Worst forms of selection in schools: Views of M'snetters

Sorry will reply to points later.

Need to deal with some work calls.

Cambridge must have given a lower offer or let the DC in anyway having missed the grades. Possibly in recognition of unusual achievement at the given school.

Maybe, maybe not. My grammar school educated niece missed her grades for medical school, but they let her in anyway. Not Oxbridge mind.

The old tests definitely advantaged private schooled applicants as their teachers would often run extra lessons to cover the syllabus . Comps often didn't.

Nor did (girls) grammar schools. It usually required part of a third year sixth, and that put off the majority.

Back to this later... Which is probably for the best!

Word, you say only 25% of kids at Oxford come from comprehensive schools. Clearly the % of kids from comps at Oxford is never going to match the % of kids who attend comps because comps, by their nature, include all the kids who won't achieve the necessary grades, as well as some of those who will.

Is there any modelling to show the % of kids at Oxford that were high attainers at primary school then attended selective secondary schools, compared with the % who were also high attainers at primary then attended comps? It wouldn't be perfect, but it would give an interesting perspective on the effects of selective vs comprehensive education on the life chances of bright kids.

No, they're not the same thing, obviously, but isn't your work about understanding the kinds of things which intimidate and put off applicants? Ever seen the huha on here when a year 7 child has a CAT test? And that's not to help determine their place, it's just to help set them! And an 'aptitude test' which, as you say, many will actually seek tutoring and advice on, is going to be something which may very well be intimidating to some potential students! I'm not saying such tests are a bad thing, not at all, but surely you can see why that would be the case?

The law test isn't something you're supposed to be able to revise for, but its 'cambridgeness' is nonetheless daunting, for example. And functionally, it is going to look and feel pretty much like an exam to those who are sitting it.

TheWordFactory They absolutely do not favour the wealthiest applicants. Yet you said that you turn away a lot of comp. applicants because they don't get the grades. Why do you care what their grades are if there is a test you can administer that will identify those with huge potential. Perhaps invite comps to suggest students put themselves forward for the aptitude test (free if charge) and if they score well then they know they should apply? This is how the 11 plus/CEM works.

nit they are not remotely the same thing!

The old tests definitely advantaged private schooled applicants as their teachers would often run extra lessons to cover the syllabus . Comps often didn't.

Aptitude tests are completely different. They test raw aptitude and are actually helpful to spot applicants whose education may not be the best but who has huge potential. They absolutely do not favour the wealthiest applicants.

They have also been introduced in lots of universities. Schools should know about them and encourage their brightest pupils to be I afraid of them.

By the same token, I think you will say any old thing is crap if it comes from out of a comprehensive or anyone connected with them!

That teacher was wrong. That's bad. But you can't say that state school pupils should be disabused of the malign notion that there's an exam and then in the same breath say, oh yeah, aptitude tests, Obvs.

nit he was talking about the old exams that had their own syllabus! He was twenty years out if date!!

He didn't even know the aptitude tests had been introduced!

Jeez you really will defend any old crap if it's to do wit comprehensives. His lack of knowledge was indefensible IMVHO. And meant that high ability students were not getting the info they needed.

And I think you may have a hard time denying there is any such thing as an exam which students will need to prepare for - and silly old teachers for thinking there is - oh but there is, by the way, an aptitude test for which many will be tutored!

that's like telling them it's balderdash that it costs more.... And your schools are hampering you by not contradicting that silly mistake.... It's just that you have to hand over some more pounds!

LaVolcan I the DC in question had three A* at GCSE and three As at A level and in response to being asked whether the DC might have done better and had more opportunities in a selective school the mum said the DC was studying Medicine at Cambridge. Which was surprising but good. Cambridge must have given a lower offer or let the DC in anyway having missed the grades. Possibly in recognition of unusual achievement at the given school.

People, generally, IME, have some odd notions about Oxford and Cambridge. I know of some parents who are absolutely adamant you can't get in unless your parents went, for example! Stoutly maintained in the face of immediate manifest evidence to the contrary!

But I think it's important to distinguish between things teachers are saying and things they may not even be aware that some of their pupils think: they can't actually go around correcting things in children's heads all day, can they?

mum no he was on about the old style exams, said in a 'oh our students don't want to be doing those' style.

I pointed out that he was a bit out of date as politely as I could. But it's terrible when you think this is what those kids have heard up til now!

As for the new aptitude tests; well yes people will get tutored. Twas ever thus. But I would say ineffectual.

