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.

[quote elbea]@AlexaShutUp The use of farmers as an example of the illiterate is ridiculous. It’s not the 1800s any more, every single farmer I work for (as a farm agent) has a degree, farming has come on since the horse pulled plough.[/quote]
If you had read my post properly, I was responding specifically to @Kiko18's point about poor families in Asia. Sadly, illiteracy is still a significant problem for many farmers in some parts of the world - including my own sisters in law. And it is massively over simplifying things to say that hard work will enable people to escape the poverty trap, and frankly really fucking insulting to the millions of people around the world who work incredibly hard and still have nothing.

I guess the complete lack of understanding and awareness of the barriers faced by some children is just a reflection of the privileged lives that some people enjoy.

It will always be a blunt instrument. My son knew someone at Bristol Uliving in a £3m house (I know because I had to take something round to the house near us) !!!!! They had a contextualised offer due to their state school.

Someone asked surely people who pay fees do so because they think it is better. Yes I agree - I paid fees happily for 5 children from age 3 - 18 and indeed through to age 22 as I also funded university and post grad without their having student loans. So I have been paying for 35 years without a break and it's fine. The reason will be as different as anyone else and none of my 5 tried Oxbridge as it is hard to get in and even at the most academic grammars and private schools only a quarter would get in and mine did not think they would have a chance so did not try. I was certainly not paying fees for an Oxbridge place.

Eg we are very keen on classical and church music so our then primary aged children singing latin aged 7 in concerts at school was a priority - not something most parents want so for each parent it will be some particular reason that matters to them.

When I read threads like this I realise that so many people just don't understand the how much deprivation and disadvantage there is in the UK.

To suggest that all young people have the means and ability to access a wide range of activities suggests you really don't understand the issues at play.

I've worked with schools where over 50 languages were spoken and many children could barely speak English. Teachers were spending all their time managing behaviour rather than teaching. Trying to engage with parents was challenging because they either didn't speak English, didn't value education or had had a negative experience of school themselves so we're scared to engage and speak to staff. Many of the children lived in chaotic households with nowhere to study and were pressured to go out and earn money.

To suggest that young people attending those schools can just hop on to university websites and complete international essay competitions or fill their time with extra curricular activities is just ludicrous.

I think if I were to send a bright child to a good, supportive, academic private school, I would expect them to achieve the best grades they were capable of achieving (barring disaster). I would also expect they'd gain a lot from a broader education that was not purely exam-focused, from being educated in an academically selective environment and from extra-curriculars.

If a very selective state school, I'd expect the same, academically.

Sending the same child to a very good, mixed ability state school, populated by enough bright, well-supported children to create a culture of achievement amongst that sub-group at least, I would hope they would achieve the same exam results and, if boosted by a bit of tactical tuition, might feel able to expect that.

Sending them to a less good, or very mixed ability state school, I would not feel able to expect that, even with tuition. The mixed quality of teaching, disruption to classes from teacher turnover, disruptive pupils, teachers having to focus desperately on securing passes for middle-range students, so not having time to focus on stretching the most able, or even to cover the whole syllabus in many cases... all of that would add up to a near impossibility of the best students achieving their potential, unless they adopted a completely independent, self-motivated approach to learning and/or were tutored to the extent that the parents were effectively running a parallel school and might as well home-educate or go private.

Picking up on the potential and motivation of that latter set of students is what I think contextual offers are and should be about.

The first two, even possibly three sets of bright children don't need to be as motivated as the fourth set, to achieve very good grades, because they're so well taught, supported and organised (partly by others). Strong motivation and self-organisation might boost them from very good to excellent. For the fourth set though, gaining good to very good grades is a feat demonstrating a degree of self-motivation the others have never been required, maybe even had the opportunity, to demonstrate.

So it seems to me that contextual offers are only about plucking the most capable and motivated students from the most difficult contexts. It doesn't capture the very capable but less self-motivated (who would do well in a selective, supportive school), or those actually defeated by their circumstances, who will already have fallen by the wayside. It's a very partial fix.

Real equality would look something much more like intervening to support and better educate all capable children (and all children), so that they can all achieve their potential, thus compete on an even playing field, when it comes to university entrance. That though, is a different discussion.

