Quote:

Ms Nowell parodied the historic institution's own letters, saying Magdalen College "did not quite meet the standard" of other universities. The 19-year-old state school pupil said she found the "obvious gap" between minorities and white middle-class students "embarrassing". And she said there were "significant flaws" in their education system. Miss Nowell - who is predicted A*s in her modern history, law and English literature A-levels - now hopes to study law at University College London. She described the University of Oxford interview process as "torture" and the college as "rude" for not even providing a glass of water. Related Articles Silence is golden as Laura triumphs 18 Aug 2000 Oxbridge, Laura Spence, and a 'culture of failure' 25 Apr 2001 Spence factor is blamed as pupils avoid Oxbridge 04 Nov 2000 Furthermore, she criticised the "grand formal setting" of the interview, saying it was "intimidating" and biased to public school pupils. Miss Nowell, from Winchester, Hants, finished her letter by cheekily offering "guidance for re-application". In her guide, she offered four points that the college needs to improve if they wish to attract her for a masters degree (LLM). The letter, which was sent to university admissions and the law faculty, said: "I have now considered your establishment as a place to read Law (Jurisprudence). "I very much regret to inform you that I will be withdrawing my application. "I realise you may be disappointed by this decision but you were in competition with many fantastic universities and following your interview I am afraid you do not quite meet the standard of the universities I will be considering. "I encourage you to try again for my LLM but re-applicants are at a disadvantage and you are unlikely to succeed unless you become a more progressive university. "See below for guidelines for re-application. "I hope you will be successful in finding other capable candidates and I wish you every success in your future as a university. "Thank you for your interest in me." University of Oxford students today took to Twitter to vent their anger at Miss Nowell's letter. User "jpspencer2", who is studying philosophy, politics and economics at the university, said: "Elly Nowell has no idea what it is like to go to Oxford. "Her own stupid and narrow minded opinions show why she would not be fit to go here." And "paulcampy" said: "Elly Nowell doesn't deserve Magdalen. Signed a former Magdalen student, JCR Pres, OUSU VP and Comprehensive Sch pupil." But "cproudman" wrote: "Good on you Elly Nowell for sticking-up for your beliefs - with humour." The guidelines included at the end of her letter are: "1) Whilst you may believe your decision to hold interviews in grand formal settings is inspiring, it allows public school applicants to flourish in the environment they are accustomed to and intimidates state school applicants, distorting the true academic potential of both. "2) Whilst you may believe your traditions and rituals are impressive, they reflect badly on your university. "As an institution that preaches academic excellence teaching your students to blindly and illogically do whatever they are told reveals significant flaws in your education system. "Frankly. I feel humiliated for both you and your students. "3) During my time at Magdalen College the obvious gap between minorities and white middle-class students was embarrassing. "Whilst I realise you are trying to address these problems within your university, the gap between elitism and discrimination is a narrow one and one that you still do not appear to have adequately addressed. "4) Perhaps offer a glass of water in your interviews next time it is rude to torture guests." Magdalen College was founded in 1458 by William Waynflete and has been home to foreign secretary William Hague, Private Eye editor Ian Hislop, documentary maker Louis Theroux and author Oscar Wilde. It also counts nine Nobel Laureates among its alumni. The college website says: "Our rich history gives us many traditions but we also have pride in our modern and progressive outlook. "The top priority of Magdalen College is academic excellence and applications are encouraged from all students with outstanding academic potential, irrespective of background or country of origin." A spokesman from Magdalen College said: "The applicant withdrew her application via UCAS immediately after her interview and wrote to us to inform us she was doing so. "We replied to her letter acknowledging that we received it."

State school student mocks Oxford with letter - Telegraph

Hahaahaha

Wish I had the balls to do this sort of stuff. Instead I just keep kissing the system's arse and fantasising about running amok with a Viking battle axe.

__________________
Standard disclaimer: the disgusting statements contained in this post are the views of the poster, and unless specified do not represent the views of the moderators or the site's owners.

