The long boat game

[Mr Pee]

Remind me again why Oxford and Cambridge are elitist. I still don't get it.

Because they persist with the ridiculous notion that they should only admit the most highly educated and gifted of candidates, rather than just about anybody who can string a sentence together, as so many other universities do.

The very idea!!

[Mary Chambers]

Remind me again why Oxford and Cambridge are elitist. I still don't get it.

Neither do I, but then I've never really worked out what 'elitist' means. From reading things online I've realised that a great many people still think Oxbridge is for the rich upper class. Not so. Maybe once, but not now.

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

i think that confusing the concept of the best education with the notion of the best people, the confusion of a first class degree with a first class mind, or confounding the notion of menial work with the notion of menial people is eltism ... and in my experience is to be frequently met with in oxbridge but not exclusively so .... could we imagine a bbc without an oxbridge person as DG or Chair?

[MrGongGong]

Because they persist with the ridiculous notion that they should only admit the most highly educated and gifted of candidates, rather than just about anybody who can string a sentence together, as so many other universities do.

The very idea!!

Here is one of the most highly educated and "gifted" ex students

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-AFyO8NZ1MXc/TrN2Z1Q6hbI/AAAAAAAAELY/xRVursw8BtA/s1600/prince-charles.jpg

here's another

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/files/2011/08/boris-hand.jpg

so that's not ALWAYS true then

[Chris Newman]

Here is one of the most highly educated and "gifted" ex students

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-AFyO8NZ1MXc/TrN2Z1Q6hbI/AAAAAAAAELY/xRVursw8BtA/s1600/prince-charles.jpg

here's another

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/files/2011/08/boris-hand.jpg

so that's not ALWAYS true then

It must be my dirty mind. I glanced at the link and read "....Boris-hand-job"

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I have no problem whatever with elitism, just as long it does not become exclusivity. If elitism is the result of achieving the highest standard through equal opportunity, that is a good thing.
However, a boat race had nothing to do with the brain-power required to be admitted to Oxbridge, so I repeat my preference that other universities should be involved as well as these two. Who knows? Cambridge or Oxford might still win.

[MrGongGong]

I have no problem whatever with elitism, just as long it does not become exclusivity. If elitism is the result of achieving the highest standard through equal opportunity, that is a good thing.
However, a boat race had nothing to do with the brain-power required to be admitted to Oxbridge, so I repeat my preference that other universities should be involved as well as these two. Who knows? Cambridge or Oxford might still win.

Actually against Loogabarooga they probably don't stand a chance ............. i'm sure old jug ears got there by merit alone

[Vile Consort]

I share your view about "jug ears," but you are going back nearly fifty years!

[Lateralthinking1]

Is it? _ I'm not being disputatious, just wondered if that really is the position. The monarch claims ownership of the seashore between high & low tide ((I think, or am I getting that confused with rights over anything washed ashore?), so presumably can claim the same rights on tidal rivers?

The Thames is managed by the Environment Agency on behalf of us all. Let us say that eleven pairs of other universities wanted to race on the Thames in each of the months other than April. That would be refused. The same as if a friend and I decided we wanted to race each other in coracles on the Thames with the rest of the water cleared. That is a part of what I mean by elitist.

Next, the old boy and girl network vis a vis Oxford and Cambridge and the fact that the names can make a big difference in getting into powerful employment positions. I have an analogy. I once applied for work ahead of university. At the interview, my A level grades were noted but the interviewer was particularly impressed by the school I attended and hardly spoke about anything else. That kind of thing is rife in respect of Oxbridge. It is elitist and it is also happening now more broadly with the Russell Group.

Plus Oxford and Cambridge dish out firsts and 2:1s like smarties. It seems to be assumed that this is right just because of what they have been historically. I achieved a 2:1 at a university that only awarded one first in my subject areas for that year. At that time the university was 6th in the league table. I didn't deserve a first - far from it - but others would have got a first rather than a 2:1 had they been in a more elitist place. Finally, the assumptions acquired at Oxbridge don't later serve the general public well.

