University Challenge 2009, Warwick vs. Christ's College Cambridge PART 1

[doraaaaaaaaaaaaaaa]

OMG THEY DIDN'T KNOW THE TANKS QUESTION! and one of them studies history... jeeeeesus.

[mckeeisafraudster]

If you need private tuition, DO NOT approach a company called "UNIVERSITY AND ACADEMY TUTORS", based at Jesson House, Coventry CV1 1JN. The owner of this company, Dr. Vincent McKee, is a SERIAL FRAUDSTER whose scams were revealed by Sky News on 12 January 2011. At that time, UAT went by the name ICUT. Following Sky News's revelations, McKee changed the name of his company to UAT and his OWN name to Dr. Patrick Kelly. A V O I D

UAT (UK) Ltd, Jesson House, Tower Street, Coventry, CV1 1JN, UK

[suenaamy]

WARNING TO ALL STUDENTS: You are strongly adviced to STAY AWAY from a private tutoring company called University and Academy Tutors (UAT), based at Jesson House in Coventry, England. This company was previously known as ICUT (UK), but the owner of the company, "Dr." Vincent McKee, was outed by Sky News in January 2011 as a FRAUDSTER. McKee then changed his company's name to UAT (GB) and his OWN name to "Patrick Murphy." Sky News AGAIN exposed him in March 2011. He now calls himself PATRICK KELLY

[myloverisbillmurray]

fucking hell! that was the most bias introduction i have ever seen! we get milton, rowan williams and darwin studying at cambridge (paxman's alma mater) and what about Warwick? well their comercial whores...nothing about their success in attracting 86 % state school students, about the russel group, about being consistently in the top 5 nationally since their inception! that is bullshit! just the kind of prejudice that is endemic in this country's education system!

[toby0cooper]

@myloverisbillmurray No offense but I don't think that a state school student ratio, being consistently in the top 5, etc. is relevant to the introduction. It's not interesting and doesn't distinguish the university particularly. The state school student ratio isn't an achievement in my opinion, and it hasn't always been in the top 5 nationally, looking it up this year it's only ranked 6-8 depending on where you look. And that's an improvement, it's a modern uni.

[myloverisbillmurray]

@toby0cooper well i think the fact that it's the only russel group uni currently meeting its target quota of state school students is an achievment. I think it says a lot about a place that it has a progressive and inclusive atmosphere that consistently attracts students with grades to rival those of the golden triangle elite, but without the backing and support to have those skills recognised by a system that is rife with archaic rituals and nepotistic attitudes within the established elite.

[toby0cooper]

@myloverisbillmurray I think the opposite. The problem is that many of the top universities have now been pressurised so much to accept people from state schools that they actually discriminate against those who went to public or private schools. I had a number of friends that were encouraged to leave public school to attend a state school for their sixth form so that they would have a better chance of getting into Oxbridge. I think that the school you went to shouldn't be a factor, just ability

[myloverisbillmurray]

@toby0cooper i agree with the latter part of that obviously everyone should get to got based on ability. it is no suprise to me that students were encouraged out of the private system, but you are reverse engineering the issue. the fact is that over 90% of students in britain are comprehensivly educated, thus if the schools, and admissions tutors are doing their jobs they should make up 90% of oxbridges intake. as it stands only 51% of oxbridge students are state school taught.

[toby0cooper]

@myloverisbillmurray That misses a huge part of the equation. Lots of people in the private system are there because of their abilities. To get into most private schools is very competitive, my school accepted 1 in 10 for example, and so only the strongest students get in. This is part of the success of private schools, that they have so many gifted pupils (often on scholarships and bursaries). If you look at the league tables they are dominated at the top by private schools for this reason.

[myloverisbillmurray]

@toby0cooper yeah but you cant say that it doesnt also have alot to do with the educational opertunities afforded those in the private sector. as A levels become more attainable and the way we teach more sophisticated people acorss the board are getting better grades, so how do you choose between two students? do you choose the guy from the comp who has good grades but spends his weekends working (especially now theyve stopped EMA, or do you take the guy who spent his summer at daddy's company?

[toby0cooper]

@myloverisbillmurray Of course, there are also many very talented pupils in the state system, just mean proportionately they are less than you think. It also seems that many in the state system have less of a work ethic even if they are as talented. This is why Oxbridge is so consistently able to outperform Warwick in the league tables. I've spoken to several professors that taught at both Warwick and Oxbridge, they said the students are just as intelligent at Warwick, but don't work as hard.

