge are only for a tiny minority, but I've come across parents who think it's their children's right. It should be everybody's right.

Nobody would ever speak to a group of pupils in an independent school and tell them that it's perfectly OK if they don't do PPE at Oxford because being a plumber is a great job.

Applaud them by all means, but question just why they didn't get the educational qualifications, if they are highly intelligent and motivated.

Oh dear!!
Not everyone has the same level of intelligence or ability, have they?
I thought that you, at least as a teacher, would be perfectly aware of that.
Not every student is going to get top grades however motivated, however hard they work.
Or am I not allowed to say that as it is discriminatory?

So if university is not for everyone, Oxbridge is certainly not for everyone and we need people who are professional, skilled and indeed lower-skilled. That is how society works.

This country certainly needs tradespeople as much as it needs Oxbridge graduates.

Someone who has the ability to become a skilled tradesperson should be given every encouragement to achieve their goals.

Social class or parental background should have no place in deciding who's suitable for Oxford or Cambridge
I agree and, as far as I am aware, it has less of a place now than it did years ago.

Some of you don't get it because anything less than an Oxbridge education is valueless to you.
It's intellectual snobbery of the worst kind.

GrannyGravy13

If everyone aimed for social mobility we would have no street cleaners, rubbish collections, care workers, supermarket shelf stackers etc.

In my opinion if you come from a family where several generations have not worked if you then go on to get a job you like and then go on to get promotions surely that could be a definition of social mobility

University is not for all, Oxbridge is not for all University applicants, let’s just work towards giving our young people a choice whether that be apprenticeships, further education or the chance of landing their dream job (whatever that may be).

How do you think it would go down if you went into Eton and said that it's absolutely OK if some of them end up as cleaners or carers?

Social class or parental background should have no place in deciding who's suitable for Oxford or Cambridge.

volver

Fair enough.

That's not what she's saying.

No, it isn't what she's saying.

Callistemon21

^KB is speaking as the Social Mobility Tsar, not an educationalist^

So what she says about someone who has moved upwards by small steps and not necessarily taking a trajectory from an impoverished background to Oxbridge is valid.
Are they not to be applauded because they couldn't get the necessary entrance qualifications for Oxbridge but still gained more qualifications than their parents have, then got a skilled job with more pay and better prospects for their own children?
Having the opportunities so that they can achieve to the best of their abilities is something to aim for.

Even ensuring that children are well nourished is essential if they are to achieve.
All the billions wasted by government could have been spent by ensuring every schoolchild had a free, well-balanced, nourishing lunch.

Applaud them by all means, but question just why they didn't get the educational qualifications, if they are highly intelligent and motivated.

Oxford and Cambridge aren't for everybody, including most people from higher class backgrounds. Why single out those from impoverished backgrounds?

Fair enough.

That's not what she's saying.

I haven't read the article or what ever that started this thread only the commnetary, but what I have read suggests that what Ms Birbalsingh suggested was that by obsessing constantly about Oxbridge, children were not being given enough encouragement to look at all the other universities they could go to.

Oxford and Cambridge are not the best universities for everybody, nor are they necessarily the highest rated place for every subject. DS's Faculty at a non-Oxbridge University is rated the best in the country and Oxbridge is not even in the second position, and that applies to a number of subjects.

Students should choose which university they want to go to on the basis of the syllabus it teaches, not its place in the University hierarchy. DS's school would really have liked him to have appied to Oxbridge but because Oxford did not offer the subject he wanted to study as an undergraduate course and the Cambridge one was not to his liking, he refused to apply to either and applied to those universities that offered the syllabus that most met his study ambitions.

Most employers know which universities offer the best degrees in the subject they most need and I suspect, for example that most engineering companies rate a degree in engineering from Imperial College well above a similar degree from Oxbridge.

IF that is what Ms Birbalsingh is saying, then I am in agreement with her.

volver

Yes, like I said.

Know your place, peasants.

Is that an order?

?

Clearly.

I don’t have a very good sense of smell.

Ah, the stench of being patronised is overwhelming, for me and for those at the bottom.

You don’t seem to be having a good day today volver. ?

There is only one poster on here talking about peasants knowing their place and it’s certainly not me.

No. I won't

I agree GG. I don’t think volver will though.

Yes, like I said.

Know your place, peasants.

I agree Callistemon21 what to us seem to be small steps, for one person can be a big deal for them and their future, and their families.

KB is speaking as the Social Mobility Tsar, not an educationalist

So what she says about someone who has moved upwards by small steps and not necessarily taking a trajectory from an impoverished background to Oxbridge is valid.
Are they not to be applauded because they couldn't get the necessary entrance qualifications for Oxbridge but still gained more qualifications than their parents have, then got a skilled job with more pay and better prospects for their own children?
Having the opportunities so that they can achieve to the best of their abilities is something to aim for.

Even ensuring that children are well nourished is essential if they are to achieve.
All the billions wasted by government could have been spent by ensuring every schoolchild had a free, well-balanced, nourishing lunch.

I'd rather that the person responsible for improving Social Mobility didn't think it was her job to keep people's expectations low.

I don't expect her to make actual promises to people about what is going to happen to them. I'd expect her to set up a framework where as many people as possible could realise their full potential, without somebody telling them that those at the bottom should be happy with something less.

volver

Sorry, GG13, she's not there to be "realistic".

She's there to change things so that as many people as possible benefit from "social mobility". She's not there to say "its going to be hard for some of you, don't expect too much".

So you would rather her lie and give some folks false unrealistic hopes.