[MrGongGong]

Next, the old boy and girl network vis a vis Oxford and Cambridge and the fact that the names can make a big difference in getting into powerful employment positions. .

That only applies . I guess, if you see University as a preparation for a job which is something other than what I always thought. Having said that and worked with Cambridge music undergraduates who were extraordinarily competent and knowledgeable of the more conventional end of music however if you seek to have a more rounded and challenging course then York, Huddersfield or Brunel would be much better places to study music.......... though if you were after a job that just needed a degree in more or less any subject then sadly the Oxbridge thing would have more value than the others.

[EdgeleyRob]

No problem with rowing as a sport, but does the boat race merit so much BBC coverage ?

[MrGongGong]

No problem with rowing as a sport, but does the boat race merit so much BBC coverage ?

No

but just you wait till the whole "Jubolympics" nonsense

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh indeed

[Lateralthinking1]

York, Huddersfield or Brunel

And that is interesting too. It shows that different universities are the best for different courses and raises questions about how polytechnics that became universities can ever catch up in respect of reputation.

I happen to know that Huddersfield University is just about the leading establishment for research into thorium too. What though would be an average employer's attitudes towards candidates from Huddersfield and Oxford?

And would they be different if the annual boat race was held between those two? I think they would be.

[Vile Consort]

The Thames is managed by the Environment Agency on behalf of us all. Let us say that eleven pairs of other universities wanted to race on the Thames in each of the months other than April. That would be refused. The same as if a friend and I decided we wanted to race each other in coracles on the Thames with the rest of the water cleared. That is a part of what I mean by elitist.

I think closing the Thames once a month might be a bit much to ask, and closing it for you and a mate to have a coracle race is definitely too much to ask. There's an annual charity race in my village for which a road closure order is obtained, but I doubt if one could be obtained every month by another eleven charities, and I certainly wouldn't expect to be able to obtain one for me and a mate to hold a race on unicycles. The suggestion is ludicrous.

Next, the old boy and girl network vis a vis Oxford and Cambridge and the fact that the names can make a big difference in getting into powerful employment positions. I have an analogy. I once applied for work ahead of university. At the interview, my A level grades were noted but the interviewer was particularly impressed by the school I attended and hardly spoke about anything else. That kind of thing is rife in respect of Oxbridge. It is elitist and it is also happening now more broadly with the Russell Group.

If people are still unduly impressed by Oxbridge degrees (and this is not my experience, I have to say) then it's not Oxbridge being elitist but the other people. I can assure you, my job is only as secure as my most recent annual appraisal, and which university I went to doesn't enter into it.

Plus Oxford and Cambridge dish out firsts and 2:1s like smarties. It seems to be assumed that this is right just because of what they have been historically. I achieved a 2:1 at a university that only awarded one first in my subject areas for that year. At that time the university was 6th in the league table. I didn't deserve a first - far from it - but others would have got a first rather than a 2:1 had they been in a more elitist place. Finally, the assumptions acquired at Oxbridge don't later serve the general public well.

So you are saying that standards are lower at Oxbridge than at other universities. This isn't what the international league tables say, so where's your evidence?

And what assumptions are those? Mine presumably. You must be very well informed about me. I am impressed!

[Lateralthinking1]

I certainly wouldn't expect to be able to obtain one for me and a mate to hold a race on unicycles. The suggestion is ludicrous.

I find it sad that you should feel unable to make such a request. Why should it be that Ian Botham walking with an elephant from Lands End to John O'Groats should ever have had better treatment than you or me? There it was his name that made the difference and the same is true of Oxbridge boats. It seems a very simplistic way for the managers of the country and its modern citizens to view how things should be. British culture would be far more interesting and diverse if we had a lot more ordinary people on unicycles, in coracles etc and fewer repetitive, predictable events designed for raising the profiles of the primitive elites.

So you are saying that standards are lower at Oxbridge than at other universities. This isn't what the international league tables say, so where's your evidence?

I am not saying that the standards of teaching or achievement are lower. What I do think is that the awarding of marks
starts with the assumption that you get 10% just for being there. Arguably, that provides the scope for Bullingdon behaviour.