Decision time - state grammar school or quasi-selective independent school

Surely Quatt wouldn't have applied if she were that dead set against it?

As for quaTT's op, based on many of your previous posts about schools, I think you should just stick to the private sector. You do always seem to feel so very much more comfortable with it. And a swirling negative cloud seems to circle your head when you speak of state. So for your own peace of mind and contentedness, go private.

what refreshingly sensible posts from abby and violet.

Quattro - Do either school do General Studies/insist on GS A level? In which case are their academic results really much of a muchness?

Even at Russell groups universities, there is no guarantee that getting in is the answer to all your prayers. I see several students each year who have had top marks throughout school, some of whom have been to good grammar schools- and it comes as a rude shock when they get to uni and find they just can't do it. We may offer more teaching than Oxbridge, but a student still has to do most of the work on their own, and it is not just a question of being "good" and hardworking; you have to have a certain level of creativity and maturity to cope at all. If you're not going to enjoy it it makes little sense to be there at all.

Haven't been around for about 16 months Ria, so good memory! Spiritual/philosphy forum?

violet what was your previous moniker? i feel i know you!

I have to agree with Abby when she says this:

"nowadays Oxbridge is not a social club and students produce 5 times as much work as at eg Russell Group universities so most who are not very very high flyers and dead keen on what they are reading will honestly be happier nad may actually do better elsewhere"

Our DD went for the social life & the status but she simply struggled with the work. She had no interest in her subject and no real understanding of how much work she had to do on her own. She believed that as long as she attended her tut each week & handed in essays " her time was her own".She didn't work for collections because " they don't count"

Although she has a good memory, she is not logical, clever or creative in her thinking. She thought all her classmates were " geeks" and couldn't understand why they were in the library all the time and not out partying.

She would have done much better at another good university, where she would have much more teaching and been expected to attend classes, sit exams and hand in work more often. And they woudl have kicked ass harder and sooner. She simply wasn't Oxford material and it wasn't a positive experience for her

NB I can only admit this on Mumsnet, in RL I have to smile and agree with others parents when they say how proud we must be

Hi, just want to add for Quattro if she's still listening that she might check out the destinations of the current 6th form at both schools? Current guidance at Oxbridge as to call for interview those from markedly weak schools, but it's guidance and not law, and I won't call for interview anyone who isn't predicted our minimum offer as it doubles the disappointment and we never offer less than 3 As (though people who get offers sometimes resit if they don't get the grades).

I really think Violet is right and Oxbridge ability can emerge from any school - we see indy kids ground down by Gradgrindian pressure and state kids ground down by family or friends' indifference - my niece refused to go to Greek club because she felt sure it would be full of geeks, which of course it would, but pretty useful when you are reading classics... she is really able and will be fine despite this.

One final thing - nowadays Oxbridge is not a social club and students produce 5 times as much work as at eg Russell Group universities so most who are not very very high flyers and dead keen on what they are reading will honestly be happier nad may actually do better elsewhere.

Oh, and admissions isn't perfect. We sometimes don't admit the very people we try to find and do admit the odd lazy cove who needs constant cranky warning leters to get off his or her botty.

Admissions at Oxbridge is all based on work samples, a written test, and an interview (or in our case, two) which is not a fireside chat so much as a kind of oral exam. (Why? Because as someone asked they are ALL predicted great grades and most are already holding fistfuls of GCSEs).

violet =I agree with all you say.
I don't believe a school can make a child anything.
However I do believe certain environments are conducive to getting the best out of people and some positively hold back. So although school cannot make a child it will have some impact.

No apology /sniff

My view: (without being personal to anyone!)

• Oxbridge candidates are usually in a league of their own. They have the ability to get into Oxbridge from whatever school

• Good Universities (generally) are using a range of factors, including considering the average points score of school) when selecting students.

• They do this to be as equitable as possible, and because they want the best students, regardless of whether they happened to have parents who chose to pay for private. Unfortunately the 3 A grades at A level does not necessarily mean that a student is highly intelligent and has huge potential. It should do, but it doesn't. Therefore Universities are responding to this fact.

• There is likely to be greater concentration of very bright children in state grammars, upper sets of high achieving comprehensives, and private schools. That's because parents who are intelligent are more likely to be able to afford to make the choice to live in particular area or go private. It does not mean that the school has 'made the child cleverer'.

• If you want to pay for private school for particular reasons then that's fine (I do for one of my children). But do not be under any illusion that it will make your child more clever, or that they will have better teachers.

Now, I fully expect that some people won;t agree with me. When you are paying for private, it is very easy to fall into a sense of 'entitlement' - you make all sorts of assumptions about what you 'should' get because you are paying. That's a separate issue, and has nothing to do with getting bright students into good Universities.

It's called having a conversation, Violet.

Don't worry, I forgive you for attacking me rather than my posts/opinions.

It's very difficult not to when you repeatedly keep telling me that I don't know what I'm saying or what I've written ST. If that's not personal, I don't know what is!!

