Do Cambridge students have rich parents?

Sometimes Cambridge students know just how to shoot themselves in the foot. There may be all those lovely initiatives to make sure that everyone knows it's not just a university for the elite, but when Varsity publishes a list like this one, you just can't help but be entertained!

Clearly, the list is not completely accurate, because any survey like this is self-selecting. And, as Mary Beard points out on her blog, many students probably don't know what their parents earn anyway. But you still can't help a little chortle when you read that students studying history of art (all those stereotypes) have parents who earn £118,000 a year (and an average weekly student budget of £182). Those studying education have parents making do with £46,500. Both, of course are rather more than the average annual wage, of almost £25,000.

So, well done Varsity for your lovely lists (one of which you can see below). Now, will these help you to decide on your applications?

Read School Gate on:

Is Oxbridge more expensive than other universities?

Which universities do employers rate?

By Subject:

Average weekly budget/Average Parental Income

History of Art £182, £118k
Management £171, £67,500
Architecture £155, £83,100
Land Economy £153, £74,000
Geography £148, £104k
Classics £137, £84,600
Economics £137, £117k
Maths £134, £78,000
Philosophy £129, £57,700
Computer Science £127, £50,900
Oriental Studies £125, £87,800
English £122,  £61,200
SPS £119, £77,600
Law £112, £80,000
Music £107, £80,000
MML £106, £62,200
History £106, £74,800
ASNaC £104, £63,300
Theology £103, £74,900
Engineering £92, £68,100
Natural Sciences £90, £64,600
Arch & Anth £89, £52,200
Medicine £86, £62,300
Education £78, £46,500
Vet. Medicine £76, £64,600

Comments

[John Scott]

The language here is unclear (and therefore perhaps misleading). The insinuation seems to be that education students (and therefore all others) are better off than the national average.

However, the survey is about parental income in total, whereas the average figure is for a single wage-earner. If you were to divide the education figure by two, it would actually be less than the average wage!

And of course any good statistician knows that a simple mean, without other information, has the potential to be highly misleading. Varsity is so sensationalist that this is no surprise, but the Times really should know better!

[S.Turner]

Our son studied at Cambridge but we were earning far from the national average income, if we go by statistics. He was lucky enough to gain sponsorship from the MoD with whom he spent one year prior to taking up his seat at Cambridge. This helped to off-set his expenses, which were more than those of his brother who was studying at Warwick University at the same time.

Do Cambridge students have rich parents?

Ha, ha! My wife, daughter of a vicar, studied Art History (as they like to call it...) at Trinity. Trust me, her parents didn't earn anywhere near the figure quoted.

Cambridge, however, has money and scholarships. Those bright enough (as is my wife... of course...) will get them.

[alex]

I went to Oxford and it was horrible. The class system is alive and kicking. I never met so many posh, privileged or rich people as I did there.

[JM]

The History of Art students having the highest paid parents is rather amusing. I guess it would be similar at other Universties (incl a certain Prince at St Andrews). It does confirm ones suspicions that these students either will not need to ever earn a living or simply have never considered the need to earn a living.

[Em]

Being a Cambridge student myself, I can honestly say that my parents earn much less than this survey says they should, and my weekly budget is lower than the survey says it is. However, I have also spent almost three excellent years in Cambridge, none of which have been coloured by any sort of elitism or reference to the "class system". I don't think that this survey is anything more than a typical piece of Varsity journalism - slightly sensationalist, vaguely entertaining and full of media-provoking statistics.

[bob]

I suspect the history of art figure is heavily skewed by a couple of students whose parents are extremely rich.

[Paul Anderson]

Although interesting to a degree, the figures' must have a degree of inaccuracy. Some students will have extraordinarily wealthy parents who increase the average figures.

[Alex in Paris]

I get to teach Art History, along with Archaeology, which is my main field.

Though I don't have any statistical evidence, it is certainly the stereotype that art history students come from wealthier families. The children of the rich learning about the art that they are going to be buying in the future.

That is not to say that all art history students are like that; for the others it is a general humanities degree.

But the student type is quite different from archaeology, where the students are very down to earth, no doubt literally.

[Anon]

Another example of the media trying to stir up a hornets nest about "elitist" Oxbridge. My brother went to Cambridge, and I to Oxford, despite my parents income not getting them onto the bottom of this list. It's called hard work.

[Nick Lane]

Does the Times OnLine recruit from Varsity?

[Robin Chung]

As a former engineer and now trainee doctor. It is amusing to note that the students in the bottom tier based on parental income are studying some of the more nobler pursuits -- medicine, engineering, education. And in the 'top' tier? Art history.

