When parents are slagging off the local comp...

I think you're right that the bottom of the N London grammar intake is far higher than the bottom of the N London selective independent - there's definitely a greater range of abilities at privates (something that personally I prefer).

However, at the top Oxbridgey end, I'm not so sure there's much difference...

The number of applicants per place though is a pretty meaningless statistic as we don't know how qualified many of them were. Lots of them aren't in with a chance.

Ontopof - of course there's no way to know that any school definitely has the top 1% or whatever.

I just think it's clear that the London elite grammars have a far more able intake than most of the private schools.

Alyosha, your points are very interesting and I'm sure you're right to question why these grammars get lower Oxbridge numbers (and indeed a governor I know at QEB has been working on this very issue) but I do take issue with your assertion that everybody would go to a grammar over a private were they to get in (with Westminster, SPGS as exceptions) and secondly that the parental profile is identical.

I know dozens of parents who have chosen a private school over a guaranteed place at one of the North London grammars. I even, shock, know a child who turned down a place at one of them for your most reviled private school, Forest. The vast majority of parents at my child's independent secondary school don't ever know of the grammar schools' existence. That I know of, only three kids in their class even tried for the grammars (one got in, the other two didn't).

We would have opted for the grammars if our child had got in so I'm not necessarily in agreement with these parents. However, my rejected child (who got into City, Highgate etc with ease) is the sort of child who one might bet on to get an Oxbridge place - all the cousins (from non-selective comps) go there, we did, exceptionally good in one subject, getting academically stronger every year having started very immature in primary.

More anecdotes. I have a friend with children in one of the North London grammars and one at City. She cannot believe the vast difference in family background. The child at the grammar has been bullied for having a 'big house', while the parents are all arranging networking drinks with one another at City (which is by reputation the most 'mixed' London private). Another kid I know at QEB says everyone in his class wants to be a dentist, doctor or accountant. When it was Diwali, he was one of only three boys in class that day.

Where the parental profiles differ, you can bet that it's exactly these differences that prize Oxbridge (rightly or wrongly).

I disagree goodbye - HBS are selecting from 23 candidates for every place. And those 23 candidates will already be in the top 20% of ability - as they have parents who really care about their education and have gone through the hoops to get them to take the test.

So I think HBS probably has the top 1% or even top 0.5% in abillity.

Oh, I know that those A* grades wouldn't have been distributed like that. I was just using the calculations to show how in reality a few percentage points can make a big difference.

There is no way that HBS and Tiffin take only the top 1% of the ability range. Absolutely no way. Loads of very clever children don't even try for any of these schools for a whole host of reasons. Westminster and SPS/SPGS have a far broader intake too - most children will be in the top 10% but not all, and certainly not all in the top 1%. These schools are selecting children on the basis of tests and interviews on one or two days at the age of 11. They are all clever kids, but by no means all extraordinarily clever.

Bertrand:

"93 in Year 7
The School received in excess of 2160 applicants for Year 7 in 2016"

23 applicants per place last year for HBS.

"In 2016 there were 1974 applications" - Latymer School.

There are 192 places, so "just" 10.2 applicants per place.

For Tiffin there are 180 places for which 1358 applicants, so 7.5 applicants per place.

QE Boys has 2204 taking the test, but don't know its intake - could be from 10 applicants a place to 20.

No advice really but people really should think about what they say to and around their kids more. I had kids in my class telling a boy who was already signed up.for the local comp "my mum says there's loads of bullying at that school."

My dd is in year 6 and we are in grammar school land. I have been very careful throughout the process to not present grammar school as the best and comp as great but to present the view which I actually hold that different schools suit different people.

No I don't think that works to get them the top 1% Alyosha.

Tell you what Bert here's a plan: why don't you stop trying to describe the life of someone on the internet that you haven't got a clue about. You're so silly about me - not sure why. Anyhow, bottom line is I shouldn't be required to ignore silly personal posts - silly personal posts shouldn't be written in the first place.

But I do agree that no grammar in the country takes the top 1%.

Yes, Henrietta Barnett School, Latymer School, Tiffin Girls & QE Boys.

All have around 10+ applicants per place and lots of applicants from private preps, lots of applicants also applying to private secondary schools who would choose the grammar as the 1st choice.

Ontopof...that's quite an assumption you're making there! There's absolutely no reason to think that all of the extra As are concentrated on individual pupils. In fact quite the reverse, there will be slightly more kids getting AAA rather than AAA. Westminster & NLCS will have more kids getting straight A*s I'm sure but not 54% more or 300% more.

The college links do still exist though - what about Christ Church college & Westminster/Eton? What about the fact that historical links between some schools and colleges have been acknowledged on this thread - but then dismissed because apparently it's OK, as the colleges only get the best kids from those schools.

