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.

It is simply defining what high achievement looks like within the context in which it was achieved.

The end result of this process at least sometimes however is to expect less academically from some sections of society.

My personal view is that expecting less academically for access to another academic course isn't actually a positive thing for anyone, including the person with lower academic achievements.

Creating opportunities for summer schools, school visits to certain universities, outreach help with applications all seem potentially sensible.

I'm certainly not against widening access but it shouldn't require a lower academic achievement.
There are enough challenges in being part of the socially disadvantaged cohort in a good university course which mainly draws from the private and public schools without adding lower academic achievement to it.

The end result of this process at least sometimes however is to expect less academically from some sections of society

My personal view is that expecting less academically for access to another academic course isn't actually a positive thing for anyone, including the person with lower academic achievements.

You are missing the point completely

Creating opportunities for summer schools, school visits to certain universities, outreach help with applications all seem potentially sensible.

These exist and have done for years and years. They aren't enough.

I'm certainly not against widening access but it shouldn't require a lower academic achievement.

It's a good job it doesn't mean that then!!

There are enough challenges in being part of the socially disadvantaged cohort in a good university course which mainly draws from the private and public schools without adding lower academic achievement to it.

That's not what is happening.

@EatYourVegetables

It’s exactly the same argument as “white males are being discriminated for XYZ”.

Biggest group by numbers and statistics are white working class males.

Where’s the outcry.

It’s not as simple as universities are favouring state school kids over privately educated. They will look in to the performance of the school, if the kid is from a low HE participation neighbourhood, whether they are care-experienced, if they have a disability/SEN, whether they are young carers. But God forbid we encourage these groups to progress to HE eh

I'm not missing the point I'm just not agreeing with everyone else.

The more I think about this the more I think it has been dreamed up by middle class folk who are trying to be well meaning and helpful.

Having been through the experience it was designed to promote my personal take is that it wouldn't have been helpful in fact it would have been the opposite.

Others are welcome to say that their experience is that it was helpful for them, the disadvantaged poor aren't a uniform blob but for me knowing I was on the same academic footing as everyone else was important.
I wouldn't be looking to remove that security for others in my situation.

Generally I would agree but don't think all kids at private schools are wealthy and have lots of parental involvement. My sons school has a high number of kids on bursaries and scholarships as they want to give those bright kids a chance. It would be unfair penalise them for being given the opportunity. Also my son has an ASD and is in the school due to the dire local schools and pastoral support. Of course he benefits from all the things private schools offer but we made the financial sacrifice to put him there for his own good and he still struggles. It's not all black and white

YANBU

Sounds like a really difficult situation to be in where entitled people think that they should get first dibs because they have money.

OP, I live in Scotland and the opportunities are available to everyone who lives in Scotland. You are right to remove yourself from elitist thinking. Money really does not buy an education. Look at the current incumbent of PM for an example.

@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

@spicedappledonuts

I'm not missing the point I'm just not agreeing with everyone else.

The more I think about this the more I think it has been dreamed up by middle class folk who are trying to be well meaning and helpful.

Having been through the experience it was designed to promote my personal take is that it wouldn't have been helpful in fact it would have been the opposite.

Others are welcome to say that their experience is that it was helpful for them, the disadvantaged poor aren't a uniform blob but for me knowing I was on the same academic footing as everyone else was important.
I wouldn't be looking to remove that security for others in my situation.

I've worked in widening participation for 20 years and have been involved in contextual admissions and have researched the area extensively.

I can assure you that if you think it's about lowering achievement then you are spectacularly missing the point.

(BTW.... I'm a first generation student, the only person in my family to have gone to university and someone who attended a low ranked university because I wasn't supported or aware of any other options)

I can assure you that if you think it's about lowering achievement then you are spectacularly missing the point

Okay, maybe I have misunderstood, I thought some people were suggesting that kids with certain backgrounds/schools shouldn't be asked for the same level of entrance qualifications as others.

That was what I was highlighting could actually be damaging for these kids.

If everyone has to reach to same academic standards to be considered for a place then I don't think any grouping should automatically be disadvantaged including lower socio economic groups, dc with SEN etc.

I’m scottish, didn’t know about grammer school and exams, and that we had to fill a form out. The form didn’t arrive back from school, nor a booklet, gifted academically child didn’t sit grammer said exam.

When we started digging about how it worked, the form return date had passed. So not eligibility and no flexibility for it.

One academically gifted child not permitted to try and attend a grammer.