[Halloway]

As someone who did indeed study History of Art at Cambridge, my parents' joint income at the time was probably a good deal less than £30,000. This was entirely irrelevant at the time as I paid my own way through grants, loans and working during my degree. It's difficult to see the point of this survey. I can only assume that Varsity is stoutly maintaining the low standards of journalism that were evident ten years ago.

[Il Guerriero]

To Robin:

So why is medicine more 'noble' than art history? Every medic I've ever known was pathetically grasping for some aspiration of middle class living - exactly the sort that most art historians apparently come from. Understandable it may be, noble it certainly isn't. (I concede the nobility of engineering though.)

[Karl]

Alex, 10:55am, so did I, and I agree, it's full of posh, priviledged and rich people, but it's also full of people from modest backgrounds such as myself. Your comment says more about your prejudices than theirs IMHO.

[Markus]

Why are they interested in the average income ? We know that saleries are not normally distributed and thus distort the average significantly.

How about to report the median ? That would surely tell us a lot more ...

[Steve Jacks]

I would never have guessed that intelligent., hard working children who are bright and buckle down to the necessary hours and hours of study needed to even think about an offer from Cambridge would themselves have hard working, successful, probably intelligent parents who instilled self-discipline, interests, manners and a thirst for knowledge. That shocks me beyond belief! I'd have guessed that the most intelligent and hard-working children would have been the one's whose parents sat around on the dole, smoking, getting drunk, fencing stolen goods and generally instilling chav, hooligan, anti-("posh, innit")-education virtues in their variously half-related offspring.

[Anon]

As a current Cambridge undergraduate reading art history I would say that art historians have been rather unfairly tarnished with the same brush. I'd be interested to know how many art history students actually filled in the survey, as of the people I socialise with I was the only one (and my weekly budget is more like £100, if I'm feeling really decadent) and there are only about 30 of us in each year. I think it's more likely that a couple of wealthy people filled it in and tipped the scales drastically.

Frankly, Varsity should be ashamed of publishing such a sensationalist report that seems skewed towards confirming existing prejudices about certain subjects.

Also, to Robin, not everybody can be, or is suited to be, a doctor or engineer. Art history may not be "noble," in your opinion, but at least we're not all puffed up with a sense of our own self-importance.

[Brenners]

What exactly does one do with a degree in Art History? Get a real degree and save yourself from working in McDonalds.

[Freddie]

There must have been some seriously rich Classicist parents to adjust the average after the severe damage done to it by my dad's income. His pension was only just over 20k when I was there, and like Halloway above, I paid my own pay through loans and working in the holidays.

Unsurprisingly, I have still not finished repaying my massive loans after working for four years since graduating.

[lyn]

Alex:
You obviously haven't been to the Univ. of Calif. Santa Barbara campus.
Late model Lexus, BMW and MB suvs, Ugg boots in 80 deg weather and $40 flip flops - not to mention Starbucks on their parents credit cards! But, unlike the UK class system - these are nice kids.

[Shueb Hussain]

I completely agree with Alex(#4). I am part way through a medical degree in Cambridge and this place has loads of posh+/or minted +/or spoilt students.

Although these students are unwittingly wildly out of touch with the realities of life for the majority of the country, students from low-income families such as myself are not held back in any significant way because of it. At Cambridge, those who need financial support invariably get it from bursaries and grants to supplement the standard government loans/grants, most of which would not exist at other universities (except maybe Oxford).

I also agree with the final point from 'anon'(#18).

[ND]

Kudos to warwick students on £50 a week! And bet we have a lot more fun! (not, I might point out, at the expense of our degrees..most of my friends and I are all on course for 1sts) WE got where we are because we're good, not because we've got rich parents paying our way through fancy schools and extra lessons.

[Steve Jacks]

And it stands to reason that parents who themselves are making only the national average wage would produce the brightest and best children? And those parents who are likely bright and talented themselves, earning double, triple or more than the average wage would of course produce children who are bumbling fools, helped into Cambridge only because their clever rich parents paid to have gain acceptance to top universities?

[NH]

Why do you hate Cambridge so much, Sarah Ebner? Did you go to Manchester Met? Or worse, Durham?

Many Cambridge students are middle class - shock horror! There are manifold reasons for this.

Again, you are smugly perpetuating an image of Oxbridge that stops some intelligent, deserving kids applying.

What's important for admission, and for fitting in and thriving at Cam or Oxford is BEING CLEVER ENOUGH. That's it.