In defence of Elly Nowell, the girl who rejected Oxford | Steve Anderson | Independent Notebook - A selection of Independent views - Blogs

Quote:

When the news appeared earlier this week that 19-year-old Elly Nowell from Winchester sent a rejection letter to Oxford University parodying the style of the thousands pedaled out by such institutions each year, it wasn’t long before the cries of “obnoxious!”, “arrogant!” and “ungrateful!” came screaming out from all corners of the internet. How dare she insult such a precious British institution, with its almost 1000-year strong reputation for academic excellence and producing great minds of the Western world? Her criticisms – notably that the university takes itself too seriously and that its grand setting allows private school pupils to flourish over their state school counterparts – were quickly dismissed as childish and Ms Nowell was labelled as a ‘silly little girl’ by those defending Oxford. But why should she accept the status-quo and choose Oxford simply because she can? What should be applauded is that this woman has had the guts to speak out against a system that has been lauded as ‘the best’ without question for too long. Sure, her tone may have come across as obnoxious and arrogant, but this is surely just a sign of the same sharp-elbowed initiative and self-confidence that Oxbridge graduates themselves are so often praised for. I’m not denying that academic results speak for themselves, and for anyone who enters university purely for the enrichment of personal knowledge or who intends on continuing into research, they could do a whole lot worse than Oxford and Cambridge. But how well do they actually prepare you for life in the real world? Tutorials inside seeming castles, supper in the great hall, a suit for every occasion, and ancient college regulations allowing you to order a pint of bitter in the middle of an exam (once you’ve left your sword at the door, of course) – the only place this kind of pomp and pretention is rivalled today is in the House of Lords. It is no surprise then, that so many of today’s top politicians studied at these universities, when they seem to have as tight a grasp of modern Britain’s reality as the institutions they trained in. I admit my first-hand experience of Oxford is limited to a taster day for prospective students at 16 and a couple of visits to my older sister while she studied at the dwarfed Oxford Brookes (her partner was an Oxford student when she met him – ‘half-breeding?!’ some may gasp), and although beautiful, the place seemed a world away from anything I had experienced before, or have since. It’s no coincidence that Oxford was used as a filming location in the Harry Potter films – both Christ Church college and the Bodleian Library doubled as parts of Hogwarts – due to their otherworldliness; their magical air of a place greatly distanced from the modern world. I decided not to pursue Oxford as a university of choice when completing A-levels, and my final years at college were far more stress-free than contemporaries who did, busting a gut to attain only the best grades and completing gruelling separate applications to those of us who went through UCAS. While Oxbridge graduates walk into high-powered, highly-paid jobs because of the name of the university on their CV, shouldn’t employers be questioning what, in practice, these students have over their competitors? They work harder, sure, having had to work to far more deadlines than students at most other universities, but in terms of practical knowledge and life experience what have they gained? Many would say that university is not necessarily about learning hands-on, professional skills, and that it is what you learn outside of the classroom that sets you up for life in the ‘real world’. What can be said then of a university society based on antiquated practices and outdated traditions, when it comes to preparing students for life after graduation? An Oxford-educated colleague of mine summed up the university as a ‘finishing school for the rich and powerful; rich and powerful students go there to ensure they continue to be rich and powerful in their working life.’ While one comment on Elly Nowell’s case came from someone saying they would never employ such a ‘spoilt brat’ after graduation, it is this sense of foresight and display of decision-making skills that should be attractive to employers, not the name of an old boys’ club on a piece of paper.

It's wierd to see how much people are invested in this thing. You can understand that people who actually went to Oxford wouldn't want to admit that they got in through wealth or randomness and that their qualification is largely a load of vapid, self-indulgent wank. On the other hand, even people who went to bog standard unis or none at all rush to prop up the very fantasy that holds them back. I suspect it's the natural resistance to admitting that most of life is entirely dependent on chance, and you personally have absolutely no say in it whatsoever. If you fail the Oxbridge entrance exams you can either face up to the fact that you weren't good/rich enough, or you can face up to the fact that every idiot who went in for it was effectively just buying a raffle ticket. The first is a tad painful, the second calls into question the meaning of existance.

