To think - yes, universities should take state school applicants with lower grades

[Lemiserableoldgimmer]

.. than applicants from private and grammar schools, on the basis that this new research suggests that as a group, state school pupils appear to be more able than private school applicants with identical A level and GCSE grades. More likely to get a good degree, less likely to drop out.

here

What do you think?

Firstly, I do not see in the underlying research that a B from indie equals a C from state, so please can you point out this specific? Because if not then you start comparing apples with oranges.

I don't have a doubt that - ceribus paribus - a B from comprehensive trumps a B from Indie. But that doesn't therefore mean that a C from a comprehensive = a B from private, and without that clear statistic, you don't know if the C state student is capable of the same achievement as the B private.

Interestingly, when you look at the underlying research (which compares outcomes from the same input grades) there is a finding that when you look at 2.2 and above, the statistics are reversed and 67% of private achieve this against 62% of state, which would suggest you ought to do the reverse of your suggestion, OP, and let in more indie students in order to shift the bell curve of acceptable degrees higher.

The reality of course is that whilst there are so many variables, universities should try to take into account those variables as much as they can and the research shows that they do - indie pupils are required to achieve slightly higher grades to enter uni than state, according to the actual underlying research (as opposed to the headlines) ABB on average, vs BBC.

What is a real shame is the the research showed far more starkness of differences between the races, which warrants real investigation and action, but no-one clearly gives a shit about that when they can jump on the class bandwagon.

Imagine trying to study for your A levels in the living room with your 6 brothers and sisters packed into the same room, television blaring, no room in your cold shared bedroom for a desk, constant interruptions. Your parents not understanding anything about what is needed to get to university. When you trek in the evening to the local library reading room you share your table with homeless people trying to keep warm and it shuts before you can finish what you need to do. This is why some able state school pupils do better at university, finally the playing field is level.

yanbu I went to a university dominated by ex private school students. The degree of support and coaching they'd had to get them through the a-level and university interview process was unreal. It is absurd to say the A grade they'd achieved was on a par with a an A or even a B achieved at a inner city comp in special measures.

The person who achieved a B in the latter circumstances has shown more capacity for independent learning, resilience and nous than someone who has coasted through the process with every advantage hsnded to thrm and is in all likelihood be better suited to university study.

"I'm not convinced that this is fair or would work."

I think it pretty much used to happen at Cambridge back in the day when I applied. The application form asked questions about your school (IIRC including how many oxbridge entrants in the last 5 yrs) and also about highest level of parental qualification, & I'm pretty sure that the statement from your school mentioned any particular factors.

Looking at people I knew in college, I'd say those from non traditional backgrounds were no brighter than those from private /grammar schools, but we worked harder & final results reflected that. (The mature students with a union background who'd come through Ruskin worked the hardest of all!)

Surely the issue being raised here is one of the major reasons parents send their kids to private school-state schools do not provide the same level of education as private schools do. That surely is the thing that needs addressing. There has to be a way of measuring achievement across the breadth of education types and that is by A level exams and their subsequent results. If it becomes the norm to require different results according to the different schooling methods then it becomes unfair to individuals-what about the privately educated kids who are very bright, organised and focused and would have achieved top grades wherever they were educated-is it then fair to discriminate against them? What if the state school child who achieves BCC and is offered a place on an ABB course had slogged their guts out to the point of exhaustion, had extra coaching from private tutors and just scraped the grades. Would they then cope alongside other kids (state or private) who easily attained the ABB grades? I just don't think it is as clear cut as private school children should have to get higher grades then state school children (or vice versa).

"What if the state school child who achieves BCC and is offered a place on an ABB course had slogged their guts out to the point of exhaustion, had extra coaching from private tutors and just scraped the grades. "

I guess at Cambridge it's not an issue as they always interview, & it would be very obvious. There it was much more about picking people they wanted at interview, but recognising that they might not have the support to get the absolute top grades that a bright private school pupil is pretty much guaranteed to get.

Antiopa do you really believe the scenario you describe is the norm for state educated children?

Totally agree. Universities need to choose the most able students. If those from state schools with the same grades as those from private schools are more able, then this needs to be taken into account.

(Just to be clear - I wasn't being entirely serious....)