I was a beneficiary of a link with a college, it simply means there is a tradition there of applicants going & getting offers, and everyone knows that they will get an interview, and probably an offer, and even in some cases what that offer will be. In my case a normal candidate probably wouldn't have even got an interview at Oxford for a competitive course with predicted grades of AAB and As levels of AABB. But I did. So did friends, because the school had links with the college.

Sorry, cross post, alyosha. Could you name one? I didn't think there were any grammar schools that selected from the top 1%, never mind the top 0.5%......

Tell you what, goodbyestranger, why don't you just ignore everything I say. You always take it too much to heart and I am sure it's not good for you.

Alyosha- can you say what you mean by "elite grammar schools"?

I just don't accept that the Grammar school kids have less cultural capital than the private schools.

And this is where we disagree.

Take a look in detail at the website of Winchester or a similar school and look at what they offer. It's in a completely different league to what grammars can afford to offer.

There seem to be two contradictory views expressed on this thread, sometimes by the same posters:

• Grammar and private school pupils have comparable achievement and comparable performance in pretests etc and thus more of the former should get into Oxbridge.

• Private schools offer deeper and broader education to their pupils and thus allowances should be made for grammar pupils doing worse in interviews/pretests etc, even when their grades are the same.

In reality, the admissions situation is much more nuanced and cannot be reduced to simple one line statistics - each case has to be viewed individually and any assessment of the fairness of an admissions system has to look carefully at all the information, including transcripts and summaries of interviews not in the public domain for data privacy reasons. The social scientist in me is frustrated at some posters refusal to understand this.

Bertrand - by elite I mean London grammars which are considered by parents to be as good as, if not better, than the leading London private schools (aside from Westminster, SPGS & SPBS).

Schools you would choose over good private schools.

Schools which are selecting from the top 1% if not 0.5% of kids, more selective by far than local private schools.

And not only that, but grammar schools which have parental wealth & cultural capital similar to the local private schools.

Bobo - what experiences will they have had? Intrigued!!!

I don't know how many are in the 6th form at Westminster, but, assuming that the blunt measure of A is what Oxbridge is interested in, if there are 150 kids at Westminster and they each take 3 A levels, 16% more A grades is over 70 A, which could mean 24 more straight A students. Similarly at NLSC 6% difference is 16 A grades which could be 5 straight A students. Of course this is not accurate, but actually those percentage points difference are probably mostly among the top university applicants, not the year group as a whole.

There's no doubt that private school applicants are advantaged in lots of different ways, but I'm not sure that it's in the ways you are convinced it is. Historically there were college links with schools; there may still be but not at many of the schools you've mentioned on this thread. And admissions tutors are telling you that there aren't.

The problem of private schools' overrepresentation at Oxbridge has been a hot topic for a long time, hence summer schools and contextual offers. The real problem is the existence of the advantage conferred by private schools which I suspect is more far reaching yet also more subtle on an individual basis than you believe. There may be better advice about where to apply and better interview preparation. There may be wider teaching, not just teaching to the A* grade. I don't know. But it's not as simple as colleges being prejudiced.

No Bert on that list I fail too, on more than one score. As I said, speak for yourself but please don't make assumptions because you're so often wrong.

Alyosha - the population of top private schools is not "just" wealthier than the population of elite grammar schools. Many DC at top private schools inhabit a universe that is exceptionally stimulating and have been exposed to things that money cannot buy.

Well Bert there are grammars and grammars. Not just in the level of ability of the students at the point of entry but in their success overall. The top ones are 'elite'. Same as unis. No rocket science involved.

"Loaded with privilege"

A warm dry house, educated parents, books, museum visits, quiet to study, educated siblings, dinner table conversation, good food to eat, educated siblings, a listening ear or two, attention, aspiration, awareness of the world, acceptance, love, faith (as in people having faith in them) encouragement, pleasure in their achievement.....not sure why you would take exception to the assumption you provide these things for your children.

Alyosha around 6% of the recent intake at our school went to private primaries - that's not excessive.

Our parental community is mixed and not similar at all to HBs - London schools are very different from the schools outside. Comparisons don't fare well.

"User7, can you give your views on why the elite Grammars are behind the top Independent schools when it comes to Oxbridge?"

What do you mean by "elite grammars"?

user615 I don't see those things as necessary either, for obvious reasons. But my point to the clearly well off poster was that she shouldn't assume that all parents at good state schools have the same background. They don't.

Bertrand you know very little about me, I hope :) I take exception to the phrase 'loaded with privilege'. Speak for yourself, but not me! Anyhow, let's not get personal.

User7, can you give your views on why the elite Grammars are behind the top Independent schools when it comes to Oxbridge?

If it's not parental wealth, what is it?