You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Oxbridge here we come!
April 26 2019 5.10am

Oxbridge here we come!

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 4 of 8 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >

 

View andyg's Profile andyg Flag york 19 Jan 19 4.23pm Send a Private Message to andyg Add andyg as a friend

Originally posted by andyg

The BBC article on this explained that the school has 5 members of staff who focus on helping students to get into university. (source: [Link] )

Many schools that puts this time, effort and money into getting kids into Oxbridge will do so - its about learning to 'play the game'. Private schools do this far better than state schools because they have the resources and experience. Its also a snowball effect where when you learn how to get kids in, that experience helps you with the next year etc.

I think some people are looking for controversy here when the solution is pretty simple

Edit: sorry the close brackets in my text attached itself to the link!

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Ginger Pubic Wig's Profile Ginger Pubic Wig Flag Wickham de L'Ouest 19 Jan 19 9.56pm Send a Private Message to Ginger Pubic Wig Add Ginger Pubic Wig as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Well, we are kind of back to where we were at the beginning.

I have sympathy for your intent but I think that once you accept the premises that you have....then essentially you have opened Pandora's box and the loonies won't let you close it again.....and that's what indeed what essentially already happened with affirmative action.

Indeed, I feel that I can criticise you for supporting this as it's this enabling at all levels which leads to lesser performing institutions and companies.

I'm fully behind social mobility for talented people at the bottom. However, that isn't what is happening......Instead of words like meritocracy I see the word equity.

Equity is the next step from the philosophy of equality. It leads to the very destruction of meritocracy.

That is what has been enabled.

it's a Pandora's box regardless.

somebody who grows up in extreme poverty with a dire education yet matches the achievements of somebody whose education costs hundreds of thousands of pounds...

meritocratically speaking, I'm just rooting for the pauper out of these two people and thinking 'I hope he gets his place at Oxbridge'.

let's be realistic rather than idealistic for one second...hand on heartwho's likely to be more intelligent of the two, given their opportunities? who has achieved more?

we both know the answer.

there's this ex public schoolboy at my work. idiot. genuine idiot. no initiative. yet he's got his nice degree and somehow is climbing the greasy pole and building a nice life for himself to repeat the life he grew up into. there's another lad, east London geezer type. but smart and quick witted. proactive. talented. but not an operator in a large corporation...

In a meritocratic world, the posh boy gets overtaken. I'm not convinced it'll play out that way. partly that's down to their upbringing.

meritocracy surely needs to reward genuine achievement.

there's some crossover between equity and meritocracy.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 19 Jan 19 11.10pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Affirmative action is real racism.

Anything that accepts a lower standard to address some kind of social justice is the beginning of the end of true meritocracy.

This cancer infects the STEM field now. Far left politics is dominant in both the IT tech field and in the world of physics.

It isn't about being the best.....It's about being the best from what is politically correct.

The East Asians are laughing at us.....and in respect of affirmative action they are also suing....and I back them.

Edited by Stirlingsays (18 Jan 2019 8.24am)

I agree that assessing people solely on merit is always what should be done.

However affirmative action can sometimes help to achieve that. Why? Because when making the assessment you need to not only consider what someone has already achieved but what they could have achieved if there was a level playing field of opportunity for everyone up to the point of the assessment.

So finding hidden bright nuggets within areas of deprivation who can then benefit from an Oxbridge opportunity is ultimately to all our benefit.

There is nothing remotely "left wing" involved. It's just common sense and good practice.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Hrolf The Ganger's Profile Hrolf The Ganger Flag 19 Jan 19 11.47pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

I agree that assessing people solely on merit is always what should be done.

However affirmative action can sometimes help to achieve that. Why? Because when making the assessment you need to not only consider what someone has already achieved but what they could have achieved if there was a level playing field of opportunity for everyone up to the point of the assessment.

So finding hidden bright nuggets within areas of deprivation who can then benefit from an Oxbridge opportunity is ultimately to all our benefit.

There is nothing remotely "left wing" involved. It's just common sense and good practice.

But surely anyone can apply to Oxford or Cambridge providing they have the grades.
Why are these people being highlighted if it is not because they are being given a wild card?

The problem with the wider issue of equal opportunities is that it doesn't work both ways.

For example. A man from pakistan can come here and open a business in which he employs his family. That means no local people can apply for the jobs. How is that fair in a country where larger employers have to conform to an equal opportunities policy?

In this case, why should someone with better grades be overlooked so Oxford can accept some poor kids?
If these kids have the necessary grades then why are we talking about them?

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View W12's Profile W12 Flag 20 Jan 19 8.12am Send a Private Message to W12 Add W12 as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

But surely anyone can apply to Oxford or Cambridge providing they have the grades.
Why are these people being highlighted if it is not because they are being given a wild card?

The problem with the wider issue of equal opportunities is that it doesn't work both ways.

For example. A man from pakistan can come here and open a business in which he employs his family. That means no local people can apply for the jobs. How is that fair in a country where larger employers have to conform to an equal opportunities policy?

In this case, why should someone with better grades be overlooked so Oxford can accept some poor kids?
If these kids have the necessary grades then why are we talking about them?

Itís easy. The answer is to provide better opportunities for everyone and not to try and level the playing field after the fact. Kids from privaledged backgrounds do well at least partly because private schools have a higher focus on individualism, discipline and traditional values. That would be a good place to start in state schools.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Online Flag Wisbech, England 20 Jan 19 8.27am Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by Ginger Pubic Wig

it's a Pandora's box regardless.

somebody who grows up in extreme poverty with a dire education yet matches the achievements of somebody whose education costs hundreds of thousands of pounds...

In my view this is hyperbolic language that doesn't accurately reflect the British state school system nor the average economic experience of working class children in the UK.

