Another Private/State question

I'm not surprised you were surprised!

Well , like I said it's not about my own child and I dont want to rub it in..
Just was really surprised.

He does sound like an ideal candidate and I'm fairly sure you can request feedback. It probably varies from college to college/tutor to tutor how detailed the reply will be.

Well, I dont know all details but I know he did math +further math, 3 sciences + a language .

I didn't know they do feedback? Do they really?

and no I absolutely don't think Cambridge care an iota about roundedness and extra curriculars.

Don't think anyone has said 'lots of kids get 6A*s', read more carefully.

You might find this report interesting. It explains the metrics they have found to be the best indicators of success for various subjects (including Nat Sci) at Cambridge, so might help explain.

It seems for Nat Sci the best predictor is the AS UMS scores in the 3 most relevant A-levels (counting maths + f. maths as one subject). That's why my guess as to why he didn't get in was that his AS scores in the most relevant subjects weren't as good as his competitors, surprising as that seems (anecdotally they look for 95%+ typically). Perhaps he spread himself too thinly with 6 subjects?

Did he request feedback though because that is the best way to find out exactly why he was rejected rather than speculating.

Actually he wanted to read Natural Sciences.. He is a bit geeky I suppose , a bit spotty etc.(In a loving motherly way , I am sure he'll grow out of it) I can see how that would disagree with PPE but science ?

Love to hear people jumping in with comments "lots of kids get 6 A* and have time for other interests" - is his another stereotype about kids needing to be all-rounders even if they are brilliant in one particular way.

They should have seen Einstein - definitely wouldn't pass through the doors.
And wasn't exactly a particulary good speaker either..

Easy to be inarticulate with 6 A*s. it also depends on the course. The type of person you want for PPE would probably be very different to the one wanted for Maths. (College choice can matter too.)

I think it depends on the grades. If both have A stars in all subjects, then I think you simply can't tell which is the stronger candidiate. There are naturally very bright children at private schools, and i dont think you can assume the state school pupil is brighter - if there were a higher grade than A star you just cant tell which would get it (which is top 1% and which top 10%).

If there was someone with an A and 2Bs from Westminster (say) and someone with the same grades from a state school (non-grammar), then I would probably assuem the Westminster pupil was less bright given the opportunities and teaching they had had (but it might depend on the school).

Some dc seem to manage 6 A levels and have plenty of outside interests too. I'm sure that wasn't the problem with Cambridge though, more likely that it was a competitive subject he applied for and others had higher grades (in UMS rather than number of A*s) and came over better at interview.

6 A-levels doesn't really leave much room for outside interests.
Still, in the academic world I would imagine academic focus is an overwhelming interest. I told his mum she should have insisted on street dancing as well .

Anyway, he has got to a top uni anyway. I wonder if there is a certain type they are after..

Maybe considered boring with no outside interests? Maybe someone who suffered from a lack of expert advice from the school on getting the balance right between showing they had a life outside of school (even if it was only doing evening and weekend work, because they couldn't actually afford a life outside school that required them to spend money) and ensuring they got good enough exam results to get into a top university? If you don't have parents who can help you work out what Cambridge is looking for in a candidate and don't have a school which helps you, then obviously it will be harder to work it out for yourself on the basis of no experience and the naivety of a 17 or 18-year old. And, of course, there is intense competition for places, so you can be extremely articulate, but still not impress enough on the day.

Hardly lazy and inarticulate with 6 A* ..

Pianoman that student could equally have come from a Private school. If the student doesn't show passion for their subject, seems inarticulate (which is where private and some state schools score), seems lazy ( where some private pupils fall down) or seems "unpleasant". They may not get an offer. After all even though all the top students do not apply to Oxbridge, there is huge competition for places (even more so in some subjects).

I'd think they were equally bright. But if one had come from a good private school and one from an ordinary state school, I might think the state school child was brighter, or had more untapped potential as she or he wouldn't have been nurtured in the same way (bigger class sizes, surrounded by pupils who don't want to learn etc.) To get that far despite unfavourable circumstances is more impressive than achievement with support.

Friend's DS has 6 predicted A* in all the hard subjects but was rejected after an interiew in Cambridge.

When I naively asked a current student from Cambridge how he would explain that, the answer was "I guess they just didn't like him " .. By the way the applicant is from a state school .

If it is equally easy/difficult to get good grades at a 'sink' school as at a 'top' state or private school, then why do middle class parents go to so much effort to ensure their child doesn't end up in the 'sink' school?

I would say that two grauates from the same course at the same university with the same degree class were "equally bright" - actually no, I would describe them as "equally capable", though one might achieve their level of capability through a decent level of intelligence ('brightness') couple with a strong, focused work ethic, and the other might achieve it through very high intelligence but a less diligent approach.

By the end of a university degree, when young adults have been (usually) living away from home for 3 or 4 years, developing their own study habits and with few other complicating factors like differences in home life or out of school tutoring, then I would say that degree class is a fairly good measure of 'true' capability.

At the point of being accepted into university, on the basis of A-level results, is I would say too soon to make a judgement - the complicating factors of differential schooling, home lives, tutoring etc have too big an effect.

The above of course doesn't apply to people who are ill / endure difficult life events etc when at university.

It also goes without saying the different degree courses, even at the same university, are too different to make cross-course comparisons.

I would assume they were equally as bright with the same qualification

Over 50% of the entrants got an "A" in Chemistry A level last summer.
So an A grade just means they are average or above from that cohort.
Not much reassurance

I'd assume they were equally capable of passing A levels, and very little beyond that. A levels, since the abandonment of bell-curve marking, no longer tell you enough to distinguish between candidates.

And that is aside from the major confounders, such as bursary (or other third party) funded private school children and pad brats; and the yawning differences in performance between comprehensives.

I would assume they were equally as bright with the same qualification.

Often people would have no idea on what has actually gone on in the individual schools and the individual pupil's home/life. The state school may be excellent, the independent school not so good, a pupil may have had a lot of tutoring, the pupil may have had no parental support (or vice versa), a pupil may have challenges in their home life or health, one or more of the school may not be academic or selective (not all independents are)...the ist goes on.

I just assume that the qualification is the same so the child involved must have put in the efofrt and both done equally as well.

I thought moving to state school in 6th form was "too late", you would be judged as if you had gone to private if you did til Year 11, which is right as you used that system to get your great GCSEs.

Also all state schools are not the same in terms of judging whether the state school pupil gets an "advantage". Needs to be one with very little tradition of getting anyone in, and very "poor" catchment area/post code.

I'd be more interested in the students' backgrounds than their schools to be honest.

If both were middle class with professional parents then...meh...nowt between em.

But if one was very a very disadvantaged background then I'd certainly think they might be more of a self starter.