To ask why two London boroughs send more kids to Oxbridge than the entirety of Sheffield, Leeds and Manchester combined?

[nickymanchester]

I was reading an article in The Guardian today which claimed that more children from the London boroughs of Richmond and Barnet go to Oxbridge than all of Sheffield, Leeds and Manchester combined.

For context, the population of Richmond and Barnet combined is about 540k (Barnet actually has quite a lot of people living there) according to the ONS - so about the same population as Sheffield.

David Lammy says England is failing those who don't go to university

This is the quote:-

He noted that university access data reveals that geography is as much of a fault line as class or race. “Two London boroughs, Richmond and Barnet, send more kids to Oxbridge than the entirety of Sheffield, Leeds and Manchester combined,” he said.

So, is it just down to all the private schools in London? Or is there something else affecting these figures as well?

I will state again for you howud - my DC is NOT going on a Harvard summer programme, Nor are they going on any summer programme. However, I know od four children who are this summer and a similar amount who went last summer at the end of year 10. This is not about me, I’m just saying what I see. Please re-read.

London borough have massively more funding than other areas. It's actually disproportionate. A % of funding is currently based on historical funding. So If you are in an area that spent more on education you get more money. It has little to do with what it costs to run a school. When councils decided the proportion of their income to be spent on education, labour councils spent more. London also have a high % of children with English as a second language. However, often these families have high aspirations and are often v well educated. Therefore London schools are v well funded compared to other areas of the country. They can therefore fund whole departments that are focussed on getting children into oxbridge. In many other areas of the country they are reducing the number of gcses that children can take because of funding. In London, the can fund non teaching staff to coach children to get into top universities.

Apologies if someone has said this as have not RTFT but St Paul’s boys school is in Hammersmith, and so is St Paul’s girls school. These are the top schools in the country. Most students there live in Richmond and Barnes. A significant portion of those children will go to Oxbridge.

You live in cloud cuckoo land Catloon.

Having English as a second language gets you more funding.

We currently dont fund extra for having parents with poor educational outcomes, which actually has a bigger impact on results.

"it has little do with what it costs to run a school".

Except 30 percent higher staff costs in inner London, 20.something percent in outer. There are other costs that are higher too.

Oh and if it was just down to funding why dont Haringey get more in?

Most London boroughs also have twice thr average of PP students.

I’m from much further north than the cities mentioned and had no interest at all in going to oxbridge. No interest in the types of doors I thought it might open (traditionally “boys club” type professions based in London). I couldn’t imagine anything worse as a teenager than working “in the city” or politics or traditional journalism.
I know it is viewed as “the best” education and that everyone should aspire to it but really not everyone does.
Ironically the uni I went to was actually very very good and very very posh - but I didn’t realise that st the time 😂😂

You ate wilfully misinterpreting me how. I meant “outliers” inthe sense that for every child that gets a bursary, there will be hundreds that don’t.

I’m an immigrant myself - I came here for education in my late teens. So is DH - he came from a refugee family. We’re in different circumstances now, yes. However, I do know that in London independents, you are in the minority if you’re full British and very few are the British “old money” types. In fact, I don’t know any.

Howwud

I don’t understand how you are interpreting Catloon’s posts.
A child who wins a scholarship or gets a full bursary to a private school from an inner city background is an outlier. They will be unusual in their community.
Richmond is a very wealthy borough. We live in West London too.
Note - DH is a North African immigrant and our DC are the only one’s out of all his extended friendship group that go to private school.

I think half the reason the country is in the state it’s in is because it’s run by mediocre halfwits who got into good universities because of their background. I saw a tweet of the Tory candidates this week with the caption ‘this is what happens when mediocre children aren’t allowed to fail.’ It did make me chuckle and I couldn’t help but think about some of the posts I have read on mumsnet.

@RubberTreePlant

First and last @SaveKevin (and sometimes all through), so it's a maximum of one year house share for a standard three year course.

You obviously have recent first-hand experience but just to clarify for @SaveKevin- a lot of colleges do guarantee accommodation for all three years though. Their policy is usually made clear in the prospectus/on the website. Although some students “live out” in the second year in the sense that they are not housed in the College itself, this is often in houses that are owned or rented by the college and sub-let to students at a subsidised rate. There are very few undergraduates who ever have to go out into the private rental market.

