Are State School Oxbridge Students More Intelligent?

[sarahlayton06]

Are students who attended state comprehensive schools (especially poor-performing ones) and yet managed to get all 9s in their GCSEs and all A*s at A-level and get into Oxbridge inherently more intelligent than students who got similar grades and got into Oxbridge and other prestigious universities but went to private school or to a selective grammar school?

This is as without the privilege of better education, they may not have performed as well?

Is

12 x A star at GCSE < 8 x A star at GCSE (the maximum offered) + no qualified teacher in four subjects at any one time for most of the five years and in three for Y10 and Y11 + only getting stabbed once?

I think so.

More intelligent? Determined? Focussed?
I don't think Oxbridge students are more intelligent full stop. But take a poor state school as opposed to a high performing private school and the former student must surely have something extra in them.
But not all private schools are high achieving (and if selective it's rather self fulfilling that they'd students will do well). And many state schools are very good, so I'd be loath to generalise.
And it's sad to see the stereotypical comments on here. The majority of students at top unis are from state schools.
So look at how the students perform at Oxbridge - do state school students outperform private school students? Do they go on to have more successful careers? Is intelligence the key factor in success at either? Probably not.

Why aren’t such disruptive children just kicked out of school and even if it is a state school, they could just be made to forfeit the privilege of education as punishment?

No

You can't tutor or private educate intelligence, a critical mind, analysing in etc

I'm twenty years out of date, but it was the case that state school students at Oxford got slightly better finals results than private school students with the same A-levels.

That would suggest they are slightly more intelligent (maybe even more than the finals differential suggests, if the private school polish takes more than three years to wear off).

However, there has been a significant push to contextual offers since then. My guess would be that the difference has now disappeared as a result of this and that the average state and average private school Oxford student are now pretty much the same intelligence.

It’s not a state vs private thing, it’s a poor education vs a good education thing, which doesn’t come down to state vs private. I went to Oxford from a failing school, so was initially completely under-confident, but quickly realised I was cleverer than the ex St Paul’s, Latimer and Godolphin, Old Etonians and the ex-Withington Girls etc. I’d had to be, to get in on a fundamentally crappy education.

No. Speaking from teaching experience of both types of schools, there’s a LOT more hand holding goes on in state schools.

ideally they would be but I suspect that if they excluded all the disruptive kids then we would have an army of suspended kids roaming the streets.

I have no idea how we deal with these kids, sanctioning parents might work if the parents cared. It is also a danger that by taking resources from poor parents would affect other children.

We already stream kids for ability, it may be time to stream them for behaviour. Maybe send them to Eton if it's such a good school as it's old boys claim.

True -- but the additional factor is contextual offers. Oxford tries to take into account educational disadvantage when doing admissions. Depending on whether they are under- or over-doing it, we might expect privileged or underprivileged students actually admitted to be more intelligent. My guess is that it will be pretty much evenly matched now.

But you can exercise influence, privilege and provide additional support and practice to ensure a good outcome.

Given that the intelligence spread across both state and private sector is almost identical then there must be other factors that mean there is a huge discrepancy between state and private schools in Oxbridge universities.

Really, that wasn't our experience at all? What sort of hand holding have you seen?

@travellinglighter

Given that the intelligence spread across both state and private sector is almost identical

I'd expect private school intelligence to be higher, for a few reasons but mainly that a much higher proportion of private schools are selective than are state. We should expect students of selective schools to be more intelligent than those of non.

Speaking from experience, one of my state school pupils who got into Oxbridge last year didn't even have a teacher for one of their subjects (the one they went to study) for the majority of the A-level course. So not just no handholding, no bloody teaching.

‘Cultural capital’ is very real. Children who are from privileged backgrounds and go to the top schools, on average, have greater access to things like museums, galleries, parents who are highly educated and can share experiences/intellect, tutors, contacts, their parents may expose them to a wider range of books and media, take them on a wider variety of holidays thus exposing them to a wide range of cultures, etc. which then helps with personal statements, interviews, job applications etc. This all shapes children and who they grow up to be.