What was i to do…. Send her to the local gladiator school where it’s regular stabbings and sexual assaults, or go without holidays and nice to haves for 6 years, so we could get her into a local private school. Was a no brainer, but 100k later, it has quite literally broke the bank for us.

Clearly lot of fault to go around.

But doesn’t seem fair to accept discrimination at any point in the system, when not all kids in private school are priviledged. Private school isn’t an indicator of wealth im afraid, just a choice by those lucky enough to be in a position where we have been able to make a choice between holidays, restaurants, breaks, a second car, slower trains, and a longer working life, vs one child’s decent education. I know many don’t have that choice.

One final thing to add, a degree isn’t what it used to be, and sadly neither are apprenticeships. Some degrees and apprenticeships are brilliant, but you can count them on two hands. They have just been successfully watered down to open them up to everyone and as a result devalued the brand.

I lost my full comment but OP poster on sitting on a zoom call in a leafy suburb of London is so discriminating, if was the other way round would be hounded.

Feels like double standards!

@TiredButDancing

The educational disadvantage starts early, fixing it at university entrance punishes the wrong people.

Definitely this. Due to his sensory processing disorder (for which DS received no formal government/nhs support as it's not covered) he is extremely behind academically. We are paying for him to have private occupational therapy and tutoring in an attempt to help him catch up. Other, similar children, will not have this option.

And then, while discussing issues with his tutor I made a comment about DD being very different and that as we live in an area with lots of grammar schools it might be that she will attend one of them, the tutor pointed out to me that most children can't pass the grammar school entrance exams without tutoring because of the way they're taught at state schools. So if we do want to go that route, we will have to do at least SOME tutoring for her. Which means she will immediately be ahead of someone who might well be far cleverer, but without the parental means to help with a grammar school preparation.

I moved to a grammar school area, knew nothing about the system. Woman I worked with was horrified that my DD wasn't having tutoring and after much nagging she persuaded me to have DD assessed by the tutor she used.

DD spent an hour with the tutor and tutor said, "don't waste your money, she'll do fine." and she did.

@spicedappledonuts one of the things you haven't considered is due to the number of students who want a place on a course, university departments with over subscribed courses have put their standard offer grades up over time.

It however doesn't mean students who get lower grades if they fulfil the other criteria for acceptance can't do very well on the course.

I know people who have got firsts in their degrees who were accepted on lower grades than standard offer grades.

They were either given a lower offer in the first place, they missed their grades by a few points and were accepted, or they got on the course through clearing with a few points lower. Some of these students went to state schools including selective ones, while others were privately educated.

It sounds like a classic case of equality feeling like oppression when someone previously had privilege.

It seems to be so difficult for some to grasp that contextual offers aren't about lowering the bar. It is simply defining what high achievement looks like within the context in which it was achieved. We are hardly talking about huge adjustments here. Let's keep perspective please

I agree with both of these. My D1 is at Oxford - she got 9s at GCSE and A*s at A level - they didn't lower the offer because she was at a state school. And although widening participation etc has led to an increase in the % of state ed children getting into Oxford, it is still only up to to 60-odd %.

Where I went to uni at the time 40% of places were filled by privately educated students. I was not one of them. They were hugely overrepresented in the student population and it was, in my opinion, the cause of some pretty unhealthy cultures (such as exclusive clubs with far too much influence, or sexually abusive "hazing" rituals for certain societies and subjects).

There is no discrimination in contextual offers, they are specifically designed to reduce the "paid for" advantage those from private schools have had so that to really is a more even playing field. This is why those middle class parents who have stretched to pay for private school are so pissed off, because they are trying to buy that advantage for their children. They'll get no sympathy from me.

I just hope that one day private schools will no longer be able to claim they are charities. It has always been bullshit that schools that entrench inequality can claim they are doing good.

I’m afraid if privately educated kids don’t get into UK unis, parents will be fighting for an overseas place…. British unis will then be undersubscribed and underfunded and Dchildren will soon be taken back.

I hate to say it but life is unfair. corporates will want the most able and if that means the applicant is privately educated they will care far less than unis! They may have some quotas for social mobility but at the end of the day their focus is on profitability.

Okay, maybe I have misunderstood, I thought some people were suggesting that kids with certain backgrounds/schools shouldn't be asked for the same level of entrance qualifications as others.

Contextual admissions can take various forms. It can be a lower offer but that is only likely to be one grade. It can be a guaranteed interview if you meet the entry requirements and it can even be the option to participate in a summer school or complete some additional work which attracts additional ucas points.

The point is that universities are looking at the whole picture and acknowledging that some people are applying with less educational advantage.