[myloverisbillmurray]

@toby0cooper not to mention the opertunites within school, most comps dont have the infastructure to provide an ecclectic range of extra-curricular activites, even if they can provide a decent education, which by the way is in no way a given. its nto lazyiness its social pedagogy! try being the smart kid in a class full of delinquants. try being heard or afforded time and respect in a class of 35. I have no beef with smart kids on scholarships, but the pull the intelleigence of a class up....

[toby0cooper]

@myloverisbillmurray While I believe that alot of what you are saying is true, you are missing my point that the professors said that the students at Warwick are as intelligent as those at Oxbridge but do not work as hard. I am not saying that people at state schools are lazier, but if going to one directly causes somebody to become unchangeably lazy then that student is not fit for Oxbridge, no matter how unfair that may seem. There are many people from state schools that work hard and get into

[toby0cooper]

@myloverisbillmurray Oxbridge. They are suited to it because they have maintained a work ethic. Universities should be looking for a combination of ability and work ethic. If the work ethic has been destroyed by the school the student attended then they may not be suited to the university. It is not the duty of the university to correct problems a student may have obtained earlier in life. Quotas are terrible for university because it implies that better students will be overlooked

[myloverisbillmurray]

@toby0cooper whilst i agree that quota systems arent perfect i would rather have a clumsy solution to an unfair problem rather than the other way round. without discussing a top down change to the education system i believe that checks and balances need to be maintained or meritocracy will be dead in the water. and a quota system is the best we've got! however i do believe we are staying from topic. this is not a debate about the private system and as we obviously come from different sides of

[toby0cooper]

@myloverisbillmurray The major reason that Oxbridge is so successful is that it consistently chooses the best candidates. A quota system implies sometimes sacrificing superior candidates and thus weakening the overall strength of the universities. It is unfair to choose candidates in this way, and completely unmeritocratic. The fairer solution is to try to improve the state school system to change the problems it creates. I don't think Warwick should be praised for using the quota system.

[myloverisbillmurray]

@toby0cooper you're missing the point. no university activly chooses candidates to tick boxes, but i do think the way that warwick chooses its candidates is more suited to their abundance of strengths, whereas oxbridge seem to target the lack of weaknesses. i have been through the selection process for both and whilst i dont want to go into detail here, i found i performed considerably better in the warwick interveiw, because of their progressive attitude towards assesment.

[toby0cooper]

@myloverisbillmurray My point all along is that universities are forced to actively choose some candidates to tick boxes. There would be no point of giving a university a quota system to follow otherwise. I completely disagree with your opinion on the selection processes. I didn't even have to take an interview, as most people don't, to get into Warwick. At Oxford I had to first pass an exam and then go through the interviews. It is a much more comprehensive process. The interview process at

[toby0cooper]

@myloverisbillmurray Oxford is designed to find your potential. That is why they forcibly push you out of your comfort zone in the questions. At Warwick they cannot properly assess your potential because they lack sufficient data to do so (perhaps different in your case). They normally only see your PS, grades and information about school, background, etc. If there are two equal candidates from the PS and grades (happens frequently) then they will obviously accept the state school one

[myloverisbillmurray]

@toby0cooper well thats conjecture pure and simple isnt it? i am well aware of the tactics that oxford employ....now but not then. what you dont seem to realise is that the gulf between private and comp is one of social confidence. no one gave me any guidance concerning my application where as many pirvate schools, by the admitance of their own alumni are 'Oxbridge factories' . warwick realised this and get the best out of shy or inexperianced, but academically gifted students.

[toby0cooper]

@myloverisbillmurray I think that you have so major stereotypes of private schools here. I myself didn't have a single practice interview to prepare for my Oxford interview. I had a one hour lecture at school about what to expect in the interview, but it wasn't really that extensive since it had to cover every subject and an interview for a sciences subject is very different to an interview for an arts student. The reason for the lack of preparation is that Oxbridge does not like candidates that

[toby0cooper]

@myloverisbillmurray look trained. That's why we were all encouraged not to use a service, i think it was called something like Oxford Applications, because they make their candidates look trained. So often the best preparation for an Oxbridge interview is to avoid being trained and instead just read around the subject. Any applicant reads around their subject. The reason some schools, like Westminster and St Paul's, are so successful with Oxbridge isn't the preparation but the results they get

[myloverisbillmurray]

@toby0cooper all i know is that at cambridge i was treated with what was tantamount to open hostility and at warwick i was given the oppertunity to think and talk in a way that i was used to at school. it is obviously going to be difficult for either of us to see completely where the other is coming from but i come from a good school in dorset with an affluent and comfortable catchment area, and they are lucky if they get one student with the confidence to apply let alone get accepted.