Ha, the personal attacks start. Very telling!

ST - you really are very bossy and I'm glad I'm not in one of your classes! No, I haven't changed my mind about anything. Private school may not necessarily be the optimum place to be applying from. Depends on all sorts of factors.

I know what I have said - you just don't happen to agree with it, which is fine!

I am not particularly anti private schools - one of my children is currently in one as I have said on many threads. I think sometimes there are particular reasons, at particular times, why parents feel they need to pay.

Getting into a good University is a separate issue, which should always be about selecting the best candidates with the aptitude and ability to succeed on their particular course. University is an entirely different experience from school. It is the student's own choice (hopefully! - though I have seen some dreadful helicopter parents who meddle in that process too!) and the student needs to have the potential and the ability and desire to study independently.

If Universities feel that it is best ( ie in their interests and that of the student) to consider the context of the school the candidate is applying from, then that's fine, equitable, and good. The only reason people might possibly not like it, is if they think that buying an education should give their child an advantage!

Actually, you did say that. You told the OP that private may not be the best place to apply for univerisities from etc etc.

If you have since changed your mind, that is good.

ST - I am quite capable of reading the thread. I have not advocated the notion that students should stand a 'better chance' of getting 'top spots from state schools'.

I have talked about admissions processes, and described my own observations, based on lengthy experience teaching in state and private sector, on the profile of Oxbridge candidates. It is my view that Oxbridge candidates stand out regardless of the school they attend, generally, though I don't know whether all Oxbridge college admissions tutors would entirely agree with this, and I suspect that is why they may look at the type of school attended.

Many of us believe that for good courses in good Universities generally (and I am not referring to Oxbridge here) it is entirely appropriate and fair that the University considers the average A level point of the school, in order to get a full picture and place the candidate in context. That is not giving anyone an 'advantage'. It is treating people as equitably as possible. And it is in the interests of the Universities who, if they are good, want the best candidates with the potential to do well on their course.

And yes of course there are some kids who are not smart in private schools and they of course benefit greatly for one-one help and fab facilities.
I think sometimes we overestimate just how smart you have to be to do most jobs.

Oh dear, perhaps you should read through some of your own posts on this thread, Violet. You have consistently advocated the notion that students stand a better chance of getting top spots from state schools.

There are only so many univerisity places to go around. If you favour one group artificially, then you are discriminating against the other.

If it is inate intelligence that gets a student into a top university place, regardless of the school they go to, then surely there is no need to factor in the school? Just select on merit/achievement - which is what they do.

Absolutely - ditto grammar schools.

But there will still be some clever kids in the poorest areas in the poorest schools ( I put up my hand ) and I think that should be perhaps taken into account at admissions stage.
Though if you are clever you should be able to get a decent A level...many a home educate dkid gets them without any formal teaching.
I imagine it's where a kid from a crap school misses out by one grade which could have been tweaked if he went elsewhere.

TBH I don't think all this stuff is really the problem - to get smart but poor kids into good unis you have to get them to apply.

P.S. Having said that, Litchick, there are of course some children in private that aren't that bright, because earning money and buying into private isn't necessarily linked to intelligence.

Round our way, quite a lot of farming families and local 'self made' well-off (eg builders, plumbers) buy into the local private school. They don't always have particularly clever kids. Of course, with the down turn, it remains to be seen how the profile will change.....

Exactly Litchick. And if you are fortunate (and rich!) enough to be able to live in a particular type of area, you would find that there is a core of liberal intelligentia whose children dominate the top sets in the state schools, and of course these are far more likely to get into the top Universities than kids from the bottom sets!

Aint's rocket science is it?!

Eh?

Who has said Oxbridge should discriminate against 'good' schools? (Whatever that may mean)

My point has been that potential Oxbridge candidates can be spotted a mile off, they are in a league of their own, and get into Oxbridge from any type of school. The fact that there is likely to be a greater concentration of them in private or high achieving state schools is likely to be because highly intelligent parents are more likely to have high earning jobs and have the choice of whether to pay for private or live in the catchment for high achieving state schools.

Many Universities look at the average points score from the school as one part of the process, putting the candidate's grades into context.

The two points above are not mutually exclusive you know. There are a lot more very good Universities other than Oxbridge!

That's interesting Violethill.
When I was growing up on a dire sink estate I had a huge chip on my shoulder about independent schools.
Everyone where I lived did. Still do.
Anyhow...the thoery went that just because their parents pay these kids could noty be more clever. In fact, we suspected, they were actually quite thick. Their excellent grades were a result of fabulous teaching etc and utterly unfair.

Hole on my teenaged rambilgs sound like a session of state v private on Mumsnet.

Anyhow...I grew up and sent my own kids to private school where I discovered that inteligent parents do have inteligent kids and said inteligent parents do tend to earn more so can pay fees. Result an unusual amount of inteligent kids in one place even schools like ours whick are not remotely selective.
Therefore I'm not suprised that more indie kids get into good unis.
Must add this has required an enormous amount of chip swallowing on my part.