__________________
Standard disclaimer: the disgusting statements contained in this post are the views of the poster, and unless specified do not represent the views of the moderators or the site's owners.

Originally Posted by Zichao

It's wierd to see how much people are invested in this thing. You can understand that people who actually went to Oxford wouldn't want to admit that they got in through wealth or randomness and that their qualification is largely a load of vapid, self-indulgent wank.

But is it? Or is engineering the only qualification that is not vapid and self-indulgent?

Quote:

On the other hand, even people who went to bog standard unis or none at all rush to prop up the very fantasy that holds them back. I suspect it's the natural resistance to admitting that most of life is entirely dependent on chance, and you personally have absolutely no say in it whatsoever. If you fail the Oxbridge entrance exams you can either face up to the fact that you weren't good/rich enough, or you can face up to the fact that every idiot who went in for it was effectively just buying a raffle ticket. The first is a tad painful, the second calls into question the meaning of existance.

I guess there's some truth in that. People want to believe that things are roughly fair and "if you work hard" kinda stuff...

Quote:

While Oxbridge graduates walk into high-powered, highly-paid jobs because of the name of the university on their CV, shouldn’t employers be questioning what, in practice, these students have over their competitors? They work harder, sure...

STOP! If that's true, that's enough to explain why an employer might prefer an Oxbridge to someone else.

Quote:

but in terms of practical knowledge and life experience what have they gained?

Dude, you answer your own question...

Quote:

Many would say that university is not necessarily about learning hands-on, professional skills...

Indeed. I would further argue that those who acknowledge that a lot of universities aren't really good (or geared) towards teaching hard skills don't really consider "what you learn outside the classroom" as the redeeming feature of university but treat it as an extended IQ measurement process - Achieving a high level university diploma shows a decent IQ and a decent work ethic. Or that you have rich parents.

Quote:

An Oxford-educated colleague of mine summed up the university as a ‘finishing school for the rich and powerful; rich and powerful students go there to ensure they continue to be rich and powerful in their working life.’

There's that aspect of it as well. The old-boys network. It helps.

Basically, if I was an employer and I had a strong HR budget, apart from hiring myself, I would definitely hire people from modest/middle class background who managed to graduate from top schools. Then, I can be sure they had to rely on their IQ and hard work to get in and succeed. The interview process would allow me to sort out those who have strictly nothing but IQ and lack any kind of EQ. I would also sprinkle the workforce with a few upper class kids from the same top schools - for the "old boys network" thingy. At least the top schools stuff might have slightly infected them and they might not be entirely vapid and incapable of thinking.

__________________
Unless otherwise specified, I am posting as a regular poster. When I will act as a mod, I'll make sure you're in no doubt.

Quote:

But is it? Or is engineering the only qualification that is not vapid and self-indulgent?

Well, tbf I took international relations, the subject that wrote the Vapid and Self Indulgent Encyclopaedia. On the other hand, from what I've heard, most other subjects aren't much better. Taking three years of law, for instance, in no way renders you capable of providing legal services. I've heard similar things about most subjects, including technical stuff like computing and physics.

I guess there's some truth in that. People want to believe that things are roughly fair and "if you work hard" kinda stuff...

Quote:

Basically, if I was an employer and I had a strong HR budget, apart from hiring myself, I would definitely hire people from modest/middle class background who managed to graduate from top schools. Then, I can be sure they had to rely on their IQ and hard work to get in and succeed. The interview process would allow me to sort out those who have strictly nothing but IQ and lack any kind of EQ. I would also sprinkle the workforce with a few upper class kids from the same top schools - for the "old boys network" thingy. At least the top schools stuff might have slightly infected them and they might not be entirely vapid and incapable of thinking.