[toby0cooper]

@myloverisbillmurray Perhaps you had a particularly bad experience, but maybe it was just the quite intensive methods they use to interview candidates. It is highly unlikely that they were treating you with hostility because you went to a state school. Maybe they were playing bad cop, as many interviewers at Oxbridge do, to see how you cope under intensive pressure. Different interviewers have different methods, I had 5 good cop interviewers and 1 bad cop myself.

[myloverisbillmurray]

@toby0cooper there are may reasons i didnt get in the main one being that a applied because it was cambridge....not because i liked the course or the place...my mistake, but ive had closure now so its cool lol and there is no point going into that. what i would say though is that i applied post A level with A* A* A. now that isnt the healthiest score card that cambridge are going to see this year, but it is above what they require, so i dont think its fair to sya that grades are paramount.

[toby0cooper]

@myloverisbillmurray I never said grades were paramount, grades are what get you to the interview stages, after that they don't look at your grades anymore, just the interviews and their tests. Many applicants will have straight A*s and get rejected, from private and state schools alike, I even had a friend that had 100% in two subjects get rejected (that also applied post A-level). You can't feel discriminated against (though I suspect you're not) just because you had decent grades

[myloverisbillmurray]

@toby0cooper no i didnt feel like they were out to get me because i was from a state school, but i do still believe that my back ground put me on a back foot in that kind of scenario, but bringing us back to the original point; i think for oxbridge to aspire to achieve a more demographically sensative intake would be a step in the right direction. this can be done by making the selection proccess more ergonomically designed for the individual, and through closeer work with the state sector.

[toby0cooper]

@myloverisbillmurray If you felt on the back foot in that scenario the selection process probably did well to reject you, since all the tutorials at Oxbridge are like that. Could you just tell me how the selection process could be more ergonomically designed for the individual, maybe it could be beneficial but it seems like that would be very impractical and costly. I think that the majority of students, like you, that get into Warwick from the state sector do so because they were the best

[toby0cooper]

@myloverisbillmurray candidates, it is simply the marginal candidates that benefit from the quota system. And before you call me elitist there, explain to me how a quota system could work without benefiting the marginal state school candidates? For that reason, I am not undermining the achievements of the majority of state school students, just the marginal candidates

[myloverisbillmurray]

@toby0cooper yes but i was on the back foot not because i wasnt academically suited but because i didnt feel comfortable. i want to make it clear also that i dont advocate an obligatory quota system. however, i feel that if institutions set goals of admission from certain sectors then we could open the system up a bit more. and im sorry but this is the essential point of disagreement. i happen to believe that a marginal state school candidate is worth the same as a dead cert private candidate.

[myloverisbillmurray]

@toby0cooper this is not a remedy to the problem of poor social mobility, but it is a way of medicating the problem, for a cure we must look at the education system, but for now i would advocate a 'benefit of the doubt' clause for marginal state school candidates. you're not going to like that, we're never going to agree, but im not the one sat in my oxford dorm with a private education behind me, so excuse me for being a tad more militant.

[toby0cooper]

@myloverisbillmurray I see your point and partially agree with it. I wouldn't go as far as saying that a marginal state school candidate is worth exactly as much as a dead cert private candidate. Most of the work towards passing exams is done independently, the role of the school is overrated I think in terms of academics. But I understand that it is harder to succeed in a state school because the teaching and atmosphere isn't as good so I can accept factoring in the background in the process.

