Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Oxford loses top 3 university ranking in the UK

hotminute.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 446 posts

Re: Oxford loses top 3 university ranking in the UK

#401

Post by physicsguy »

patanegra wrote: post #75
yodsanklai wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But does Oxford want the best student or some that had to work harder but ultimately aren't as good? In France, our elite scientific schools recruit students based on anonymous nationwide tests. It turns out most of the recruits come from privileged backgrounds, and I've heard this is more the case today than it was several decades ago. I'd love to see more diversity in these schools, but I prefer to maintain our edu…

Clearly, it's because talented people grow to the top (not just economically, they might be cultural elites, like people working in news, academia). Then, they marry people who are on the top. And they pass their genes and habits. It's nothing bad that their kids end up good students again. I think that French system is superior. It gives fair chances to everyone.

It's clearly not purely genetic though is it? A lot of it is wealth and opportunity. That's why there's "dynasties" in so many areas of the developed world, particularly in cultural spheres where that opportunity matters more than in scientific worlds.

Re: Oxford loses top 3 university ranking in the UK

#402

Post by physicsguy »

lwhi wrote: post #66
patanegra wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is extremely unfair framing. Oxford University has been discriminating people from independent schools for a while now. To get in, you need 4 A* from an independent schools, or just 3 As from state schools. That's not "letting in poor people" as you framed it. It's letting in dumber people, worse students. Lots of that is mainly based on classism (against people from middle class), racism (against white people).…

What an appalling point of view. Growing up without privilege is (obviously) markedly more difficult than being provided with the best education money can buy throughout childhood. The students aren't necessarily worse; but they will be unaccustomed to the codified approach that other students from independent schools understand. The system has been built to serve the privileged. While you might feel blame can fairly…

I have to laugh anytime anyone talks about the students being brighter.

I went to a relatively poor state school. I did very well regardless but on average the results were not that good. I remember sitting in my history GCSE class and a teacher chasing a student around various classrooms on multiple occasions. I remember not having a permanent teacher for Year 10 English. I remember my GCSE Spanish teacher bribing everyone with chocolate when OFSTED came around because this was the third time doing the same lesson and he wanted us to look stronger than we were.

Re: Oxford loses top 3 university ranking in the UK

#403

Post by physicsguy »

wulfstan wrote: post #330
growse wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Parents in state schools don't put in even half of the effort on average. I wondered how long it'd be before we'd see "parents who can't afford private education just aren't putting the effort in".

The truth is that if you have an intelligent child, independent school is a complete waste of money. In the UK you will be spending in the vicinity of £200k over a child’s education to finish a levels, and although they will get better a levels on average, their results at university do not reflect their a level achievements. This is why independent schools find themselves downgraded in university offers. This isn’t…

> You also end up with a very narrow program of study

This just isn't true in my area (Physics), the courses at Oxbridge are just as broad but go much deeper than you'd study in another University.

I don't think it's true of written subjects either, from friends that studied there it sounds like the cranking out of essays is weekly or more at Oxbridge whereas my housemates at University were doing termly stuff.

Re: Oxford loses top 3 university ranking in the UK

#404

Post by nickd2001 »

fidotron wrote: post #109
homeless_engi wrote: post #31

I think the real story here might be the line below: "Durham University improved by 30 places year-on-year" Seems a bit suspicious, no? What methodology change led to this result? How can a university that was previously not as well-regarded become the #3 in the country overnight?

My recollection from thirty years ago was a lot of people that were aiming for Oxford would have Durham as their backup plan. It's been hovering around there for a while although not so much in the the world tech people care about, for which Warwick and Imperial circle Cambridge far more closely.

There's a stereotype, possibly unfair but somewhat amusing, that Durham attracts some people who are less clever/bright than they and their families believe, who failed to get into Oxbridge despite expensive private education, personal tutors, every other privilege under the sun. Sometimes known as "rahs" possibly? ;

Re: Oxford loses top 3 university ranking in the UK

#405

Post by StopDisinfo910 »

seper8 wrote: post #8
abxyz wrote: post #2

pg thinks this is because of letting in poor people: https://xcancel.com/paulg/status/1969334665375813679

Not familiar of Oxfords admissions, but if they apply affirmative action as done in other universities in the US, this take of Thomas Sowell is very relevant: https://youtu.be/7AyhaYkikCs?t=57

1. They don't.

2. As usual, the question doesn't really make sense in the context of the UK. The UK is far less diverse than the USA as a country: 80% of the population is ethnically white followed by 9% of Asian from former colonies.

3. Without affirmative action, Oxford is already noticably more diverse than the UK overall because it attracts applicant from all over the world. It's mostly true for Asian students but remains true for black students.