I'd hire people at random - The Peter Principle Revisited: Random Promotions Work Better | career-line.com

__________________
Standard disclaimer: the disgusting statements contained in this post are the views of the poster, and unless specified do not represent the views of the moderators or the site's owners.

So, if all qualifications, incl. hard ones, are more or less vapid then what's the point? And why are companies requiring such degrees rather than employing cheaper school-dropouts?

I mean, I'd be worried if my nuclear station really did employ Homers...

-------

And promotion is a different issue from recruitment. Besides, I'd like to know how to road-test their 'computational' study. I would prefer the more standard solutions of "up or out" or, even better, competence-based promotion i.e. if an employee does something good but would likely suffer at the level above, don't promote, offer a bonus or a "medal-like" reward.

Finally, I think a bit of randomness and/or cross-function mvt might not be a bad thing indeed but I wouldn't rely solely on that.

__________________
Unless otherwise specified, I am posting as a regular poster. When I will act as a mod, I'll make sure you're in no doubt.

Quote:

A goddess emerged from nowhere this week, as fully formed as Athena when she sprung from the skull of Zeus. Her name is Elly Nowell, and if you missed the story, she is the A-level student who did to Oxbridge what Oxbridge necessarily does to so many, and rejected a college yet to decide on her application. It had, she regretfully informed it, failed to meet “the standard of the universities I will be considering”. Were I the admissions officer of Magdalen, Oxford (which, for reasons soon to be apparent, was never likely), I would drive to Elly’s home in Hampshire, and beg her to reconsider. I’d schmooze the parents, do the washing-up, and spend the night unbidden on the sofa, in the style of Brian Clough’s victorious quest to sign Roy McFarland for Derby County. I would do anything within the law to recruit this girl, in fact, because any 19-year-old with this much wit, brains and chutzpah is a guaranteed star alumna of tomorrow. Admittedly, the letter has its faults. Her rebuke to the interviewers for not providing a glass of water was a shade precious, while this comprehensive schoolgirl’s moan about the Oxford architecture intimidating those not familiar with medieval quads seemed harsh. It is asking too much of the dons to relocate to a cheap conference hotel on the outskirts of Staines for interview week. (Darlings, have you tasted the gull eggs at a Premier Inn? Or the roast swan at a Travelodge?) She also lobbed in some of the public school/state school ratio resentment that felt passé when Gordon Brown played that card on behalf of Laura Spence a dozen years ago. All right, perhaps Elly is something of a precocious madam, sporting on her shoulder a chip that passed its best-before date a while ago. But Oxbridge self-regard can use the occasional elegant pricking, and as a parodist she is spectacular. “I realise you may be disappointed by this decision, but you were in competition with many fantastic universities,” she wrote. “I hope you will be successful in finding other capable candidates, and I wish you every success in your future as a university.” So some consolation for the dreaming spires there. Best of all, she makes a valuable point to the untold thousands of students tormented each year by the belief that elsewhere lies only academic wasteland. Oxford and Cambridge are mighty universities – the best we have. But it wouldn’t be a calamity if ambitious young folk and their neurotic parents came to realise that there are other “fantastic universities”, and that life need not end with a rejection letter from an Oxbridge college. Now, I have a nasty feeling that, noting all the gushing above, some of you will mentally be chanting, “Oxbridge reject, Oxbridge reject”. In a cynical age, too many people automatically ascribe self-interested motives even to writing as fastidiously altruistic as my own. Shame on you. The fact that I am an Oxbridge reject is, in this context, beside the point. Far from being a cause of bitterness, it is the source of immense pride. With the quality of teaching I had 30 years ago, and the unpopularity of the subject, not winning an Oxford place to read Classics was far more challenging than being accepted. If you could name the Greek god of the underworld and tie a shoelace, you were pretty much a cert. Not getting in required a combination of dimness and indolence of which few can even dream. Having said that, if there is one aspect to Elly’s letter that really pains me, it is that it serves as a reminder of my interview at Trinity, Oxford. Of all the myriad humiliations that wake me at 4am, whimpering with shame, this one comes second only to the time (needing to repot a plant after a bamboo pole accident, and with no intention to offend) I jauntily tossed a garden hoe over my shoulder, and sang Hi Ho, Hi Ho, It’s Off To Work We Go to a dwarf. Anyway, the interview having developed not necessarily to my advantage, it moved to my entrance exam essay on Alcestis, by Euripides. None of the dons present needed to be Inspector Morse to deduce, from the surreally vague replies to their questions, that something wasn’t quite right. After several minutes of excruciation, one of them muttered: “Erm, do forgive me, but you have read the Alcestis?” Well, of course, I spluttered. Cover to cover. Eventually I cracked, and confessed that the bits between the covers had defeated me: the 1,500-word essay had been based solely on the blurb on the back of the Penguin. It was at this point that the dons and I agreed that we had delighted each other long enough. I never bothered to open the ensuing letter, and went to Bristol – a much finer city in which to pass a late adolescence than Oxford or Cambridge. If Elly changes her mind about reading law at University College London, and settles on Bristol instead, I recommend the sub-Soviet architecture of the Hiatt Baker hall of residence. No one but an erstwhile resident of a Lubyanka interrogation cell could be intimidated by that. But wherever she takes her degree, she will forever be Elly, goddess of redbrick, to those of us who worship her Olympian disdain for Oxbridge, and wish to God that we’d had the wit to get our rejection in first.