Economic selection
Private schools aren't the be all and end all, but they do have a high correlation with success so providing greater access to them via bursaries and state funding would help. However, this 5% of the system is dwarfed by the next one

Religious selection
Why are all taxpayers paying for state schools that only those attending certain churches go to can access? This is much worse than private schooling, where (charitable status aside), they at least pay for themselves and reduce the tax burden. Church schools want to exclude people and get taxpayers money. Not sure of the stats, but that's about 30% of our system.

Covert economic selection
Schools that have a catchment area the size of a football pitch amongst houses worth more than 10x the average salary. Not a lot can be done here because this would happen even if all private, grammar and faith schools were abolished. You have to allocate places somehow and distance is pretty much the fairest. So even if we had the social democtratic ideal, there would still be plenty of selection and a large correlation between wealth and "inheritied" success.

We are doomed to the status quo.

We can't vote for electoral reform and we can't vote for independence. Voters fear change.

Went off the rails a bit there ......

TheWordFactory mum how will I get to the parents though? I could write you a Marketing Plan if you want. I was a Marketing Director before having children. Of course it would depend on the budget.

TheWordFactory Although it was a teacher who said there were extra exams, they had no idea that the old entrance exams had been abandoned eons ago. They certainly had no idea about the (relatively) new aptitude tests and what they entailed. Could they have been referring to the new aptitude tests when they referred to exams? I was under the impression that there is a STEP test/exam and the 6 children I know who applied to Oxford all used tutors to prepare for it.

mum how will I get to the parents though?

TheOriginalSteamingNit I'm really surprised to hear teachers are saying those off-putting things - I've never encountered a school that isn't cock-a-hoop if students get into Oxford or Cambridge! That is my experience too. One of the non selective schools had their first successful Oxford candidate last year and they had the PR plastered everywhere (this is the school that runs their grammar stream in conjunction with one of the selective schools).

I have to admit that they should be proud of the fact, given that they have 7 selective schools on their doorstep yet still get good results by national standards.

nit it wasn't the teachers saying them all, it was that they were doing nothing to correct them IYSWIM. Although it was a teacher who said there were extra exams, they had no idea that the old entrance exams had been abandoned eons ago. They certainly had no idea about the (relatively) new aptitude tests and what they entailed.

TheWordFactory I still think though, that schools are better placed to help here. They see the kids every day Evidently not if you are meeting such a high level of resistance that it is not having a satisfactory affect.

Personally I think it is equally important to educate the parents as ultimately they will be in a position to have a final say in whether a child attends a university (after all they will be paying the bills).

information is all readily available on the websites perhaps this is has something to do with the reluctance to consider Oxbridge. Whilst I am quite prepared to spend hours/days/months surfing the internet to find out the comparable cost of sending my DCs to Oxbridge, I am sure many parents will go by word of mouth and buy into the hype.

Mind you, the most off-putting thing I've seen lately was that godawful crass internet thing where the Oxford students themselves held up cards to counter the 'micro-agressions' thing.

Would I want to study somewhere where the same Nigerian was used twice as the only BAME student, holding up a card saying 'the Fellows seem to really like it when I wear my Nigerian national dress to formal hall!!'. Not much.

I'm really surprised to hear teachers are saying those off-putting things - I've never encountered a school that isn't cock-a-hoop if students get into Oxford or Cambridge! What can be meant by 'extra exams'? Things like the Law test?

MumTryingHerBest

Technically secondary schools are obligated to provide good quality independent, impartial advice to pupils since the demise of Connexions, so secondary schools do have a duty to advise on HE.

In reality though, a school will not give advice to a pupil if it directly conflicts with a schools own priorities. I went to an open evening at a school recently. They proudly showed off their careers suite. I nodded politely and asked why there were no leaflets on show from ANY of the Merseyside FE Colleges or other education providers. Response was something along the lines of "cough cough ahem".

It's a disgrace.

mum the information is all readily available on the websites.

But other than that, we try to get out there and tell people as early as possible so prospective applicants don't get put off by incorrect assumptions.

I still think though, that schools are better placed to help here. They see the kids every day. Discussing universities, all universities, should just be part and parcel of what they do.

TheWordFactory as Oxbridge actually has so many bursaries if you are focusing your efforts on the secondary schools do you really think that is the best way to communicate this fact to parents?

I did not have any help finding a primary school (except for a list of local schools) yet I found one I am happy with. I am in the process of looking for a suitable secondary school for my DC yet the primary school is offering no help. In light of this why do you feel it is the role of the secondary school to promote Universities?

TheWordFactory and the cost of accommodation is quite cheap compared with many other universities Where can this information be found?