@fiveinfulham
Agree Oxbridge has worked hard to change but in the past - pre 2000s - there was a lot of emphasis placed on things like whether tutors thought you were ‘the right type of student for their college’, tutors often had links with specific private schools always taking pupils from them year in, year out. And often the interviews themselves were downright weird asking questions which many would have been completely unprepared for (in addition to having no comprehension of a student maybe needing to do paid work in their spare time as opposed to ‘improving hobbies’ to support their family etc.). That coupled with the fact that many private school students applied to do subjects such as classics, often not taught in state schools, or were advised to apply to do subjects such as Theology which have lower numbers of applicants than say Medicine or Law also increased the proportion of private school students. Top universities have clearly worked hard to erase a lot of this, as you are now seeing, but parents who’ve maybe been through the application procedure themselves in the past are understandably sceptical. I think it takes a while for the acceptance that changes have been made to filter through to wider society.

SkinnyMirror yes indeed. It's not so much the day-to-day blindness to the reality of deprivation and disadvantage that I don't understand, but the refusal to accept your experiences and perspectives aren't the only ones in the world.

The inequalities, deprivation and disadvantage even within the UK are appalling, all the more so for the fact that they could be much reduced if there was any sort of political will to do so.

My children's primary was very like the one you describe. A girl in my dd's class was exceptionally talented at art - like genuinely, mind-blowingly astounding. She was from a Roma family and seemed to move between various relatives homes, so I'm not sure how much opportunity she had to be accessing 'enter such and such international art competition' or access to materials.

She was taken out of school at 12, sent to Romania and gave birth to twins at 13.

That's what disadvantage is, not possibly having a slightly lower chance of your superb private education getting you into a top notch university.

Positive discrimination would be offering some with a protected characteristic a place at a university even though they weren't qualified

A contextual offer could be slightly lower than a standard offer

These two statements seem to be saying something similar then, if contextual offers can be slightly lower than a standard offer.

It's just a question of magnitude then, but it's still discriminating against one of the applicants?

@mustlovegin

Positive discrimination would be offering some with a protected characteristic a place at a university even though they weren't qualified

A contextual offer could be slightly lower than a standard offer

These two statements seem to be saying something similar then, if contextual offers can be slightly lower than a standard offer.

It's just a question of magnitude then, but it's still discriminating against one of the applicants?

It's not saying the same thing at all!

Those being offered a contextual offer still need to meet the minimum requirements to get on to that course.
They are not being given a free pass. It's about acknowledging inequality and disadvantage.

Nobody is being discriminated against. If you attend a private/top performing school and perform well then you'll still get a place at a good university. It just means that high performing young people from disadvantaged backgrounds may also have a chance of a place at a top university too.

It is a good thing and it baffles me that people can't see that.

@Dillyjones72

‘ 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.

Wow! Yeah, very genuinely, in Oxbridge we don’t care at all about extracurriculars (in fact it sometimes makes us chuckle to read the list of completely irrelevant extracurriculars that only convey the social standing of a certain applicant.) But Eton does prepare much much better than your usual comprehensive. They look at things outside from school curriculum, like problem solving for example (for sciences), or ability to convey your point (philosophy, history), critical thinking…They coach kids to perform at exams. And they teach kids how to behave at an interview. We have had kids from comprehensives who barely open their mouth at an interview, barely interact with us. It is a no-go no matter how we wanted to to give them a fair chance. Kids from Eton talk-talk and talk some more. Very often they talk nonsense, and then it is no use - but to stand any chance you have first of all to interact and many people need to be coached to do it…

That's what disadvantage is, not possibly having a slightly lower chance of your superb private education getting you into a top notch university.

100%

I've worked with schools where over 50 languages were spoken and many children could barely speak English

Why is the UK in this situation then? What is the root cause of this issue?

@HarrietsChariot

It's one of those situations where trying to "level the playing field" makes things unfair. Like usual, there's a straightforward and fair solution - give the university offers and places to the students who get the best results, regardless of whether they were at a private or state school.

I faced this discrimination myself as it happens, when I was applying to six universities for offers I got five fair offers back and a rejection. The rejection was from the uni that I'd been warned not to bother with because they didn't like taking people from my type of school. (Won't say the university's name but I think the town it was in used to be called Snottingham.)

My belief has always been "equality through equality" - you don't get equality through discrimination.

"Like usual, there's a straightforward and fair solution - give the university offers and places to the students who get the best results, regardless of whether they were at a private or state school."
Totally agree with this. Shouldn't the selection be based totally and blindly on grades? Universities shouldn't even know which school you attended! And what about children who go to private schools on bursaries? It's become a political game and reverse discrimination.