A first, with honours, for the student who rejected Oxbridge - Telegraph

__________________
Standard disclaimer: the disgusting statements contained in this post are the views of the poster, and unless specified do not represent the views of the moderators or the site's owners.

Quote:

So, if all qualifications, incl. hard ones, are more or less vapid then what's the point? And why are companies requiring such degrees rather than employing cheaper school-dropouts? I mean, I'd be worried if my nuclear station really did employ Homers...

The evidence would seem to suggest that they're morons.

Look at how many French companies insist on having engineers for patently un-engineering related jobs. I (a law grad) once got rejected for a job in contracts for not being a qualified engineer. I was tempted to write back and ask whether they wanted me to construct the contracts out of tensile steel and Tesla coils.

In England, on the other hand, they go to the other extreme, and cherish an aristocratic suspicion of anyone who's too good at their job, and appearing to want the position too much is frowned upon. In these circumstances a chap from a decent school with a 2:2 in history is more likely to end up head of engineering than someone with actual technical training.

__________________
Standard disclaimer: the disgusting statements contained in this post are the views of the poster, and unless specified do not represent the views of the moderators or the site's owners.

To much store is put on university why can't you apprentice to be an engineer? Even after getting a law degree you have to apprentice at the bar. I suppose my point is to many universities offer moronic degrees such as media studies and journalism. In the old days journalists used to start as a cub reporter or a cadet at a local paper.

University is seen as a short cut personally I'd take experience over a university degree any day.

__________________
“Some people like the Jews, and some do not. But no thoughtful man can deny the fact that they are, beyond any question, the most formidable and the most remarkable race which has appeared in the world.”

- Winston Churchill - Prime Minister of Great Britain

Originally Posted by Zichao

The evidence would seem to suggest that they're morons.

GPWM...

Quote:

Look at how many French companies insist on having engineers for patently un-engineering related jobs.

True but that's because France is one of the rare country to over-produce engineers. I blame the fact that engineering schools are free and the selection system based on maths only.

Quote:

In England, on the other hand, they go to the other extreme, and cherish an aristocratic suspicion of anyone who's too good at their job, and appearing to want the position too much is frowned upon. In these circumstances a chap from a decent school with a 2:2 in history is more likely to end up head of engineering than someone with actual technical training.

They don't have engineering anymore here.

__________________
Unless otherwise specified, I am posting as a regular poster. When I will act as a mod, I'll make sure you're in no doubt.