[toby0cooper]

@myloverisbillmurray What I cannot accept, however, is having a system that deliberately rejects better candidates to meet targets. The university should only be concerned with getting the best candidates. A meritocratic system would give a slight preference to a candidate from a state school in recognition of their background. But it should only do that insofar as it gives more information about the ability of the student, not just for the sake of appearing more state school friendly

[myloverisbillmurray]

@toby0cooper no i completely agree. like i said i think im more militant than you, but thats probs inevitable from someone sitting on my side of the fence. to that end i would like to see a more critical commentary of the private system within political dialogue, but what with the overwhelmingly oxbrdge make up westminster and the media i cant see how thats going to happen. never the less im glad to see we've come to something of a consensus in terms of a 'sensitivity without bais' arangment

[myloverisbillmurray]

@toby0cooper and i think its fair to say that we should end it at this mutual in road. from what i have gleaned 'mr cooper' you are obviously an intelligent and erudite guy and a credit to your university, its obvious that you deserve your place also. i wish you every success in the future and im glad we could find at least some areas of consensus. good night x

[toby0cooper]

@myloverisbillmurray I have to say, I enjoyed the debate. I am very tempted to go into politics as it happens so it's enjoyable discussing issues like this which would obviously affect me if I were able to get elected. I hope you're having a great time at Warwick and I actually have alot of respect for the university (just not for the reasons that you mentioned)! Thanks for the discussion!

[myloverisbillmurray]

@toby0cooper i stand by the fact that it is meer conjecture to suggest that warwick works on the sort of rigid quota system that you imagine, and that that does alot to undermine the achievements of students at both warwick and oxford that are from state backgrounds. i believe that there is a general trend amongst more established universites towards academic complancency, and that actually they could benefit from an more sensitive system of selection

[myloverisbillmurray]

@toby0cooper and yeah it was pretty dreaful, if i was ambivglent before i hated the place afterwards.

[myloverisbillmurray]

@toby0cooper the debate and its unlikely that we are going to change each others mind. bury the hatchet there? back to the core issue i believe that the amount of respect that is afforded warwick is essential to its development and progression. warwick has the funding, the staff and the students to make it a world class institution, and yet you dont see nationallly weaker institutions like manchester and kings jumping 200 spaces a time on the international leauge tables?

[myloverisbillmurray]

@toby0cooper this is important because of the different way that the two tables are assembeld. the international tables rely on opinion and reputation. warwick cannot help its age or asthetic, and the problem i have is that when put against an institution like cambridge they get derided and scorned for all the wrong reasons. it is the nepotism, snobbery and eliteism of our education system that i cant stand. a system where openly social democratic institutions like warwick cannot thrive.

[toby0cooper]

@myloverisbillmurray I don't know what international tables you are referring to because none of the major ones rely on opinion. They rely almost entirely on the academic output of the university, which means that institutions like Harvard will always come out on top due to being so large and having huge budgets. For this reason I do not like the international tables as league tables, they don't reflect the academic success of their students sufficiently

[myloverisbillmurray]

@toby0cooper and you cant say that they made that decision themselves. if youve got strong invested, usually middle class parents pushing you to a scholarship then you are going to do better. if you remove the private system then you prevent a childs future being determined by anything other than their own merit. frankly im am insulted that you can suggest that lazyness is a pandemic for one social group alone. that is the kind of wilful ignorance that infects the private system.

[toby0cooper]

@myloverisbillmurray I never said it was a pandemic for one social group alone. You are committing the straw man fallacy here. There are many people I know in private school that are incredibly lazy, I also think that they should not get into a top university. I am not talking about social groups here, I am only talking about the work ethic of the student concerned. The reason work ethic may be greater in private schools is they push the students harder, why else do they dominate league tables?

[Js5s141]

I don't know how they managed it, but the people on Cambridge made me hate them instantly after their introduction lol.

[MsHambro]

WARNING:Any student who is thinking of approaching a company called the "Institute of Independent Colleges & University Teachers (ICUT)" for help with private tuition--DON'T,because ICUT's Director,Dr. Vincent McKee,is a throughly dishonest individual who'll ask for your credit card details and will withdraw money WITHOUT YOUR AUTHORISATION OR CONSENT.McKee used to have a British Telecom internet connection but they cut it off when students complained and BT identified McKee as a SCAMMER

[Amanox]

The Warwick girl is pretty

[PickleMyTickle]

Christopher Christmas is such an awesome name.

[ainhoator]

The host is dreadfully mean to the Oxbridge brats.

[FunkyCrime17]

Sorry dudes, I only recorded and posted this because I know the people involved =)

[ExpoFever]

@FunkyCrime17 i watch it every monday on bbc 2 

[sugarsean1]

post some new episodes please..iplayer dosent work in the us

[bpoc16]

Great upload. Any other episodes you have would be apprecoated; "University Challenge" is, sdly, not broadcast in Canada.

[StantheMarsh]

The BBC iplayer is quiet good, shows back the shows every week after they are played on tv, if it's available for you it's really good.