Getting to Medical or Law school

Three quarters of judges and QCs went to private schools. 50% of partners in the top London firms likewise. 55% of solicitors went to Oxford or Cambridge, both of which have a disproportionate number of students from private schools. I'm afraid that saying "my daughter studies law and she went to a comprehensive" doesn't alter that.

Medical and Law degrees in the UK are completed at universities that have faculties of medicine/law within them.

Obviously students are required to achieve (or very nearly achieve) certain academic entrance requirements there are also other non academic requirements that a candidate may need to fulfill especially with medicine.

Some top universities use a contextual data system in their applications, so an applicant who is predicted to meet the entry requirements but attends a school that performs below national average or lives in a low socio economic area is "flagged" their application is highlighted as they are recognised as performing strongly in less advantaged circumstances This of course does not guarantee an offer.

On a personal note my DD attended a grammar school and is a law student at a highly rated university and most of her friends went to comprehensive or secondary modern schools but they are definitely outnumbered by privately educated students.

It's not true. However there is a kernel of not-lying in it.

I believe (no links to back it up) that barristers and judges are still disproportionately likely to have an Oxford or Cambridge degree, and disproportionate numbers of Oxford and Cambridge students were at independent or grammar schools. This is partly about academic achievement, partly because barristers are self employed and it's easier to put food on the table in the early years if you have a richer family to help out, and partly because people tend to recruit others like themselves.

Have your kids started secondary? Or are Law / Medicine your aspirations?

Hampshire has a number of high achieving comprehensive schools. They only go up to GCSEs and then there are separate very large 6th form colleges.

Also, why the focus on law and medicine? Amongst our professional friends, with one exception, the doctors and solicitors do not stand out as being particularly more well off, if that is one of the aims. Those living the most comfortable lives are those who went into finance or started their own business. We live in London and house prices mean our lawyer and doctor friends (including ourselves) live in very average houses and are mostly sending our children to state schools.

This is far far off the mark.

I went to a comprehensive in the south east and a good non-hooray university in the north. DH also went to a comp. We both have law degrees (although ultimately I did something completely different). We do not move in rarified circles. Both of us are still in touch with a lot of our 6th form an uni friends who mostly now successful professionals including solicitors (one extremely senior partner in City firm), a few doctors, one publisher and several accountants. And then there's loads of very happy people working as lots of other things in all manner of professions in the UK and overseas, running their own businesses etc. The majority also send their children to comprehensives - only a couple of grammar and independents but I admit there has been a rush to make sure people live close to good comprehensives.

The assertion just doesn't make sense at all.

My DP is a surgeon. He went to state school (and not one known as being outstanding or whatever - run of the mill state school!), as did most of his friends from his Uni days who are in the same field.

The person you were talking to is talking largely nonsense.

State school kid here = qualified as a solicitor ten years ago.

The other day, I was talking to someone about Medical School Interview, he said, preference is given to kids from a wealthy background, kids from doctor parents, kids from a rich neighborhood like oxford etc..

Where do these people come from?

If anything a non-wealthy state school background is preferred. Most medics HATE kids with doctor parents...

I’m the product of state education through and through (and not even a particularly good school, and definitely not a privileged background) - I’m a doctor. As are at least 2 other people from my small school year - only 45ish stayed on for 6th year, and I can also think of a lawyer, as well as a few teachers, a PHD level biochemist, several engineers and a couple of city high flyers.

In some areas of Bucks, the 11 plus pass rate is 20%. The grammar school rolls are made up from children from Milton Keynes. Obviously Bucks is very different from a standard local authority. However, there are excellent comprehensives all over the country and somethat are not!

I find it really odd that people think grammar school pupils are coached and somehow do better because of their parents. Where there are only comprehensives, the ambitious parent is alive and kicking in these schools too! There are a couple of excellent secondary moderns in Bucks and transfer to a grammar is always possible for 6th form.

Very few comprehensives out perform Grammars.

My son went to law school from a very ordinary state school.

www.medschools.ac.uk/

Here you will find the actual criteria for admission to UK medical schools - a somewhat more reliable source than your Iill-informed friend. Enjoy.

The reason you will struggle to find good or any other variety of comprehensive schools in Buckinghamshire, btw is that in terms of state secondary provision, it is a fully-selective authority. So it has grammar schools, which are set up to educate roughly the 'top' 30% and Upper schools.. Upper schools make no pretence at being 'comprehensive', because they are missing most of a particular section of each year's intake.

This is not true at all. My daughter is so studying law at a Russel group uni, and yes she was privately educated but having met some of her peers and also talking to her a huge amount were not privately educated.

I would agree with the pp who said the uni is way more important than the school.

My DD is a trainee Solicitor in a big London law firm, having gone to a normal comprehensive school. Did well in her GCSEs and A Levels and did a law degree at a Russell Group Uni. I know of atleast 2 junior doctors who went to the same school. It has to be pretty much straight As all the way though which is sometimes harder to achieve in a comprehensive school.

I went to a state school and have been a solicitor for the last 16 years.

No, it's not true. My 2 ds went to a normal state comprehensive and are in medical school along with 8 or 10 of their friends from each year.

However, we live in a comprehensive school area so kids of all academic abilities go to the same school. I guess if you live in a grammar area it's true that the brightest kids are the ones most likely to go to a grammar school and are also statistically more likely to achieve the grades needed for med school

It is absolutely not true that med schools choose wealthy students. They select mainly on test scores and partly on skills demonstrated in interview and through volunteering or work experience. However it is true that wealthy parents are those most likely to fund tutors, interview coaches and interesting work experience opportunities for their dcs.

In law, I think that's more accurate for the older generations (lawyers in their 50s/60s). DH and I are both Solicitors. DH is a partner in a law firm, I'm relatively senior in house. DH went to a relatively average London comp and I went to a reasonably good comp in Berkshire. Neither schools were outstanding and neither of us went to Oxbridge for our degrees. A lot of the older lawyers I've worked with went to private schools (fewer went to grammar schools), but most of the lawyers I know in their 40s and below went to state schools. Bright hardworking children at comprehensives have just as good a chance of becoming lawyers. IME the university is more important than the school.

Buckinghamshire is very different to most of the rest of the country. It doesn't have many comprehensives at all. With a few exceptions, all state school pupils take the 11 plus exam, the top 30% or so in that one exam go to grammar school. The rest go to secondary moderns. In Buckinghamshire, of course the secondary moderns will struggle to send many pupils to law or medicine as the brightest third of pupils have been creamed off to the grammars at age 11.

The rest of the country (with a few exceptions) have comprehensives. These schools take pupils of all ability from lowest to highest and do the best for all of them. Many are great and will send lots of kids to university.

If you're moving to Buckinghamshire then your view and research may have some merit but if you're thinking about living in any other county, one that has comprehensives then I think you're very wrong.

I went to normal (slightly rough ) primary and secondary schools, no fancy education at all. I'm a solicitor now and some of my peers are training as doctors.

I can assure you that although there are wealthy areas in oxford and the surrounding area, there are also areas that are far from wealthy and a lot of us send our kids to comprehensives here. And our children do get into Russell Group unis despite being at a state school.