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

I don't think anyone has said Universities should assume that the best candidates have lower results.

Simply that the University will want to look at the whole picture, in context, so that they can be sure of selecting the right people for the course.

I'm sure lacrosse-playing isn't a waste of time if that's what floats your boat and keeps you fit and healthy. I was just pointing out that it's unlikely to be a major factor in getting you into University!!

I played lacrosse at school and didn't think it was a waste of time. I much preferred it to hockey, and it helped me to be a team player and kept me fit.

Not a waste of time at all.

How can you assume that the best candidates have lower results?

How do you know that individuals did not have the odds stacked against them despite being at an independent school?

The only safe, and ethical, way to go is via the UCAS points system and the personal statement. It is really very dodgy to start reading between the lines.

It would be right for univerisities to consider the potential of their applicants, but that would really require a very different system to the one we have now (eg introducing an Apititude Test). The current UCAS system does not measure potential.

The 'other interests' thing is highly over-rated too. So all that lacrosse-playing may be a waste of time

Why would it be wishful thinking scienceteacher?
Is it really so difficult to believe that Universities want the best candidates?

In my profession I talk a lot with University admissions tutors.

It didn't happen at all when I did Admissions five years ago, though things may have changed. All we were interested in was existing GCSE results, predicted A-level results and, if it came to it, evidence of other interests as well. I'm not sure we ever really looked at the name of the school.

Violethill - who's talking about hothousing?

QC - your DD is a wise and thoughtful girl. Go for your - and her - real preference!

Is there any evidence of this though, Violet?

I haven't been able to find anything. I suspect it is more of a case of wishful thinking.

I'm sure Universities don't prioritise lower grades on the basis of any assumptions about a 'difficult past'.

What they do do is look at average points scores for the school attended to put the candidate's grades in context - which is entirely sensible.

I bet we've all known of people who have ended up with inflated grades because they've been hothoused in a particular way - it shouldn't happen but it does. And it helps nobody - the candidate's grades don't reflect their innate ability, which could potentially be disastrous for them if they wind up on a course that isn't right for them, and it's not helpful to Universities who want to know what the candidate is capable of on their own merits.

Any positive discrimination is between independent schools AND grammar schools versus 'sink' schools and children from obviously disadvantaged backgrounds. Nothing more sinister than that.

It has been said many times on this thread, it is treated as some kind of sacred cow.

It would be very unethical for universities to prioritise an actual lower grade on the assumption that they have had a difficult past.

Scienceteacher - it was a joke!

(I was a university admissions tutor in my previous incarnation, and I don't think the applicants' schools made any difference to what we thought of them...).

Where is the evidence that universities (apart from Bristol) discriminate against independent schools? We certainly don't find that at our school.

And they have done AS modules prior to filling in their UCAS forms.

dotoressa

I think it's too much to ask someone to forego a grammar school place on purely altruistic grounds - but since quattro seemes to be inclined to the privae school she can also have the warm glow of knowing someone else will be overjoyed by her dd's foregoing the place.

It sounds to me as if quattro prefers the private school but is aware of how many people would sell their left eyeball to get dcs into a grammar school and therefore can't trust her instincts which are to go against the majority view

whoops - are not is

I'll have the pedants after me!

Although the only exams you have actually taken when applying for University is GCSE - so actually being at state school earlier may be an advantage

I do have some (a lot) of sympathy with the 'leave the place for someone who'll really appreciate it' argument. I had in fact thought it myself. However, I wonder how many of us would have such altruistic thoughts if it were our own child? What matters to the OP is where her child will be happiest/best fulfil her potential, and I'm not sure that social responsibility necessarily comes into it if that's what she's (rightly, understandably) concerned about.

More to the point is that I think, QC, you would always think 'what if...' whichever school you go for. However, I think the 'what if...s' will be considerably fewer if you go for the independent school. If your DD were to have strong opinions and want to move schools at sixth-form level, she'd increase her chances of getting into a decent university by being at a state school for the relevant two years .

Think of it this way, if you DON'T take the grammar place, it's win-win: your child probably gets an education more in keeping with her interests and another child benefits from the grammar place.

Absolutely.

bags spot on

Yes, agree with jujumaman.

If you have doubts,please leave the place for someone who will really appreciate a grammar school education, not for someone who is always comparing it to the independent school.

It still doesn't look as if money is that much of an issue to you, Quattro - if it were you'd be going for the grammar school like a shot

I, like others, think you're looking for validaton because you feel guilty turning down a place that is so highly coveted. Don't. Someone else will be overjoyed to receive it. And, as I said earlier, you can always move your dd at sixth form if she needs a change.

"a keen interest in sports and sports being key to the school makes school a MUCH better experience for DD"
"DD says she doesn't much mind what she does and wants to abdicate responsibility leave the decision to us"

How do you square these two sentiments? If sport is vastly superior at the Private and it is so important to DD then why isn't she lobbying for the Private? Is school sport not that important (bearing in mind she already does tennis and hockey out of school) or is she hiding her feelings (worried about economic climate maybe?).

I'm not sure that MN can help you on this query QC. DD will be fine at either school and it is a close call to chose which one to go with. Without really knowing your DD and the two schools in question it is difficult to advise; I think that you need to speak to local parents, esp at the Grammar.

There are dire uniforms in state and private. But let's not get sidetracked by thinking that uniform is a major factor in determining success.

Give me inspiring, dynamic teachers who have the talents to cope with children in all their complexities - stellar bright, reasonably competent, bright with a specific special need, struggling..... these are the kind of teachers who earn my respect and who I believe are the ones who really make a difference. That's the sort of person who can strike a chord with a child and inspire them.

My grammar was obviously very unusual, we had tartan kilts and more after school activities than you could shake a stick at. 3 orchestras, 5 choirs, upper and lower school drama productions twice a year, very successful at sports (against the local private schools)....

Discipline was both strict and lax. It was amazing what you could get away with if you churned out the A grades. I once smoked a joint in front of my English teacher, on school property (not during the school day).

If all this is the crunch factor go private.