@londonmummy4
Hi, I was just wondering whether now the traditional m/c parents who desperately try to get their kids into private schools should be thinking about getting their kids into Grammar schools or Outstanding State schools due to the fact that the likes of Oxbridge are being forced to accept more state school students. I'm constantly being told this is the thing to do. I went to a state school and it is something that I would avoid at all costs! What do you think?
Dear londonmummy4
That’s several related questions, I think, but they’re all very pertinent. I thought a lot about this stuff as I was writing.
First, I don’t think Oxford and Cambridge are being forced to take more state school students. I’m certain they’re not, in fact. I have friends who have given Oxbridge interviews, and as well as being honourable people, for selfish reasons they’re very focused on admitting people who are going to be interesting to teach in one/two-to-one tutorials for three years.
There are thirty-odd colleges at each university, and dozens of subjects taught at each one. So there are between one and two thousand independent-minded academics making the decisions about whom they would like to teach. I don’t think a version of the recent American college applications scandal could happen here for that reason – Oxbridge applications are far too decentralised to be so easily subverted.
So the shift from around 50% state school when I matriculated in 1997, to around 60% now, while probably significant, has definitely not been centrally imposed. The graph in the link below makes pretty optimistic reading, too, for those of us concerned about the gulf between state and private education in this country.
researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN00616
I can see why you’re down on state schools having gone to them yourself. I went to six different state schools all over the country between the ages of five and thirteen. The one with the best Ofsted ratings now, was the one I liked least then. At thirteen I went to Winchester College, which was then perhaps the best school in the English-speaking world.
The difference between a brilliant public school and a brilliant comprehensive is enormous, for all sorts of reasons, most of which have little to do with money. Briefly, their brilliant teachers are free to teach however they like, to a critical mass of brilliant students. But brilliant people are in short supply. They tend to congregate together. And paying large or enormous sums for your child’s education doesn’t guarantee the presence of these brilliant people.
To my mind, there are four types of school in England. First, there are good private schools, or public schools if you insist, which are selective, and expensive. Scholarships are available if you’re brilliant and diligent. My book was partly written to help candidates for these incredibly tricky and interesting exams – google Eton Kings Scholarship past papers for a flavour.
Then there are good state schools, most of which aren’t grammar schools, but which are selective in the sense that you have to own or rent a home within their catchment areas, which ultimately means they are also very expensive to go to – you have to buy a house in a nice part of town. These schools are increasingly successful, though there’s nothing remotely like Westminster and St Paul’s Girls (from the first group), which send 50% of leavers on to Oxford and Cambridge.
Third, there are average private schools. Most private schools are in this group. They’re more socially/ economically selective than they are academically, but they get decent results on the whole. Mostly you’re paying to keep your kids out of the fourth kind of school – at least partly out of fear, or for snob value – rather than to inspire your child with the joys of the Western Canon.
The fourth kind of school is what Alastair Campbell unkindly called the bog-standard comprehensive. It’s much the biggest category. Two thousand of the three thousand secondary schools in England haven’t had a successful Oxbridge candidate in the past five years. There are brilliant teachers at these schools, and brilliant students too, of course, but not in enough numbers to make a dent on Oxbridge.
With the best two groups of schools, you can purchase advantage, whether you pay fees or buy your way into catchment areas. But what if you can’t afford either of these options? How do you mitigate the lack of these huge advantages? Here’s how.
- Don’t worry too much. A huge study of Danish teenagers found that the effect of the schools these children had attended on their final exam results was pretty small. Only 10% of the effect was down to the schools. 40% was down to the parents. And 50% was down to the students themselves. And, just speaking anecdotally, when I meet a new student who reads for pleasure, I rarely have cause to worry about their academic future. If there’s a magic bullet, it’s that.
- Environment environment environment, as Tony Blair might have said. That means fostering, and investing in, the subjects that they take joy in (whether they’re curricular or extracurricular). Just as much as it means coming to an arrangement with the entire household that severely limits the presence and visibility of internet-enabled screens for anyone expected to read actual books every day. Bonus marks if you can be seen reading books yourself in your home’s communal areas. Children respond more to cues than commands, like everyone else.
- If you do get involved with their subjects, teach them the stuff you know and like best – and only that. Give your expertise in small doses, and spend at least as much time listening to their ideas.
- Make sure Oxbridge is what they want, too. If they end up e.g. studying Sculpture at St Martin’s College, they’ll have worked damn hard to get in there, too. And it may have been in the teeth of all your Oxbridge promptings, which will garner you only resentment.
- Finally, if Oxbridge is definitely their aim, look really carefully at their A-Level choices. This is more important on the Arts than the Sciences side. You’d think that Oxford PPE dons would look kindly on an applicant with excellent A-Levels in Politics, Philosophy and Economics. But they won’t. You’d be better off dumping the first two for History, or English, or a language, or Maths. Why? Because Oxbridge dons just don’t rate these exams’ syllabi. They’re not difficult enough.
