To scream, "Your Private School Children Are Not Being Discriminated Against at Uni"

[Triffid1]

Between work and social I seem to have a pretty diverse group of people who I engage with regularly but as my DC are at an age where we're thinking about high schools, there have been quite a few conversations around this recently. I have now had not one but THREE separate conversations with parents who are planning to send their children to private schools who have expressed concern that it might "disadvantage" them because the universities are prioritising state school children.

Clearly, every time someone says this, I immediately move them further down the pile of people I want to hang out with. But why is this so prevalent? Yesterday, talking with a client on Zoom, where he was ringing from his lovely home office in his leafy suburb of London I didn't actually know what to even say but I wanted to yell, "FFS, if there's a small shift so that the small number of private school children don't get the majority of places at the top universities, you'll have to live with it." Instead I simply changed the subject politely. Argh.

@Fairyliz

Well I don’t know, isn’t the whole point of sending your children to private school is to get them into a better university and then a better job? It’s like me paying for super fast broadband, I would complain if I then only got bog standard broadband the same as everyone else.

Not quite the same, as state school pupils can do exactly the same as private school pupils.

I know of two people off to Warwick this weekend to do Maths. One went to the local sixth form college (state) and the other went to a very expensive private school. Same uni, same course. That does ignore the extra-curricular things, but if you have the money and save on private school fees you can afford to pay for extra-curriculars.

I don't see the point of private school except to keep your precious darlings away from the plebs (excluding special needs where a private school can accommodate those needs better).

Fiveinfulham, I've never moved or lived anywhere for the schools, we just take what's in the area

Someone is biased and believe there is not enough diversity in the City, hence they commission a study. One has to be very naïve to believe the study will not be tainted by the original assumption

The conclusions coming out from research should not be taken as gospel for this reason

I think it would help if you understood how research like this works. This isn't someone waking up with an idea and deciding to do a bit of research.
Research like this is underpinned by specific methodologies and a code of ethics. This means any issues around bias are addressed and acknowledged. It will be carried out by experiences researchers either from a specific research organisation or a university.

This research is based on the fact that there is a lack of social diversity in the city. Not an assumption, but fact based on data. It's not starting from a biased perspective.

@Thefifthbeatle You are absolutely correct about "involved parenting priviledge". But this is basically what the whole cohort of Oxbridge and other top Uni's applicants has in common. No one gets there without having involved and supportive parents at least at some point in their life. Still a child of teachers from rural Wales will be far less prepared and polished than a child who attended a top private school with teachers and tutors who themselves went through interview process in Oxbridge. So there is an attempt to take this into account (that is really minuscule compared with social inequality in the society that worked against him in the past and will work against him in the future).

@fiveinfulham

Dillyjones72 - Oxbridge are very clear that they don’t give a monkeys about your extra-curricular sports or music (unless you’re applying for music). All they care about is your aptitude and engagement for the academic subject you are applying for. The personal statement should be 100% academic for Oxbridge or other unis a such as LSE. I wouldn’t say “well rounded” is what they’re looking for. Maybe that was the care once, but no more. You need to show you have read and pushed yourself beyond the curriculum. National / international essay competitions are online and easily accessible to all. If students are entering essay competitions from China etc, what’s stopping anyone in a state school here? Unis such as Durham or Bristol like to hear a very little about extra-curricular, but definitely no more than one or two limes and only mention it if it shows skills you can apply to your learning.

Not knowing such competitions existed perhaps? If you don't know such things exist you can't won't know to look for them.

How good your state schooling is depends on your parents knowledge and failing that individual teachers who have a desire to help you. Such teachers tend to only help those who they can see could go far in a particular area even if it isn't their own subject area as it is going above and beyond their day job.

@edwinbear

Where does that leave the third of children who receive some sort of financial assistance with their fees then, through bursaries and/or scholarships? At DC's school, they offer a number of fully funded, sixth form places to local children, where family income is either under £40k p.a. or if they qualify for pupil premium. Should they be 'penalised' for going to private school?

Yes, because if it's about "levelling the playing field" they have still had a better education if that's what this is really about, rather than ppl being jealous of those who can afford to send kids to probate school which is how many posts are coming across

I’ve always been confused about this on MN. Many on the Higher Education boards have the same attitude. Please enlighten me. If you believe that private school will disadvantage your child, then why do you send them there at all, surely you would just send them to a state school where everybody gets a free ride into Oxbridge apparently and save yourselves hundreds of thousands of pounds?

It seems people do believe private schooling still gives some type of advantage or surely they wouldn’t pay to send their child there?

@Endlesscleaning

Only in Britain would people be gloating that unquestionably bright children who have passed highly selective entrance exams (beating contemporaries both from the private and state sectors) should be turned away from seats of learning on the basis their parents paid for their schooling.

This!

@mustlovegin

In what way?

Someone is biased and believe there is not enough diversity in the City, hence they commission a study. One has to be very naïve to believe the study will not be tainted by the original assumption

The conclusions coming out from research should not be taken as gospel for this reason

You really don't understand how research works do you? I mean, sure, anecdotally, someone would have thought "is it my imagination or are all the big wigs in the City from private schools? When do these people start being promoted? Is t that more of them join these organisations in the first place? And then what happens once they do?"

