Ethnic minorities in selective schools in London

Btw, for anybody who cares, when I speak of middle level at these companies I'm talking about anything up to and including mid-level MD's at investment banks. I consider senior to be people who are responsible for $100MM+ of annual profits (or other impact, in a cost center or a tech company). These people are almost always managers rather than functional types.

Wimbles101, ime, having brains and academics is not a must to do the vast majority of jobs in finance, even at Goldman Sachs or Morgan Stanley. But, these days, having the academics makes it a lot more likely you're going to get the job in the first place.

Don't get me wrong, I absolutely agree with you that people skills, EQ, EI, etc., are necessary to get to the very top. And that may well be why Asians who are pushed academically are under-represented at the top levels compared with their representation at the middle levels. But keep in mind that they are very over-represented in the middle levels compared with their representation in the general population.

Imo, achieving highly at academics is a very good way to gain entrance to top companies and the middle levels. I am less clear on the best way to reach the very top. You may have great leadership skills but you're not going to have a chance to show them off if you don't get in the door in the first place.

ujerneyson, how long ago did your husband join Goldmans? When I first came to the UK there were many people who fit the descriptions you gave of your husband and his boss. But that was over 20 years ago. Before I left, my shop had started requiring MBAs for middle-office jobs. And they focused their recruiting on Ivy League MBAs at that. I hope they've rowed back on that policy because it didn't really make sense, but it seems that the world is generally heading in that direction.

My DH worked at Goldmans for many years. He has fairly poor GCSE's, even worse A levels, a Mickey Mouse degree from an old poly and he left Goldmans just before being promoted to MD. His boss left school after O Levels. What they both had though was passion for their area and an ability to get on with and gain respect from their teams and their senior managers. They also had stacks of relevant work experience and a track record.

Having said all that, my own kids are at an outstanding comprehensive and they know that to get where they want to go in life they'll need not only good GCSE's and A levels but a good degree from a Russell Group uni (they aren't Oxbridge material), lots of leadership experience possibly through sport or maybe leading on PGL or similar and work experience and that should put them in a good position. They'll get the work experience because they're lucky that we are able to help facilitate that. However, although we could have gone the grammar route we knew that many of the children in our local superselective grammar would excel academically the focus was less likely to include extra curricular building soft skills as a priority which is what we get from the route we have chosen and I know we are not alone in that decision making process

You've got to have something to bring to the conversation than just your academics cos those are a given.
And btw as someone who went to a red brick Uni can I just say I've never struggled I finding jobs ;)

expat96 I was referring to grammar kids I particular and the selection process for them. The point being that there are kids in state comps and private schools who will do just as well academically later at GCSE and A level and degree who have a little bit more going for them than just having academics - not only personality but other hobbies and just generally a life outside school.
I've worked in the City myself for various organisations and certainly yes you're right having the brains and academics is a must but the people who really succeed have more - and it's that which is lacking in a lot of the kids I see getting into grammars. Their parents forget and/or don't know about the importance of these kids having a life outside of constant study.

I agree with every beyond says. Really depends on people's idea of success and job. How many people on this thread has worked for a Google or a Mckinsey or Sachs? I have and having been through the companies like these hired as a graduate and then now as senior exec I think the competition to get in is fierce. There are way more academically qualified applicants now than back in my day when i was hired and the Internet has truly levelled the international application playing field. Academics is really valued but if not academics then some other field in excellence - business iniative , startup, voluntarty charity transformation etc..

I think Asians in UK have wisened up the fact they need to have a more western approach in people skills, EQ, public speaking etc. There are more Indian and Chinese CEOs than every before dominating industries. Look at founders like Alibaba and CXO members of Google like Sundai Pichar . Half my team in business strategy and development is now Asian usually dominated by Caucasians.

Anyway, not saying what's right or wrong with the grammar school system etc on tutoring or ethnuc mix but A grade standards, strong work ethics and values of excellence, money and materialism, family and looking after your own (not outsourced to care centres) is also hugely valued..it is culture ingrained ..