YABU

Some children are from very wealthy areas with fantastic State schools. They are a lot better off than most grammar and privately educated children. Is that okay? Do they deserve their place more than the poor Kid who worked hard to get a grammar place? OR the child who's local school was a dump so parents worked all hours, forfeiting family life for private school fees so their child would get a decent education? Now you want to punish them? how is that fair?

Perhaps the government should rather concern itself with ensuring equal education for all.Instead of trying to create Social mobility by punishing the ones at the perceived top.

No, not for all of them but for some of them yes. It was for me. Family size is less these days but there are still bright poor children with difficult home circumstances which are not conducive to studying.

"Surely the issue being raised here is one of the major reasons parents send their kids to private school-state schools do not provide the same level of education as private schools do. That surely is the thing that needs addressing."

We know state school teachers are generally just as good as those in the private sector (which gets most of its teachers from the state sector anyway).

State schools should forthwith halve the size of their classes, and distribute all their disruptive pupils as widely as possible, including by sending them to private schools, so that state school teachers are not overburdened by having to spend disproportionate amounts of time dealing with challenging children and those with special needs, diagnosed and undiagnosed.

But it's not going to happen, is it?

It is not about trying to create social mobility, it is about picking the best students.

I remember at an open day some other people being most indignant that I had an ABB offer whilst they had AAA offers. I suspect coming from a comprehensive had a lot to do with this (15 years ago now)

Toapoint I agree with you this system is already in operation, most unis have/want to increase their intake of students from diverse backgrounds and so do this informally anyway- for example, being more flexible if a pupil from a poorer state school doesn't hit the required grades and a judgement has to be made.

Cambridge certainly operated this policy, or some of the colleges did 20 years ago to encourage more state school pupils to attend.

As for those saying how do the unis know who is a 'state' pupil, they don't need to classify so crudely, they can take a quick look at the GCSE and A level average points of that school over the past couple of years, and some have lists of 'not so great' and 'better' schools in their area but they would never ever disclose these.

Anti that isn't reality for a huge number of state school pupils.

"Now you want to punish them? how is that fair?"

No. But on a much, much grander scale the people currently being 'punished' by being deprived of a chance to fulfil their potential are bright children in state schools, as children from private schools who are similarly or less able are leap-frogging over their heads to claim most of the prizes.

You can't please everyone.

YANBU though I thought they already did this a little. Both DDs were at an average comp, but got into RG unis with slightly lower grades than was asked for. (They both got a B instead of an A for one of their A levels)

Both have said, in their experience that they are surprised they have/are doing better than their friends from private schools. They presumed the private school students would be way ahead of them, but have found the only thing they are ahead in initially, is an air of confidence.

Yes Antiopia you are right, however I don't agree in making a policy based on the minority.

I agree with Six

In the scenario of the poorer pupil whose parents 'scrape together' private school fees or send them out of a grammar school- why is it then unfair for them to be expected to get slightly better grades. Surely that's exactly why these students were sent there, for the better educational possibilities? If my dd gets into the grammar school I hope for, then I will expect her to get top results along with the whole cohort.

Universities want the brightest, as in academically brightest. If the child has been lucky enough to be both academically bright and have parents who are motivated to help them fulfil their potential earlier, by paying, or sending them to the grammar school in another borough, then they have benefited from this already. Any such 'tweak' in A level grade expectations is likely to be pretty minor, and so their chances are still better of getting in to a top uni, even with a little added competition from those less fortunate in their schooling opportunities (as evidenced by the Oxbridge numbers from most private and grammar schools).

My school had a 43% 5 A*-C pass rate at the time btw.

olga my DDs have come across the same thing. Dd1 got a summer job, showing prospective student and parents around during open days.

She had some extremely rude comments from some parents who said she only got in with her results because she went to a comp. Well that's is true but she worked blooming hard and came out with a high 2.1, so why shouldn't she have been there?

YANBU

Just to (attempt to) explain my previous post a little better. The English literature paper A requires a raw score of 65 out of a possible 80 to achieve an A. If a private (or excellent state school) pupil gets a raw score of 79 and a pupil from a lesser achieving school gets a raw score of 65 then both pupils get an A but clearly one has achieved a higher raw score which the overall grade doesn't account for. Can we be sure that the pupil getting 65 would also have achieved 79 if he had been at the other students school?
In order to implement this we would need to f