This is an interesting discussion. I (a comprehensive school child) would never have got to Oxford if not for the fact that my school sixth form collapsed, and closed, so I had to go somewhere else. My new school always sent some students to Oxford—all you had to do was be in the interested group to go to extra sessions (not about interview techniques, about the subject) and they’d put you in. I went (because I fancied one of the boys in the group) and there I was. Got in and loved it. Couldn’t believe I could live in a building like that for so little. It’s totally about expectations and opportunity.

Later, as an Oxford admissions tutor, I was accused of being biased towards girls from comprehensive schools (from someone who favoured privately educated boys) 😃
My own (comprehensively educated) children had totally diverse experiences. One got into Cambridge and found 5 people on their corridor from the same (London) school. Felt awkward. Felt a different species. Survived, and the degree is a definite CV plus.

One went to Durham and found it amazing in comparison—pastoral care fabulous, 🏳️‍🌈 friendly—totally lovely. If I were advocating for MH, I’d choose Durham every time. The only reason not to, is that Oxford and Cambridge need more comprehensive school children, need more BAME children, need more non-privileged children to balance them.

They may be ‘outliers’ to people who live in Richmond but it’s an unpleasant label to give any child.

London has less schools than any other area of the country below floor level. That is less failing schools. Yes it does cost more to live there but the funding is still much higher than elsewhere. More that twice some other areas of the country per child. I know some schools that literally couldn't spend their money.
The intersting question to ask, would be how many London schools have reduced school hours because they literally cant afford to keep the school open? Personally, I wouldn't reduce London schools' funding but I would certainly up others.

We live in one of the mentioned northern cities. My DS, currently sitting his A levels has declined his offered place at Cambridge, due to cost, and is going to Uni up north. Cambridge is no 1 for his subject, but where he’s going is number 3, and should allow him a social life and more time to study as he won’t have to try and earn as much money while he’s there. I’m really proud of him both that he was offered a place, and that he has made a sensible decision

howwudufeel I think you maybe don’t realise that “outliers” is a term that comes from statistics/social science? It’s not a value judgment or an insult. Google Malcolm Gladwell’s book “Outliers” for more info.

London schools have higher wage bills, business rates and many other costs.

Most outer.London boroughs recieve aboit 5 percent more than those in the North West (on average).

The impact of the London challenge has been siginifcsnt though and it should have acted as a model to the government. Lots of London schools are changing timetables to shorten school daya and have lost lots of money .

I have read that book I still feel it is sad to describe kids from immigrant backgrounds ‘outliers’ simply because they are, well immigrants.

yellowwellies Cambridge don’t allow students to work part time during term time. As a result, they are careful to keep costs down and offer financial help. As discussed above, most accommodation is very heavily subsidised and cheaper than in other cities as a result, and food in Hall is also very cheap.

There are quite a lot of bursaries available to help those in financial need.

Of course your son can decide based on where he thinks he’s be happier socially but I am very surprised that Cambridge came out more expensive.

I did a 2 day open day/sample seminar process at Oriel. They offered no Modern Lit or Politics in the French and Spanish degree (this was 2003 so my have changed). I also wanted to study Catalan. I think it's a bit rich to say it "says something about me" that I wanted more variety.

You could have done all that at Cambridge though Hammering.

Aargh, it's so appallingly inept.
I wonder if the people who organised it realised quite how much they had fucked up or if they were all injured innocence and 'we're doing our best, but state school students just don't apply!'

YY. One of the justifications I have heard is 'oh, but the private school contacted us, and the state school didn't!'

For the final time how, I did NOT say children from immigrant background are “outliers”, but hey, you just carry on twisting things to your own agenda.
My own children are “outliers” in that case. As are DH and I.
To me an “outlier” is someone who achieves something despite the odds - eg. a child who gets a bursary place that may change the trajectory of their life. They don’t need to be an immigrant fgs.
If you want to go on telling yourself that everyone in London independents or at Oxbridge are of the ilk of Boris Johnson et al, well go on believing that. It may have been true once, but no more. In my sons class of 24, I think there’s possibly one student with 2 British parents. Not a Boris-in-the-making in sight, I can assure you.
I’m from Southern Europe and grew up in the middle of nowhere. Half the time my school was closed down. DH’s parents fled Iran. So I’m quite happy for people to call us “outliers” tbh.

yellowwellies, unless he is living at home can I ask how is it cheaper?

That is totally not to doubt his decision btw. I wish more people did just apply even if they didn't take up the offer for whatever reason. It shouldn't be made out to be such a big thing to apply to Oxbridge.