And then they commission research. And the research takes numbers of people who start at an organisation from different backgrounds and then tracks those people's promotions and progress.

And in this case, they found that as a rule, if you come from a private education, you get promoted quicker and faster.

There are also lots of less scientific findings in the study that are indicative and not necessarily 100% true eg comments re those from non private school backgrounds feeling disadvantaged by golf days or whatever. And of course there's all kinds of different interpretations of the data eg that privately educated people have a stronger maths background and therefore more likely to succeed (I made that up as an example). But those are in the interpretation sections.

The facts part is based on statistics around career progression of private school vs career progression of non private school. It's not complex.

@Slowdownandsee

I have children in private school, they had zero tutoring before the entrance exams, they went to state primaries and we didn’t bother with tutors, they all had to sit entrance tests and interview to get in, they thoroughly enjoy their well deserved places and many sports and clubs, they work very hard, we could have spent the money on a bigger house and fancy cars but choose to spend it on our children, that’s allowed…they would likely do just as well in a good state school, that’s where they would be now if they hadn’t passed the entrance tests, that would be fine too, it’s just school, who knows what they will do in future but I know they are happy along the way, my eldest was teased mercilessly in her state sch for being hard working/geeky and wanting to join the few clubs on offer (which were often cancelled anyway who knows why…) we have the means to give her the chance to get away from that, why should they put up with that kind of atmosphere daily….up thread someone mentioned the soft skills like public speaking and debate etc, or museums that stuff is available in spades in my kids schools, but actually they already had experience of those things from us as parents….. where does it end? Should I not encourage my child to read newspapers and join debate clubs because it’s not fair on kids whose parents don’t provide those sorts of things when they are young? And I’m talking about free stuff like talking, reading , Visits to free museums…..

Well done to your kids :) I'm in a similar position and decided that private school is best for my child as it will give her more opportunities to learn. No big houses, no flashy car. I'm not aiming for Oxbridge, just a happy child who is in an environment that promotes learning.

TiredeButDancing absolutely. And that's exactly what Medical Schools are trying to access - EQUALLY clever and committed DC who haven't had the same advantages. This diversity enriches the Medical profession.

‘Not knowing such competitions existed perhaps? If you don't know such things exist you can't won't know to look for them. ‘

The unis themselves suggest essay competitions on their websites. You only have to Google ‘Essay competition - History’ and hey presto. My kids schools never told them this stuff. Not once. As I say, if children from a China or India are finding this stuff - when their first language isn’t even English fgs - what is stopping kids in the U.K? Surely if you’re interested in a uni you Google it and look at courses. There are suggested reading lists and other suggestions all there. No need to wait for the school to tell you to do anything.

‘ Dillyjones72 - Oxbridge are very clear that they don’t give a monkeys about your extra-curricular sports or music (unless you’re applying for music)’

That’s a load of crap.and everyone knows it. The number of old Etonians and other ‘top’ private school kids at Oxbridge are just genuinely academically that much better than a bright A** kid in a state school in a WC part of Belfast or Glasgow?
Only a fool would believe that.

I think you should stop discriminating against private school pupils yourself OP

My children are at one only because the smallest class near us had 32 and they couldn’t cope. Both autistic. They have enough disadvantages through that alone without the likes of you adding to it. There are many many many other children at their schools in the same positions, most of which are the children of state school teachers!

@mustlovegin

It would also be helpful if someone could explain the difference between positive discrimination and contextual offers, as it's not clear

Positive discrimination would be offering some with a protected characteristic a place at a university even though they weren't qualified- like giving a female student a place on an engineering course just because she was female even though she didn't have any qualifications.

Contextual offers are acknowledging that the education system is not equal. It's acknowledging that young people from certain postcodes or schools are not experiencing the same advantages of those students who attend good schools in good areas. Students who are offered a contextual offer still need to meet the conditions of that offer so it's not positive discrimination. It's affirmative or positive action.

A contextual offer could be slightly lower than a standard offer or it could be a guaranteed interview ( all universities deal with this differently) but it's a way of trying to compensate for impact of disadvantage- something we know is an issue.

@wellards

The thing I find interesting is that plenty never admit choosing private for an advantage instead it was the facilities or suits the child. Now it turns out it was the advantage they wanted.

This thread is so confused - the "advantage" being paid for is BETTER education... so it would follow that the child at the end of it will in many cases be better academically, especially with highly motivated parents + many with genes from parents who are clever.

I can see from both sides why people feel hard done by - the child who genuinely is better academically through no fault of their own, loses out to a child who has not performed as well.

Those who are at bad state schools feel hard done by because their whole education has been worse.

Typical British to focus on dragging down private school students instead of focusing on IMPROVING bag state schools!

The disparity was brought home to us when Dd went through the 2020 A level debacle. Under the weird rules set she was awarded a C in chemistry. No one in her school had got above a B in the last 3 years, and she was ranked fourth in the class.

My bosses daughter , not state educated, was awarded an A, as her school could have as many As as they wanted, (90%+ in previous 3 years) despite being ranked second from bottom of her class.