I personally do find it very impressive when a child who has had a very different upbringing to this can compete with those who have had the above advantages.

By no means is the above a blanket statement - I am fully aware that there are working class kids who are very cultured and vice versa! But certain advantages must not be overlooked.

You're right to a certain degree as private schools exclude the thicker kids as they affect exam results so if you exclude the bottom sets(which private schools do) then they are broadly the same. Saying that, some private schools do take special needs kids that have specific issues. One of my local ones has a brilliant track record with dyslexic kids.

There was a VERY long thread recently about differences in attainment at Cambridge which might be interesting in this context https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/private-school/5164837-cambridge-university-discriminates-against-children-from-private-schools

Some are, and some aren't.

An article in The Times yesterday suggested Oxfords's bias accepting underprivileged students who are not up to scratch is compromising standards. This is unacceptable. However if a state school pupil has the potential to thrive there they should be admitted of course but discrimination against private school pupils is unfair too. Many private schools are terrible but the best are very good and very competitive to get into, those pupils should be admitted.

Discrimination against private school pupils???? Awful, I mean the 5.9% of the privately educated only get 32% of the spaces. How awful for them. I mean some of them are forced to go to Durham or Bristol.

What most of the students at Oxbridge have in common is that they come from supportive, usually two parent families, where they talk to ea h other, read books, sit down together for family meals and value education.

„State schools“ cover a range of options. Are you talking about super selective grammars where most students have parents who have paid tutors to prepare for the entrance exams, and tutors to help with exam prep? Flagship denominational schools chosen by MPs? Or failing comps in Northern mill towns with high numbers of students from deprived backgrounds?

“Private schools“ are similarly diverse. Eton or Winchester? or small schools catering for ND children?

I always used to think that three As at A level was outstanding. Then I met some of DC friends who had been to private schools where 4 A levels was the norm, 4 A stars not that unusual and this alongside county level sport, editing the school magazine and participation in music and drama….

So many variables…..

„Awful, I mean the 5.9% of the privately educated only get 32% of the spaces“

I think at least 20% of Alevel students are privately educated.

Not necessarily more intelligent.

No one can get all 9s and A star just because you had a private education.

But they likely had more barriers to their achievements and had to work harder and/or do more independent study to achieve those grades.

I think I would suggest that going to Oxbridge, or even to university, is not a measure of general intelligence anyway - though we have somehow awarded it that status.

You can be gifted at a single subject/group of subjects or a skill but useless at lots of other things. If that single subject is something that is studied at Oxbridge, then somehow we think that’s a sign of general intelligence. Not necessarily.

Far more targeted teaching, especially of more able kids. Small group work, lots of extra revision sessions, keeping kids in school and lessons rather than sending them on study leave, writing half their revision notes for them and in the days of coursework, practically writing it for them (thank God that’s now gone in my subject). I’ve found that intelligent state kids get far more support in school and private kids (day kids) get more at home. It evens out but in terms of intelligence levels, no, the Oxbridge kids are pretty much the same wherever.

Guess it depends on the school to some extent. But on average I’d say it’s probably true. If you’re at a state school with 35 kids in a class, loads of disruption from badly behaved kids which wouldn’t be tolerated in a private school, a string of supply teachers, some of whom quit in tears mid lesson after sitting on the floor crying (as happened to Dd in English) then you probably haven’t had as robust teaching or attention as someone in a smaller class and calmer environment with a better continuity of teacher.

My nephew is in a state school and has taught himself further maths the whole way through sixth form as the school can’t support him due to lack of staff. They will enter him as a pupil for the exam but not teach him. He’s on track for a A *. Which I think is good going for no teaching at all. Obviously he’s getting teaching for the standard maths A level but I assume further maths has an extended curriculum for which he isn’t being taught. I’d guess in a private school he’d probably get a teacher?

Imo yes and they have more grit and determination