Originally posted by Ginger Pubic Wig

meritocratically speaking, I'm just rooting for the pauper out of these two people and thinking 'I hope he gets his place at Oxbridge'.



When you introduce class into it as part of the decision making process then you no longer are operating purely on meritocracy.

What you are supporting is tokenism.


Originally posted by Ginger Pubic Wig

let's be realistic rather than idealistic for one second...hand on heartwho's likely to be more intelligent of the two, given their opportunities? who has achieved more?

we both know the answer.

So what....I don't hate someone because of their class.....what I hate is cronyism and other anti meritocratic practices.

I recognise your objections and I hold some of them however I will never deny the brighter child an education because of class.....that's pure dumbing down for ideological purposes.

I've seen what affirmative action has and is doing in America and it isn't good nor helpful.

Originally posted by Ginger Pubic Wig

there's this ex public schoolboy at my work. idiot. genuine idiot. no initiative. yet he's got his nice degree and somehow is climbing the greasy pole and building a nice life for himself to repeat the life he grew up into. there's another lad, east London geezer type. but smart and quick witted. proactive. talented. but not an operator in a large corporation...

In a meritocratic world, the posh boy gets overtaken. I'm not convinced it'll play out that way. partly that's down to their upbringing.

There will always be families with more wealth than others, just as there will differences between people with innate intelligence as with any other ability.

I think you are in danger here of romanticizing the working class and of demonising the middle and higher.


Originally posted by Ginger Pubic Wig

meritocracy surely needs to reward genuine achievement.

Western society already does this better than any other society in the history of humanity.

I think you are guilty here of drawing extreme caricatures of situations to justify a policy that in reality is more unjust.

You don't correct the problems with the class system by implementing your own systems of injustice.

Originally posted by Ginger Pubic Wig

there's some crossover between equity and meritocracy.

No there isn't, they are near opposites.....Explain what you mean by this.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Online Flag Wisbech, England 20 Jan 19 8.28am Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by W12

Itís easy. The answer is to provide better opportunities for everyone and not to try and level the playing field after the fact. Kids from privaledged backgrounds do well at least partly because private schools have a higher focus on individualism, discipline and traditional values. That would be a good place to start in state schools.

I would agree that this is part of the solution.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Online Flag Wisbech, England 20 Jan 19 8.35am Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

I agree that assessing people solely on merit is always what should be done.

However affirmative action can sometimes help to achieve that. Why? Because when making the assessment you need to not only consider what someone has already achieved but what they could have achieved if there was a level playing field of opportunity for everyone up to the point of the assessment.

So finding hidden bright nuggets within areas of deprivation who can then benefit from an Oxbridge opportunity is ultimately to all our benefit.

There is nothing remotely "left wing" involved. It's just common sense and good practice.


Your first sentence was a good one.....the rest of it...

Having been a secondary school teacher I know all about 'hidden nuggets'. In reality they don't stay hidden very long and indeed most of them become successful.

In this country the reasons bright people don't achieve has very little to do with the level of education they receive. It's far more centred on their family life and other external influences.

That's the reality.....success has far less to do with pure talent than many people realise.

The state can't fix those problems.

Edited by Stirlingsays (20 Jan 2019 11.19am)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Hrolf The Ganger's Profile Hrolf The Ganger Flag 20 Jan 19 12.35pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by W12

Itís easy. The answer is to provide better opportunities for everyone and not to try and level the playing field after the fact. Kids from privaledged backgrounds do well at least partly because private schools have a higher focus on individualism, discipline and traditional values. That would be a good place to start in state schools.

Privilege is not the fault of the individual concerned.
If we want genuine equality in educational then everyone has to receive the same standard of education.
Tokenistically, giving a hand up to a few individuals does not achieve this.

Even if we had equal education, we would still have those that failed because of lower ability.

Do we then blame some other factor for their failure?

There are always winners and losers however you massage the system. That is life. There is also the inevitable tendancy for those of means to seek advantage by any and all means possible. That is how we get to where we are now and always will.

In short. Equality is impossible. People are at the top and bottom of society for a reason.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 20 Jan 19 6.16pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

In this country the reasons bright people don't achieve has very little to do with the level of education they receive. It's far more centred on their family life and other external influences.

That's the reality.....success has far less to do with pure talent than many people realise.

The state can't fix those problems.

Edited by Stirlingsays (20 Jan 2019 11.19am)


Fix them no. Help move things in the right direction, yes. If these bright people are held back by their family and other circumstances and this is identified by schools and examination boards then creating special arrangements for them is just sensible. This is affirmative action which produces positive results for everyone. There is nothing racialist involved.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Online Flag Wisbech, England 20 Jan 19 6.18pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle


Fix them no. Help move things in the right direction, yes. If these bright people are held back by their family and other circumstances and this is identified by schools and examination boards then creating special arrangements for them is just sensible. This is affirmative action which produces positive results for everyone. There is nothing racialist involved.

I utterly disagree with you.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View OllieMaidstoneEagle's Profile OllieMaidstoneEagle Flag Maidstone, Kent 20 Jan 19 6.20pm Send a Private Message to OllieMaidstoneEagle Add OllieMaidstoneEagle as a friend

They've been "Offered" places but what are the chances of them actually "Getting" places.As a born and bred south-east-working-class-Londoner I'm very lucky to have had 3 of my kids graduate from Uni and even more lucky that they're all in employment in jobs that they studied for,graphic design,fine art and illustration. Ollie's Dad,Ash.

 


Red and Blue Army!
LONDON BORN PALACE BRED LIVE AND DIE FOR BLUE AND RED
Football is not just a game, its a religion

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 4 of 8 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Oxbridge here we come!