Dd sat the exam in the autumn and got her A, but had to delay uni a year.

@mustlovegin

This is all backed up by data and research

It would be interesting to know who commissions this 'data gathering' and 'research'. Given the state of universities and which lobby groups fund many initiatives nowadays I would take any conclusions coming out of these studies with a pinch of salt TBH

When you apply for a job or even when you are in a job, you often get sent a form asking for information about your background.

The company/organisation can do nothing with this data - one company I worked for admitted this - or after a few years get a researcher in to collate the data and draw up conclusions on their workforce.

With higher education data is collected when you apply for university, when you get accepted, through your course and when you leave. Again the data is then used by different bodies/organisations to write reports.

Often the people who collect the data or enable the data to be collected have absolutely nothing to do with analysing the data and drawing conclusions. (I've been involved in data collection but definitely don't analyse data.)

Typical British to focus on dragging down private school students instead of focusing on IMPROVING bag state schools!

For the record, that wasn't my intent and the vast bulk of people on this thread haven't complained about private school students. There is no doubt that there is privilege involved in attending private school though. And acknowledging that doesn't seem like a bad thing to me rather than complaining about, for example, things like contextual offers or research that considers what factors are at play for career progression.

@purpleneon This thread is so confused - the "advantage" being paid for is BETTER education...

That's not really like that. It is not only better education, but many opportunities and understanding on many issues that are highly valued in society that others don't.

As I said, I do come from poverty and illiterate parents. Education helped me immensely, but it was not enough to compete with the kind of knowledge you are talking about here. I am not resentful. I was lucky in many ways and excelled well beyond expectations academically and in the social 'ladder'.

I also know that I have an understanding of the world many kids from other social background lack. It is true for everybody I guess. Everybody knows something better than others, but only a specific kind of knowledge is highly valued. If you want to acquire that kind of knowledge it is not enough to work and being smart. This is just not true, no matter how much people who have never been on the other side want to believe it.

Inequality is very dangerous. It angers people. It causes envy and resnentment. This is the real reason any government wants to address it to a certain degree.

Dilly - I think you are missing the point.

Oxbridge do not want to hear about extra -curricular unless it’s specifically related to the subject you are applying for. So if you’re applying for Politics and you’ve been in a debating team, or write for a school newspaper, then by all means work that in as it shows aptitude and engagement. But don’t bother mentioning your Grade 8 violin or the fact you’re an elite gymnast or whatever the case may be. This will not help in any shape or form and they are simply not interested. I don’t know what it was like in the 70s, 80s etc. I can only tell you how it is now and I know this for a fact as I have a DD applying.

In the US it’s very different and a total palaver. You have to show ‘roundedness’ - ie, charity work you have done, sporting achievements, all sorts of things around the academic. You almost have to sell yourself as a brand, that’s how it seems to me. Far more hoops to jump though.

But it’s not the case in the U.K. and if you don’t believe me, go on the website for LSE or Cambridge or UCL and see for yourself what they are looking for and how they advise you write a personal statement. You only have 4000 characters. No space for irrelevant waffle.

That's not really like that. It is not only better education, but many opportunities and understanding on many issues that are highly valued in society that others don't.

Absolutely. We shouldn't underestimate the role of cultural and social capital.

@fiveinfulham

‘Not knowing such competitions existed perhaps? If you don't know such things exist you can't won't know to look for them. ‘

The unis themselves suggest essay competitions on their websites. You only have to Google ‘Essay competition - History’ and hey presto. My kids schools never told them this stuff. Not once. As I say, if children from a China or India are finding this stuff - when their first language isn’t even English fgs - what is stopping kids in the U.K? Surely if you’re interested in a uni you Google it and look at courses. There are suggested reading lists and other suggestions all there. No need to wait for the school to tell you to do anything.

As a teen to know to go onto a university website even before you choose your A level options means you have good social capital. The average working class kid in the UK doesn't have that. (Most of them don't even think what degree subjects their GCSE choices have an impact on.)

You seem bent on ignoring to know certain things as a teen relies on your family and/or school. I should add I work and have worked with people from India, China and other countries. They know they are privileged like I am.

@XingMing

The abolition of grammar schools has done more to entrench privilege than almost anything. The political landscape was more diverse when clever people from a range of backgrounds could attain an elite education. But they did have to be clever, which chimes with the statement made in the first 100 posts, that selection at 11 is a better predictor of academic success than most.

That is absolutely NOT the case in Scotland.

The Scottish state school secondary education has been non-selective and totally Comprehensive for the past 50 years.

@fiveinfulham It is quite telling how little you know about other people's circumstances and the lack of curiosity/effort you are making to learn about.

The same way you are really struggling to see other realities, many people cannot see yours. Already talking about people from 'India' and 'China' as you do (shall I remind you you have there almost 50% of the world population; some of them are meant to make it) is telling.

In India, English is not a second language for most kids who 'make it'. The Chinese system of education is excellent and way superior in subjects like maths for lots of kids.

You are comparing the best of the best of half of the world population with disadvantaged kids in the UK. The lack of rigour in your thinking process is in sharp contrast with how much you expect others to do.