Re: Oxford loses top 3 university ranking in the UK

#406

Post by cowboy_henk »

skippyboxedhero wrote: post #199
growse wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The very top aren't applying there any more at all, you don't need to: Stanford, Harvard, MIT, all better. The only people applying to those from the UK are the wealthy. If by "very top" you mean "richest", then maybe. But I'm not sure we care about that?

No, you can get a scholarship. Again, this is really the best of the best, those with the highest merit. If you have that, why would you study somewhere that has no people of merit? All they had to do was convince a bureaucrat their life was hard (usually based on rather unobjective criteria), everyone else has to pass exams. If you can't get the grades, you don't have merit. Debase the currency, surprised when it ha…

This assumes that "the best of the best" all want to move halfway across the world to attend university. There are many reasons (proximity to family, friends, cultural differences, and increasingly the uncertainty caused by government policies changing) why students wouldn't want to do that. Even if they are smart enough to get in.

Re: Oxford loses top 3 university ranking in the UK

#407

Post by nickd2001 »

foven wrote: post #48
patanegra wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is extremely unfair framing. Oxford University has been discriminating people from independent schools for a while now. To get in, you need 4 A* from an independent schools, or just 3 As from state schools. That's not "letting in poor people" as you framed it. It's letting in dumber people, worse students. Lots of that is mainly based on classism (against people from middle class), racism (against white people).…

The kids at private schools are specifically primed for every part of the application process, including the interview and interview questions in a way that state schools simply cannot. It does not matter how smart you are if your competition is able to practice in a way you cannot.

To me, the whole Oxbridge education must be distorted by this fierce competition to improve one's "personal brand" by getting a prestigious school on your c.v /resume (or misperception that going to Oxbridge gets you in contact with the best people to learn the subject from, which is clearly untrue, as for starters many great academic staff stay away, unable to afford a family home in such areas). It just means your peers will be rather "type A" , pushing very hard. but does it mean they're actually brilliant minds with novel ideas? Some of them for sure but Oxbridge hardly has a monopoly on that. There must be people whose parents sent them to amazing private schools, and they got pushed towards Oxbridge and one day they wake up and say "I've no idea why I'm doing any of this, its not making me happy and I wish I could be around normal people" ;)

Re: Oxford loses top 3 university ranking in the UK

#408

Post by nickd2001 »

patanegra wrote: post #187
frotaur wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not 'clear' at all. What is clear is the correlation. You imply that the cause is 'good genes and habit'. An equally, if not more valid cause is that having money makes it much easier to get good condition/tutors etc for preparing for the exams.

There are studies that show how heritable intelligence is. Very. It is quite common people say, that something is only a correlation and not causation. But if you can point to a common denominator, that has been shown multiple times, to have a massive effect, it's not likely to be just a coincidence. Genes are this common denominator. Society and habits (for example, protestants vs catholics) are another. Things that…

Some research on the subject here : https://www.bbc.co.uk/future/article/20180905-how-genes-infl.... Personally I question how one can definitely prove to what extent genes are the factor as there are so many other factors in play, but those researchers know more than I.

Re: Oxford loses top 3 university ranking in the UK

#409

Post by ionwake »

joshuaissac wrote: post #269
ionwake wrote: post #145

I cant help myself, I have to chip in. Having lived in Oxford for about a decade my most memorable local ( and in one case international headlines) which maybe me tut and wonder what on earth they are doing were these ( feel free to look them up). a) Banned clapping in the student union. Literally incase it offended people for being loud. This one was even mentioned on Joe Rogan. b) About a year or so later, the SAME…

You have it wrong. The clapping ban was at the Oxford University Student Union (a student union), whereas the blind student incident was at the Oxford Union (a debating society unrelated to the student union).

apologies my bad I knew my memory was terrible thanks for the correction

Re: Oxford loses top 3 university ranking in the UK

#410

Post by ionwake »

arp242 wrote: post #368
ionwake wrote: post #145

I cant help myself, I have to chip in. Having lived in Oxford for about a decade my most memorable local ( and in one case international headlines) which maybe me tut and wonder what on earth they are doing were these ( feel free to look them up). a) Banned clapping in the student union. Literally incase it offended people for being loud. This one was even mentioned on Joe Rogan. b) About a year or so later, the SAME…

There have always been the occasional silly "Monty Python type moments" throughout the history of humanity, even in the best of institutions. We just didn't have the right-wing outrage media to jump on every tiny incident to stoke up anger among the base.

I dont see how anything I said has to do with politics, the left or right stuff.

Also I am confused why you are pointing out the obvious. Its as if you have been personaly offended by the suggestion Oxford has Monty Python moments and are trying to reassure everyone its only because all institutions do.

This was not an attack, it was just a couple of anecdotes. Like I said I still think Oxford is a great institution.

You are clearly confused why someone who likes something might criticise it. The reason is to improve it by increasing awareness. Its called positive feedback.

In essense what I am saying is, if all you have is praise for something, then in part you hate it , because you are not being honest, or trying to help it grow.

Post reply on HN