Should we care that 50% of state schools didn't produce any medicine applicants in 3 years?

Rabbit, my understanding was that if you come from a top performing school you may well be expected to have mainly A at GCSE. (DS' school got around 90% A at GCSE so hardly unexpected.) However Universities will look at context, and the bar will be lower for pupils from elsewhere.

However no medical school can accept students who might struggle academically. There will be two problems taking students with lower grades. First that they will have to catch up, and second it is then not proven that they can handle, say, the more difficult concepts in chemistry.

Medical schools are there to train competent doctors, not be a tool for social engineering. They see diversity as useful, but there is only so much they can do if schools don't produce qualified applicants.

But TheWordFactory, forgive me if I'm wrong, but I thought the reporting from which this thread arose indicated that medical schools themselves had agreed that they were not doing enough to widen access? People on this thread have certainly not limited themselves to talking about inappropriate subject choices, but have explicitly argued that A grades won't hack it when others have As - in the same, relevant, appropriate subjects, that is... I would argue that it is not necessary to have 11 As at GCSE in order to become a good doctor, and if people think it IS the case, then no wonder people who might make good doctors are not even applying.

rabbit in my direct experience, medical departments are committed to widening access.

Just as the majority of highly selective universities are (though some do more than others).

We visit schools, we run outreach programs and summer camps. We look carefully at all applications, actively searching for flagged candidates. We regularly make contextual offers.

But it is not our responsibility to reparate for the failures of the state education system in toto. There is no justification for accepting inappropriate subject choices, or inadequate grades as standard.

Smoke, it was not meant to be demeaning. I don't know how best to put it. At DHs school reunion it was noticeable how very few had moved far from the area, and he was the only one who had ended up in a professional job in London. My cousin reported similar when teaching in a pleasant city. Bright kids could have got further but wanted to stay close to home. It is seems a factor on the south coast, with bright kids talking about Southampton or Bath, but not Oxford or Imperial.

Aspirations in private school London are very different. Much higher and very international. Schools don't have to push students towards applying for Oxbridge, but rather students considering which is better, Oxford or Harvard. The norm is to work very hard in order to achieve the grades needed.

I can support that medical schools might show flexibility on grades to a student who has achieved exceptionally well compared with the norm for their school and who are likely to be able to cope with the demands of medical school. And who can also show, though volunteering or working, that they know what they are letting themselves in for and can hack the less glamorous aspects of work as a doctor.

However I don't understand an argument that has poorer students considered incapable of finding volunteering opportunities. And regret that poor advice at school may have some students choose the wrong options or not understand how hard they will need to work to achieve the best grades possible.

For some on MN private schools are the root of all evil. Not true in this case, and making that argument wont do much to help students who need to understand that an awful lot is required of them if they want to achieve their ambitions.

I also don't understand why you say steady jobs are only available to the top 10-15% of people. I can accept that aspiring to be a medic is limited to the more academic (not "top") but plumber, supermarket manager, chef? This is probably more a north/south divide, and a whole other debate about whether people in areas of high unemployment should "get on their bikes". (Ducks!)

I think there are too many bright student have gone to medicine study, banking , law in this country. Those are all careers that provide a very good salary. However, science and engineering are the foundation to push a country forward.

Whether it's an argument that is defensible is another question, of course.

But were many schools closed down, smokepole, rather than being required to convert?

Sleepytea - I don't follow your argument that grades are either mediocre or exceptional. I do follow the argument that it's all rather a lot of effort supporting people whose families aren't able to support them, and that it's much cheaper to go for people who clearly have lots of backing behind them, so you don't have to provide so much.

I really don't follow your logic TalkinPeace.
DP came from a family which didn't possess a book. He loves reading and was accused of being gay! He did well though because he had a supportive school. If the schooling is good disadvantaged kids can do well.

Rabbit. I think Economies of Scale can in to play here . It has to be less expensive to run a 1500-1800 pupil comprehensive rather than running 3 separate schools. The council also have the added bonus of selling off the other two schools to property developers for. £££.

Need. The comment at the end of your post about kids going to their local University is slightly demeaning ! The scenario you talk about with kids having a steady job/career is in itself only available to about the the top 10-15% of people.

Rabbit stew, whether we like it or not, the Alevel system has got easier. It's no good having a student with mediocre grades. They just aren't going to keep up with the level of work needed for a medical degree. It's expensive to put students through a medical degree so the recruiters need to pick students who are going to succeed. These are the ones getting exceptional grades, who aren't going to balk at the level of comittment etc.
My DH went to medical school albeit a number of years ago. He came from a comp where only a handful of children did A levels. Even all those years ago he had 4 A's, lots of voluntary work and a part time job in a supermarket. He didn't get good careers advice but knew that he wanted to do better than working in a supermarket for the rest of his life so he found out what he needed. He was lucky that his parents gave him lots of support (not financial because they couldn't afford it) and encouragement. On his course there were a number of people who came from similar financial backgrounds.

To add. My understanding is that work experience is primarily to allow the would be medic to confirm that they do in fact want to be a doctor. DD ended up enjoying her summer more than expected, especially the people element. However we recently met another girl who HATED similar work in a local hospital, and has switched ambitions to bio-medicine. She likes the science but not the patients.

I may be wrong but assume medical schools will look more favourably on a pupil who shows and ability to get on with things and an understanding of the less glamorous aspects of medicine. Helping an elderly neighbour, volunteering with a local disabled group (disabled teenagers often love being in the company of able bodied peers), care homes. There has to be a lot of opportunity in any community however disadvantaged.

