Oxbridge-style admissions beginning Michaelmas 2014

Actor

Trinity today announced (Prof Patrick Geoghan) a new admissions system that will begin in 2014.

It includes interviews and school weightings (results from elite schools are downgraded and results from "disadvantaged" schools are up-rated).

I'm all for interviews; but not for the school weightings. It smacks of wooly lefty thinking and this dogma of "equality". In my opinion; the biggest equaliser of them all is the points race. Is there something wrong with competition and the gathering of the best at what is supposed to be Ireland's "best university"?

I say bring back matriculation examinations and stop with these dumbing down policies that are rusting away at the college's historical reputation.

Irish_wolf

Uh any source on this. Seems like a daft thing to do to be honest.

Gae

http://www.tcd.ie/Communications/news/pressreleases/pressRelease.php?headerID=2640&pressReleaseArchive=2012

They're going to try out a pilot scheme. It doesn't say exactly what's involved, but interviews is a fair guess at least.

I don't see anything about school weightings in the press release. It is mentioned here: http://www.tcd.ie/undergraduate-studies/assets/documents/confquestions.pdf as a discussion point for the conference they held to examine the admissions process, but doesn't look like a proposal. Personally I think that's a non-runner. Even if you wanted to weight the good schools, they don't really have an objective means of applying weights to schools. In the UK they have rankings, but the 'rankings' we have here are just based on admissions to colleges - you couldn't really use admissions to colleges as a means to determine admissions to colleges. That would be a bit circular.

blubloblu

If anything, people from disadvantaged backgrounds will fare worse with interviews. I'm sure private schools will have the resources to prep students for interviews, a step backwards.
School weightings sounds almost unworkable. These problems need to be addressed at an earlier stage in school than University entry.

NeuroCat

In Oxbridge, even with the school rankings you tend to find the majority of students have exceptional results. The interviews serve as a balance between the results and personal statement weighting.

I do hope it's being organized by Trinity itself and not by the state because anything University related the state has tried to copy from other countries has resulted in a watered down and somewhat galvanized product of it's former self.

Histie

Under the status quo, poorer students are better off than they would be with some kind of interview system, because everyone is taught the same syllabus and hard work is rewarded. In Oxbridge, because in theory the interviews require no preparation as they allegedly exist to look for such qualities as “imagination” and “critical thinking” , but in practice interviewees who have prepared and practiced are hugely advantaged, those whose parents can afford to pay for private tuition and whose social backgrounds provide them with more cultural exposure are more likely to succeed than those from poorer backgrounds.



Also, the less clear the selection criteria are, the more useful it is to be well-connected, which obviously should not be a factor in selection. To take an extreme example, Prince Edward was admitted to Cambridge despite the fact that his highest A-level score was a “C”.



As for the weighting system, it has been shown that intrinsically the differences between fee-paying and non-fee-paying schools such as class sizes have little effect on exam performance: it’s more of a self-sustaining cycle created by a number of factors, such as the fact that the parents of the students in private schools obviously care enough about their children’s education to make a financial sacrifice, which means that they have better support, and are more likely to feel under pressure to succeed, which in turn leads the students of that school to perform better in exams, which leads the students tobe more academically competitive, but which the school sells as owing to the nature of the school, and keeps the cycle going. Students whose parents either don’t want to or can’t afford to go private are therefore placed at a disadvantage, but it has little to do with the school’s innate qualities, whatever the glossy prospectus may say.



If we want to tackle inequality, we need to tackle the underlying causes, not the symptoms.

Irish_wolf

Histie wrote: »

Under the status quo, poorer students are better off thanthey would be with some kind of interview system, because everyone is taughtthe same syllabus and hard work is rewarded. In Oxbridge, because in theory theinterviews require no preparation as they allegedly exist to look for suchqualities as “imagination” and “critical thinking” , but in practiceinterviewees who have prepared and practiced are hugely advantaged, those whoseparents can afford to pay for private tuition and whose social backgrounds providethem with more cultural exposure are more likely to succeed than those frompoorer backgrounds.



Also, the less clear the selection criteria are, the moreuseful it is to be well-connected, which obviously should not be a factor inselection. To take an extreme example, Prince Edward was admitted to Cambridgedespite the fact that his highest A-level score was a “C”.



As for the weighting system,it has been shown that intrinsicallythe differences between fee-paying and non-fee-paying schools such as classsizes have little effect on exam performance: it’s more of a self-sustaining cyclecreated by a number of factors, such as the fact that the parents of thestudents in private schools obviously care enough about their children’seducation to make a financial sacrifice, which means that they have better support,and are more likely to feel under pressure to succeed, which in turn leads thestudents of that school to perform better in exams, which leads the students tobe more academically competitive, but which the school sells as owing to thenature of the school, and keeps the cycle going. Students whose parents eitherdon’t want to or can’t afford to go private are therefore placed at a disadvantage,but it has little to do with the school’s innate qualities, whatever the glossyprospectus may say.



If we want to tackle inequality, we need to tackle theunderlying causes, not the symptoms.

Agreed on nearly every point, but dear god man fix your space key....


I cant really think of many advantages to this system. Some people just arent very good socially. Adding an interview to the requirement could deter some otherwise incredibly intelligent people due to the pressure of an interview, which can be a huge deal for people with social or anxiety issues.

Trinity's world wide reputation has slipped in recent years, I really dont think this system would help improve it's rep.

blubloblu

That document you linked to referenced 'school performance', as in looking at your ranking within your own school. I don't that's a half bad idea, when used in conjunction with other methods. They also mention subject weightings, which would be much better than the half-assed blanket 25 bonus maths points.

Histie

Irish_wolf wrote: »

Agreed on nearly every point, but dear god man fix your space key....

The problem created by copying and pasting became immediately apparent. Please see the edited version.

Irish_wolf wrote: »

I cant really think of many advantages to this system. Some people just arent very good socially. Adding an interview to the requirement could deter some otherwise incredibly intelligent people due to the pressure of an interview, which can be a huge deal for people with social or anxiety issues.

True, and that's an issue which also exists within the system, for example in the language orals. In this case, orals are necessary, but it is a very good reason to oppose the recent increase in terms of the marks the oral is worth in Irish, given the considerable advantage a confident person has over a less confident one.

It's a pretty acute problem when it comes to some kind of attempt to measure intelligence, given that not only do many intelligent people struggle in conversations and social encounters, but are actually broadly more likely to.