DD is JOKINGLY (before the mind police set off ) called the token English white girl in her tutor group at her grammar school. Asian parents - or those of Asian heritage seem pushy. (particularly parents of boys)

Her Geography class for instance consists of 7 Indian Boys, two Sri-Lankan boys (makes for interesting debates apparently), 3 Chinese girls, 1 boy from both Pakistan and Japan and her.

This school is in Gloucestershire - not exactly a hotbed of multiculturalism.

She doesn't mind - it is helping pull her along at the same level, less distraction when pupils are driven.

Wimbles101, what you say is partially true but also very incomplete. In the real world most people have to get a job, ideally with a "top" company. Companies have always used universities to filter their candidates for them. Top universities filter for academic achievement.

I have worked for multinationals in both the US and the UK, the kind many of you would recognize as being at the top of their fields. I can tell you that, when hiring into professional track positions, the kind with clearly laid out paths to the top, we mostly recruit from very selective universities. We understand we're missing out on some very high potential kids who didn't succeed academically in secondary school but, quite frankly, it's not economically efficient to search at every university to find these kids.

It's important to keep in mind probabilities and expectations as well as anecdotes. Most people know or know of some child who got a place at a highly competitive grammar with minimal or no preparation, just on sheer ability. These children do exist, but they are few and far between. Most people know or should know that preparation for the exams improves the chances of getting a place for nearly all children.

Similarly, many people who don't go to Oxbridge will get jobs at Google or Goldman Sachs. But you should know that your chances of getting the interviews and, therefore, the job, improve greatly if you do have Oxbridge on your CV.

Some people will fare poorly at academics but go on to succeed spectacularly in many ways, including financially, e.g., Richard Branson. Some people will have Henrietta Barnett and Cambridge on their CV and not have success in any particular endeavors. But when you look at the whole population, it's pretty clear that academic success is highly correlated with subsequent financial success.

My elder daughter went to one of the schools you mentioned. I think the demographics are partly because London is very diverse and partly because certain 'ethnic minorities' value a good education above all.

Being in an ethnic minority does not mean poverty. Many of the parents were themselves professionals; doctors, lawyers and the like.

Sorry can I just comment on this 'get good jobs' thing. Understand if you want to go into medicine or maybe engineering or accountancy, but a lot of jobs require people skills as much as qualifications - EI.
From what I've seen the kids that get into grammars often lack this - no personality or not much because they never been allowed at home to express an opinion. It's very Asian. I say this as an Asian person.
In the real world you need a bit of EI etc - it'll make all the difference when it comes to wining clients/promotions etc.
Academics will only get you so far.
A lot of these kids will end up in research jobs back Room stuff nothing particularly high flying on the whole - some just crash in the real world - I've seen this over and over again.

Why are you asking OP? And where are you getting your statistics from?

"That's true but around 80% of top schools are ethnic minority"

Tutoring (paid or parental) took place across all the kids I know in our local grammar. In our year group not one kid who got in, took the test without preparation.

And the ethnic mix within our 2 local grammars do not represent the local population demographics.

We are not in London, so again, what are you basing your statement on? "grammar schools outside of London have a low amount of ethnic minorities"

I believe the Birmingham grammars also have a high non-white intake.

Agree with previous posteroles. Some Black West Africans are astoundingly pushy as well. I know a few families there that demand a lot and have high expectations.

Tutoring paid or unpaid isn't really the question here. Asian parents will do whatever it takes to equip their kids ahead of the rest. 2nd generation wealthier Indians and Chinese seem to prefer private school as they can now afford it and it's a bit less intense than selective top grammars.

It's about getting top jobs (not just any job but one that pays really well and has a high entry ) and being self sufficient. We know that so that's why we do it.