But isn't the question whether it is really necessary to have those top grades - as in drop down to a few As from As and your chances are over? You used to be able to get into medical school with Bs and Cs at A-level (and certainly did NOT need a string of As (given that A didn't exist) at O-level OR, subsequently, GCSE - I know from the offer my dsis got, and from the grades of contemporaries who got into medical school... So, if medical schools REALLY wanted to recruit students from more diverse backgrounds, why are they, as some are saying here, holding them back for "not getting good enough grades?" Surely it's more a question of grades that are not as good as other more privileged students', not grades that show you are not cut out for medicine? Which thus puts medical schools out of kilter with the efforts made by universities in other disciplines. But then of course, it is a self-perpetuating system - the privately educated all believe so strongly that their education is superior to that of their state educated peers, that they secretly (or not so secretly) believe their state educated peers have no chance of "catching up" and being capable of hacking a degree in medicine. These are the people deciding who to recruit as the medics of the future.

Talkin' I am not surprised if would-be medics are not getting very far if they fail at the first test of initiative.

DD spent the summer working in a care home, just over the boundary from the County you live in. Initially they said they would not pay her as she was only 16. However she was sufficiently diligent and they were short staffed, so they ended up adding extra shifts and started paying her. Mainly kitchen duties but lots of having to be cheery with elderly ladies, help them with their food, and working with colleagues from all sorts of backgrounds. You certainly did not need to be from a private school, and indeed the other summer worker was a local 17 year old saving up to buy a car.

One thing she did notice was a difference in aspiration. DD was there when she got her GCSE results, and whilst her crop of A*/As would be considered good but not stellar in London, they were seen as extraordinary on the South Coast. Implying that at local schools As/Bs would be seen as good enough. In medicine this is not so.

I suspect that there are plenty of schools, often with solid middle-class catchments, who have not got the message across to their pupils that there is a big tough competitive world out there which is expecting top grades in the right subjects. And also perhaps, nice areas of the country where aspiration is limited to going to a local University, getting a steady local job and raising your children round the corner from their Grandparents. Not necessarily a bad thing, but it is not going to get a heap of kids into medical school.

"Aren't grammar schools state schools too?"

It depends on the LA. We don't have grammar schools round here - no eleven plus. The only grammar schools are private and cost £££. DD's school has grammar school in its name, but it is a very old school that has kept its name. It is in fact a very good comprehensive school.

Talkin not condescending, the reality is that medical schools would welcome with open arms a student from a socially deprived background versus a student from a MC background with only medical shadowing experience. The issue is the support to achieve the academic standard not (as WF says) the perceived necessity to shadow brain surgeons or GPs.

As for numbers of privately educated and grammar schools at sixth form;

More DC defect to them from non selective state than vice versa. Your observations of your DD's school do not follow the national trend.

Those DC leaving grammar and independent at sixth form often have no choice. You've said yourself that your DD has noticed how weak the pupils are from the various private schools. There's probably a reason for that .

Talkin I know how resistant you are to accept there is any problem with the educational system as it is vis a vis applications for the most selective courses at the most selective universities .

But the fact is, there is a problem.

Yes, internships and voluntary stuff doesn't help in some industries (arts, media, publishing, fashion, politics, the bar etc) but that is not the issue with medicine applications.

No application for med school needs to be accompanies with a stint shadowing a world-renowned brain surgeon for two weeks! Volunteering at the local care home, or with St John's Ambulance, or any local hospital is fine. Universities are simply looking for commitment to real people in the real world.

What lets applicants down each and every time is the wrong GCSE choices, the wrong A level choices and the wrong grades!

And this issue is replicated across the board on all the most competitive courses, which will result in in the continuance of the status quo!

smokepole - is there any evidence that comprehensive schools cost less than the old grammar/secondary modern system???? I would have thought the old grammar schools were pretty cheap to run, because they didn't bother with all that expensive equipment for teaching practical subject, and that to turn them into comprehensives was actually quite expensive.

summerends your comment is unbelievably condescending.

It's like saying rich kids need never be chosen for school trips as Mummy and Daddy will have already taken them in the hols.

Those with motivated academic families in and around selective schools have NO idea what it's like to come from one of the 1/3 homes with no books.

I would agree that you don't need to be affluent, but you do need some degree of support, guidance and encouragement from either your school or parents.
I doubt many places at medical school are offered to kids from bog standard comps who don't have educated and/or motivated parents - I'm sure there will be the odd exception that proves the rule but doubt very much there are many sadly

I don't believe that anyone determined to study medicine couldn't "afford" to volunteer in a local care home for two hours a week! There is no minimum tariff for work experience to apply for medicine. To say that you need to be affluent is ridiculous!

This thread and the report tells us two things. The first being if you have not been educated in a Private, Grammar school or have educated parents the odds are totally stacked against you. The other thing this report shows is that bog standard or the majority of Comprehensives cannot prioritise the very bright pupils over the weakest pupils. A mainstream comprehensive school would be breaking its remit by attempting to give the required support at the inevitable cost to the rest of their pupils.

People need to wake up and realise that real "Comprehensive schools" not the fluffy ones Mumsnet children attend are unable to help children. They are incapable of getting their pupils on to academic courses or in to careers as diverse as the Media or Medicine . The reality is that most comprehensive schools were never set up for the reason of getting pupils in to high flying or academic careers ,but to save money by educating everybody together.

Talkin a DC who is from a social background that means they need to work part time to support themselves in the sixth form won't need volunteering experience of social deprivation, they will have that experience first hand. Ditto if they are the carers in their family. What is more of a problem is them accessing the right academic framework for the grades needed, even with adjustment.

What are you on about TiP? Most med school applicants are school children, they are not 'signing on and likely to lose their benefits if they don't take a JobCentre job'.

And why do you keep talking about going to London or some other city centre? There are loads of opportunities closer to home.