Want your children to be able to go to uni?

I agree selection should be on academic ability. However, with A levels so devalued, too many students are now getting straight A/A* grades. Unis are going to use subjective indicators if 40% get A grades!

At least Oxbridge attempt to differentiate by using their own harder exams (like STEP papers for Math degrees) rather than just using interviews. The problem of course is that better schools (whether private or state) will be better at coaching their students for STEP papers or interviews. That isn't Oxbridge's fault though.

We just need to go a system where sensible Gaussian distribution is applied. Grades should just be relative to that year's intake. So every year the top 10% get A grades, 20% B grades, 30% C grades etc. Even better get rid of grades, and just give people a % mark for each course.

agree with granted. I don't like the interview system for that reason. People tend to pick people like themselves. It is not objective. Selection should be on academic ability, not on social skills or personality or any other factor

I think some of those points in the link are fair, Xenia - but speaking as someone who went to Oxford, thinking back, no I can't remember ANY black fellow students. Literally. And what the article conveniently brushes over - and which I think is the root of the problem - is how much admissions' decisions at Oxford and presumably Cambridge are based on the whims and personal preferences of individuals - at many colleges, the tutors who make the decisions are themselves male, white and public-school educated, and they prefer little clones of themselves, because they feel a personal 'link', and they know they're a safe choice. Not the same thing as deliberate, active discrimination - in most cases I'm sure they're unaware they're doing it, they are just picking someone they'd be happy having one-on-one tutorials with for 3 years, which just happens to be a younger version of themselves.

I remember a tutorial I shared with a male student, who was public-school type, in the cricket team etc - the (male, white, public-school) tutor spent about 40 minutes of the one-hour tutorial discussing cricket with him - not a whole lot I could contribute. Made me feel about so big. (And not something I would be happy with if paying 9K per annum for the course!) But very typical of a lot of Oxford tutors, I'm afraid.

I don't agree. Whilst chidlren can have confidence at private schools, they are used to competition to a greater extent than the state sector. I was just suggesting things that the state sector could do to help itself.

There is an Oxford article below which I just noticed today which is quite interesting:
www.ox.ac.uk/media/behind_the_headlines/101307.html

"Unlike the pupil from the poor state school who feels anything bu entitled to be there. And therefore probably doesn't even bother applying."

You hit the nail on the head granted. The top universities are dominated by the 'top three sections of society' because, in part at least, they apply in great numbers.

If more 'less affluent' pupils applied - more would get in.

Also worth noting - that the '3 richest sections' are not all privately educated. They are a number of state schools which send a significant numbers to RG Uni's.

The whole reason why huge numbers from Eton etc appl to Oxbridge, and then handle the interviews confidently, is because they feel it is their right to go there.

Unlike the pupil from the poor state school who feels anything bu entitled to be there. And therefore probably doesn't even bother applying.

Xenia - what world do you live in?

Have to pick you up on this bit:

"i think the sort of ethos of the private sector works too, no sense of entitlement "

• "no sense of entitlement "???? Eh? Have you ever been to a private school? What do you think the current cabinet are all about if not a screaming sense of entitlement.

Our older 3 children have all been through university recently. None had an interview anywhere (although that not Oxbridge and it may just be the subjects they did) so any tutoring for an interview for a huge number of universitys in the top 20 is totally irrelevant.

The universities have always done and will give some preference to smoeone from a state school who does terribly well for that school which I think most parents can accept but apart from those rare cases it's entry by ability. See other threads to see the asy GCSEs some state schools pick. Make sure they all are forced to do proper core GCSs as childrren in all schools used to do for school cert - indeed they used to have to pass all 8 subjects to get the qualification and that would include English lit and lang , maths, geog, history 2 sciences and French (and in those days RE). The private schools know that the core subjects are harder and better and do them. The state schools don't always do so.