* I do have an issue with highly privileged people being outraged if their privilege starts to wane.*

But op
They’re not complaining their privilege is waning
They’re complaining their child is being disadvantaged due to their privilege

That is very very different
And indeed they are justified in complaining

If they were “complaint about their privilege waning”

They’d be saying

“Boo boo my privately educated child isn’t being prioritised over state educated children”

You see the difference?

camaleon - where I come from (a very rural community in another country), its a whole other level of disparity. Often kids wouldn’t go to school because their help was needed at home (particularly girls). On the other hand, my husband arrived here aged 4 with his family as a refugee. His father had been given 24 hours to get out the country or he would be shot. My husband had a disability which meant he spent about a third of the time out of school until he was about ten. His father had a mental breakdown and was in hospital for years. All the wider family were dispersed throughout whatever countries would take them, mainly Canada and the US. His English was poor and society was more racist in those days.

He says that the greatest privilege of his life was that he had a chance (albeit disrupted) in the U.K. state system. He didn’t get all his GCSEs the first time. He retook them. His A-levels were mediocre. He got into a uni (although he almost didn’t go). That was where something clicked. He got a first and later a Masters. He somehow talked his way into a job in the options trading floor of a Swiss Bank. He learned on his feet with them all shouting abuse at him 5.30am till 9pm. He survived, made money to invest, and then after a few years, left to start up his own companies. Over the last twenty years he has created thousands of UK jobs - from entry level to directorships. So today, our children have and are going through independent schools, yes. It’s mainly a function of where we live in this part of London and the dearth of state options. If we lived outside London they may well have gone to a comprehensive or grammar if those had been available options. But they were not. You make decisions in the context of where you live. Yes, their schools are a world away from the education I had, I can assure you of that. But I also know that the situation is really never as simple as some people seem to make out.

Shouldn't the selection be based totally and blindly on grades? Universities shouldn't even know which school you attended! And what about children who go to private schools on bursaries? It's become a political game and reverse discrimination.

^This. And it may ultimately devalue degrees from those universities also

@mustlovegin

I've worked with schools where over 50 languages were spoken and many children could barely speak English

Why is the UK in this situation then? What is the root cause of this issue?

There are parts of the uk where nearly all schools are like this. They are areas which are high numbers of immigrants whose children enter a woefully underfunded education system.
They children often have parents who don't speak English and therefore can't engage with the education system themselves - I've had meetings with parents and the child is translating.
Added to this is the fact that these areas often have high levels of deprivation.

And this is just one issue. When you start working with schools that are in areas which have seen a decline or obliteration of industry ( ex mining towns for example) then you encounter a load of other issues. Attitudes towards higher education and student loans can vary significantly.

These young people are really trying to succeed against unfavourable odds.

I've worked with schools where over 50 languages were spoken and many children could barely speak English

We allow inequality to develop in this country through inadequate policies and then we are forced to have to 'address the inequality' at a later stage. This shouldn't be happening in the first place

They are areas which are high numbers of immigrants whose children enter a woefully underfunded education system

What are the solutions to these issues then?

@mustlovegin

I've worked with schools where over 50 languages were spoken and many children could barely speak English

We allow inequality to develop in this country through inadequate policies and then we are forced to have to 'address the inequality' at a later stage. This shouldn't be happening in the first place

How are “we” allowing inequality in this scenario for the fact that if a child only speaks their own language and not English it is because they have recently moved here from having been born and raised in their home country and never learned English… there!!

@fiveinfulham It is a fascinating story; thanks for sharing it.
As it demonstrates however, the obstacles your husband met were totally different from those your kids had to face to be applying to Oxford. It does not mean your father worked less or was less bright or did not do the right things when he was at school.

I have seen similar things in my own life; for whatever reason I was exceptionally gifted academically but nobody could support it. I still made lots of incredible things (whith luck and help). I did not acquire (like your husband) the necessary skills to really make it until I was an adult because there was not enough support for me despite a very loving stable family.

My brother was average academically; like everyone else in my family the struggle continues for him. It is very naive to think context does not discriminate some children. I do not blame the schools. But kids in private schools are very far from being discriminated against in University entry

Shouldn't the selection be based totally and blindly on grades? Universities shouldn't even know which school you attended! And what about children who go to private schools on bursaries? It's become a political game and reverse discrimination

For those who can't read it is not discrimination

Blind applications at this stage would not make the system any better. We would just see private/top schools dominating even more.

Children who are attending private schools in bursaries are benefitting from that private school education! That's the point.
Contextual admissions are there for those who don't have those advantages.

I meant your husband, not 'your father worked less'

@mustlovegin

They are areas which are high numbers of immigrants whose children enter a woefully underfunded education system

What are the solutions to these issues then?

A better funded education system, more support staff in schools do teachers can teach, Careers education from primary school and widening participation/social mobility policies such as contextual admissions!!

mustlovegin You're trying to broaden this so far that it turns into a different discussion entirely. You might be better off starting your own thread about immigration, taxation and education policies.