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?

Hak depends how one spins it in ones personal statement. Provisional offers being made before grades are attained and all.

I for one am very good at spinning my "soft skills" as a result of all the applying to university palaver.

Lemiserable as a previous poster pointed out, if you look at better class degrees, the percentages are reversed. The finding you mention only holds good for poorer classes of degree.

indigo

A 2:1 isn't a poor class of degree. Only a 1st is better.

Aptitude isn't the barrier it's finance, we need more bursaries and industry funded places.

No, BreakingDad77, finance is not putting anyone off applying to University.

And the moon is made of green cheese.

And the unicorn shall lie down with the Yeti, and Shergar shall lead them.

And Elvis is on tour with Princess Di, and NASA flew them both to the moon

Only on Mumsnet is a 2.1 a poorer class of degree!!!!

Perhaps it is now with grade inflation? I don't know.

In Australia tertiary entrance is determined using ATAR scores (based on scores). In SA, students from disadvantaged schools or rural schools can get extra points.

"'m so glad my (very good) grades, which I worked myself into the ground for (including being taken off school for exhaustion), are worth less because I was privately educated. "

I think that someone who works their themselves to exhaustion and attends a private school has less potential to do well in the future. There comes a point that hard work will not be enough on a difficult course.

Perhaps we need something like CATS tests to predict potential of candidates. Maybe an educational pychologist should be involved in the interview process to assess the intelligence of a candidate for a very competitive course. I feel the final say should still be with the tutor, but extra information could be useful to a tutor.

My degree's a 2.1. I have to say, without being an arse and also without outing myself, it was not a stroll in the park. No-one in my year got a First and I suspect very strongly that any MNer who calls a 2.1 a poorer class of degree would struggle to achieve in mine.

Anyone who says that a 2.1 is a poorer class of degree doesn't understand how the university system works.

I got a desmond in physics and my husband got a third in physics. In my experience employers are more forgiving of having a low class of degree in a really hard subject.

Anyone who thinks that grade inflation is affecting university marking systems probably hasn't done a degree recently.

In my vocational profession, they only care if you pass, never mind the grade. Glad I worked so hard, not!

candy - It used to be that Firsts were very rare. You had to be exceptional, and only 1 or 2 people in your year would get them. The reality is that more people are getting firsts. Do you really think everyone across all universities has suddenly become a lot smarter?

And we did not ahve resubmissions, or practices disguised as resubmissions. You wrote your essay with only input from lectures and group tutorials, and got your final mark back.

Only 4 out of 200 who graduated on my course got firsts. Less than 50 got 2:1's. That was 2010! So firsts and indeed 2:1's aren't being handed out willy nilly

I say 200, I'd have to get my graduation programme out to be totally sure of the number.

4 out of 200 is double the amount of firsts in my year 30 years before.

www.thecompleteuniversityguide.co.uk/news/percentage-of-first-class-degrees-doubles/

They publish these same sort of stats about every three months. Here's the last one: www.hefce.ac.uk/media/hefce/content/pubs/2014/201403/HEFCE2014_03.pdf

The reporting is typically rather disingenuous.

Firstly, unis already do take school background into account, as is well publicised (and it's not merely a case of state vs private or comp vs grammar, there are things like which income quintile the school's catchment falls into).

The fact is that you can get into a university with any grades. So we are really talking about Oxbridge and the like here.

This article is 2 years old and explains quite clearly about how they do this already

www.theguardian.com/education/2012/jan/10/how-cambridge-admissions-really-work

It's certainly true that BBB from Shittown Comp is a better predictor of success than BBB from Eton, but the fact is that independent pupils enter with substantially better A Level grades (average ABB, versus BBC from state), and they leave with better degrees.

So there really isn't much point in talking about changing admissions, when this is already well-known.

And by the way, the difference is not that huge, for those with all As at A Level, there's no difference at all between state and private, below that you are talking about a BBB from a state school being as good (in terms of the number getting good degrees) as ABB from private. Hardly earth-shattering stuff - we are not taking students in with two Es from the ghetto and having them beat AAA students from Harrow. It's 1/3 to 1/2 of a grade higher, per A Level (depending on the level at which you are comparing), which rather puts paid to some of the nonsense about independent school students being spoonfed + clueless in comparison to their resourceful state-educated counterparts. Yes, BBB at state is better than BBB at private, but it's not as good as AAB, or AAA from a private school.

Ask yourselves - is this how China, South Korea, Singapore etc educate their children?

Do Chinese and Korean students struggle with UK degrees? Yes they do.

I read this article and none of quotes or research results actually mention Grammar schools.

For instance first one says:
If you have in front of you a student from a state school and one from a private school with the same A-level grades, on average – and I should emphasise it is on average – it does appear that the student from the state school background or less effective school will go on to do better given the grades that they are entering with.

Student from a Grammar school = a student from a state school

Am I missing something here?

The article I read said it was low value state schools they were focusing on so high achieving state comps where parents buy places via property would be included in those discriminated against.

I think it's worrying as surely it gives carte Blanche to such schools to just put their feet up whereas those discriminated against will just push their kids harder.Also those kids at schools in the middle would ultimately miss out to either end.

This is all very interesting. I went to a private school on a full scholarship my ( as did 2 of my siblings). My father's income (back in the 1980's) was about £6k per year. My mother did not work. Neither of my parents are educated beyond O level (my mum had one and my dad 3).
I got ACD for my A levels (excluding General Studies for which I got an A but it was not accepted for my course).

Not all children who go to private school have monied backgrounds or high achieving parents. Nor do they have extensive extra curricular experiences. I didn't do DofE or music lessons. I did spend my weekends stacking shelves in Wool worths. I also nursed my chronically ill mother and raised my 4 younger siblings throughout my sixth form which had a fairly brutal effect on my resulting A level grades ( not a fact that was disclosed to any of the universities I applied for).

From the threads on here it seems that I should have been denied a university place based on the fact that just because I went to a private school I should have got higher grades but if I'd gone to a state school they would have been ok.

I got a 2i from an RG university but using the logic that seems to have been applied on this thread I should have got a third from a poly.

Poshfrock- the problem is that you are an exception. That's not how it is for most kids at private school- it just isn't. You can't use anecdote as data.

The overwhelming majority of kids at private schools- and at grammar schools come from comfortable- or more than comfortable middle class families. As do many children at comprehensive schools.

It is much easier for these children to do well than for children from disadvantaged backgrounds. It would be foolish to pretend otherwise. So some way has to be found to level the playing field a bit. And lower offers to pupil premium applicants is surely a good place to start?