The Chinese especially immigrant but also British Chinese have extremely high academic expectations and work ethic. Nothing less than a grade A is appreciated. I don't know any Chinese families who are not pushy or tiger mums and dads. It's so normal that we don't even question it. For us, it gets results, good grades, excellent professional jobs. Working hard is a non conversation starter and we just get on with it. Whether happiness comes into well...that comes after the grades!!

I say the above as I am in that community and was raised as such.

(In our area the main non-Asian-Muslim groups are Black and East Asian. East Asian families also get places in the grammar school for similar reasons. Black families, of which there are few because, well, we're in non-metropolitan NW England, are spread among the different options).

I live in a grammar school area and the grammars also have a slightly higher proportion of BAME children than some other local secondaries.
Part of the issue is that, in the NW, a very large number of the BAME families are Muslim, while many of the non-selective schools are church schools.

So for a Muslim family it's try for the grammar, or go for the ex-secondary-modern, while for a nominally Christian family, there's the "find religion" option.

So the grammar and the ex-secondary-modern are reasonably representative of the surrounding area while the church schools (especially the v popular one) are very white.

What is your point op?
The fact that a vast majority of the immigrants who came here in the last decade have very good education and highly qualified (think HSMP) has a lot to do how they want their children to grow up. It is also massively difficult to get on the property ladder and hence they need to save a lot too. I have seen families preferring grammars for this reason mainly. They don't want to pay private school fees even if they afford. Their point? We are paying high rate of taxes and state must return. I kind of see their point. If you want to compete the world in STEM in the next hundred years, we need to do hard work. That's reality. I like it or not is not the point anymore. It is about survival really.

III36, "around 80% of to schools are ethic minority" is a meaningless phrase as well as a generalisation.
Why do I get the feeling that when you say "ethnic minority" (when you really mean South Asian- see Hulder's point about black pupils)) you think they are over represented, not because of the difference between school and nationwide population, but because of tutoring, being pushy etc?

This is the third thread (that I have seen) started by you on this issue.

Why are you so interested in 'ethnic minorities' and tutoring for grammar schools?

I live near a grammar that is over 90% Asian, while the local population is mostly white British. It's so competitive that you have to be clever and prepared to work very hard. The locals are uncomfortable about making their children spend so much time studying. They think it isn't good for children psychologically, and they value their children having time for football and ballet and just larking around. Meanwhile the Asian families from just a bit further out, value an elite education and feel that the many hours spent preparing for the 11+ rather than doing other enriching opportunities is worth it.

I'm not British or Asian. I guess only time will tell whether it is better to be well-rounded or well academically prepared. Ideally, you would want to be both, but "well academically prepared" equates to being more prepared than anyone else, rather than just reaching a particular standard. So the competition drives the standard to ever greater heights each year. It's a tournament. An endurance test as much as anything else.

I have found that Asian ( in particular Indian families) and West African ( particularly Nigerian) families value education and therefore are prepared to make sacrifices in order to ensure that their children do well. This means that many of them are tutored for selective schools.

2000 applicants for 93 places
2800 this year , 5 years ago it was 2400 for these places.
The majority of the girls (over 90%) are very bright, but the parents are extremely competitive, particularly the ethnic minority ones.

My DS just started grammar school in the North West. This is not a fully selective area and only a very small number of places are available to the top scorers as we are out of catchment. Out of about 20 boys waiting for the bus on the first day (year 7 only) there were only 2 white boys.

This will not be fully representative of the whole school but reflects the fact that most of the very good comprehensives in my area are Christian faith schools hence are not accessible to more than a few non Christians.
My point is that local factors will affect the proportion of ethnic minorities who need/want to access grammar schools.

Most local non-Asian parents choose Latymer or DAO ahead of HB and QEB because they don't want to have their children "compete" at that level.

Agree 100% with this. We didn't even both because although our kids are extremely bright we simply weren't prepared to put them through the levels of tutoring they would need to compete. They also go for the high performing state faith schools in NW London as alternatives to independent.