Also stop the bias by left wing working class teachers in state schools against hard universities to get into. They can put pupils off. If something is hard and you might not get in then haev a go. Failure is fine. I am not sure the state system is quite the sale always as private. Yes Johhny can fail, He can get all his sums wrong,. he can get red marks all over his book and told he hasn't been done enough and he will develop the robustness to put himself forward for challenge.He can even take part in sports day and be useless and know that he is but he will hate a talent somewhere else to make up so it doesn't matter if he was last in his race but don't make them all think they are winners when some are not very bright and some not very sporty. i think the sort of ethos of the private sector works too, no sense of entitlement and you will win but have a go and in the trying is the fun and challenge, just learn to pick yourself up from the failure and crack on.

As no one pays up front under the new system unless they choose to it should not put off the ambitious although it might put off someone who thought flower arranging at an ex poly might allow them 3 years to laze around before they start work in the local flower shop which they might as well have started at 16,.

TBH I am being facetious with the TNG bit but my points regarding unfair advantage stand up to scrutiny.

Newwave- Why do you appear to hate children from private schools so much, calling them Toffeenosedgit is pretty childish. My DS goes to a homework club and the majority of the volunteers who help are from the two local secondary private schools so I don't get your hatred for them.

This is circular, TNG will have been coached to do well at the interview whilst Johny (mostly) will not have been, this is an unfair advantage. Also some admin tutors have been shown to be class biased

If the admission tutor thinks that the state school pupil would be a better student than the private school kid then of course he should get the place. As I said before leave it up to the admission tutors to decide who they think would make the best student and I'm happy to back them.

Why do you keep talking about Tony Blair's nose?

The reason there are more private school kids at top universities than their proportion suggests there should be is that they have a far higher educational attainment than the majority of state school kids.

So if Toffeenosedgit and State school Johny have equal A levels you dont mind Johny going in first then as he has had to overcome disadvantages that TNG has not

I'm from a workless household in the North and I went to a Russell Group University and I don't recognise this picture of top universities being full of upper middle class kids who have been to private school.

The majority of students at university in this country are from state schools, even in Oxbridge so this view that they will only choose upper middle class public school kids doesn't bear true in reality. The reason there are more private school kids at top universities than their proportion suggests there should be is that they have a far higher educational attainment than the majority of state school kids.

hudd, it's not their fucking university and they have shown by their actions that they are class ridden FGS. The best suited seems to be those from Public schools.

Fifteen road shows at Eton and Marlborough, none in Tottenham, Barnsley, Bradford, more students from Richmond on Thames than from the whole of manchester can you see a pattern here.

92% of pupils at Barenose college Oxford from the top three richest sections of society

Left to their own devices they would pick from the upper echelons with a few token working class and as we see today at Oxford no black students.

If you cannot see a class bias you are blind.

Yes, something needs to be done to make the system as fair as possible. I don't know the answer. But I don't like the interview system, because it is too subjective. All sorts of prejudices can sway the result. I think entrance should be on academic ability only.

I believe that we should trust universities and admission tutors to choose who they think is best suited to study at their university.
I don't believe in central Governments dictating university admissions from Whitehall

Hudd, then you were lucky not many state schools do that, certainly my Son's school did not.

As for frowned upon not sure I said it should be only that the advantages of wealth and a public school education should be taken into account.

I see my position as entirely reasonable, equal results state goes first or do you think bought advantage is ok

Why should preparing for an interview be frowned on, surely its the sensible thing to do and preparation for university interviews was done at my school and I went to a state school.

Some people do have an advantage because they are prepped for the interviews.

If you take that view then Public School pupils do have an unfair advantage and should be offset by giving the place to a state pupil with equal grades.

Some people do have an advantage because they are prepped for the interviews.

Yes I remember her. Brown jumped in.

claig, yes Brown did his nut over a Girl from a state school who had brilliant grades who did not get into Oxford but got into Yale or Harvard (not sure which) and also about the percentage of students from Public schools.

He accused the Uni of bias against state schools which David Lammy MP seemed to confirm today with Oxbridges entrance stats.

She wanted to do Chemistry I think.