If everyone has to reach to same academic standards to be considered for a place then I don't think any grouping should automatically be disadvantaged including lower socio economic groups, dc with SEN etc.

But the lint is that some people are disadvantaged and that's what contextual admissions are trying to address. Applicants still have to reach high academic standards.

@Lifeisaminestrone

I lost my full comment but OP poster on sitting on a zoom call in a leafy suburb of London is so discriminating, if was the other way round would be hounded.

Feels like double standards!

If he's lives a leafy London suburb he likely lives near very good and outstanding state schools.

Data shows that in London, particularly some of the leafy suburbs, lots of young people go to elite universities regardless of the type of school they attend.

So the OP is right to point out where he lives and the fact he expects more privilege from sending his kid to a private school, when his kid is already privileged by their geographical location and him being their parent.

[quote Porcupineintherough]@HarrietsChariot that doesnt sound fair at all, it sounds like entrenching privelige. The education children receive is in no way equal, neither are their circumstances, so why should only grades count?[/quote]
What about two state school kids, one of whom was from a family who supported their education from an early age, the other wasn't so lucky. How are you going to even out that playing field? It's not possible to ensure every child has exactly the same educational support and opportunities.

@Lifeisaminestrone

I’m afraid if privately educated kids don’t get into UK unis, parents will be fighting for an overseas place…. British unis will then be undersubscribed and underfunded and Dchildren will soon be taken back.

I hate to say it but life is unfair. corporates will want the most able and if that means the applicant is privately educated they will care far less than unis! They may have some quotas for social mobility but at the end of the day their focus is on profitability.

Universities are judged on social mobility. Social mobility metrics form part of university league tables.

Universities also have to produce an access and participation plan to be able to charge 9k fees. These are monitored by the Office for Students.

@Lifeisaminestrone

I’m afraid if privately educated kids don’t get into UK unis, parents will be fighting for an overseas place…. British unis will then be undersubscribed and underfunded and Dchildren will soon be taken back.

I hate to say it but life is unfair. corporates will want the most able and if that means the applicant is privately educated they will care far less than unis! They may have some quotas for social mobility but at the end of the day their focus is on profitability.

What makes you think that universities will be undersubscribed and underfunded if they reduce private school intake and replace that with an increase is state school intake.

As for private corporations, they will do what they will do. Some a focused on improving diversity in their workforce, other pay lip service. They are not a model for how we should educate our children and young people and have no bearing on that. University is not about getting a well paid job to the exclusion of all else.

I’m afraid if privately educated kids don’t get into UK unis, parents will be fighting for an overseas place…. British unis will then be undersubscribed and underfunded and Dchildren will soon be taken back.

Coming back to this point. Widening participation and contextual admissions have been around for quite a while and this still hasn't happened.
It's less likely to happen now there are no student number controls.

Privately educated applicants are still getting into top universities and will continue to do so. It just might mean that a higher number of high achieving state school students also attend these universities which is a good thing!

I am so sick of being vilified by people who don’t pay for private education. I do and I don’t feel guilty about it.

1. I had no intention of sending my children to an independent school until I visited the local school and it was appalling. I wouldn’t have spent a single day there and made a choice to make huge sacrifices to send my children elsewhere.
2. I am not rich by anyone’s measure. I have to scrape by every month for the “privilege” of paying for an education that I have already paid the state for in taxes but given they have used the money badly, I pay it twice. I’m not burdening the state to pay for their education and yet somehow I’m the bad guy? Pfft.
3. No parent at an independent school will care if a child with equal grades from a state school gets a place over their child at university. We all know that’s a good thing. But when child A from state school with lower grades gets a place at university over child B with higher grades from an independent school, it is discrimination. There’s no other way to dress it up. And child B is discriminated against because of a decision made by their parents… not the child. And you’ll never convince me that’s fair.

So you want equality??? Get the government to make state schools good enough so we don’t have to go elsewhere. Raise the standard of state schools. Stop accepting a sub standard education and then expecting the universities to compensate for it.

The contextualisation varies from pl;ace to place. Bristol where 3 of my children went has about 2 grades lower if you went to one of the 40% worst schools in the UK. That is obviously a very very broad church. They look at the area too I think. My area is counted lower because people are mostly BAME in this area and not white, whereas my parents' area NE7 is deprived but mostly white so you don't get a BAME point but have the low income deprivation point.

We just have to be careful that we don't make children who don't choose their school not find life is very unfair - worked really hard and someone who didn't work hard at all but was "lucky" enough to have parents who chose a sink school gets a place the hard worker with higher grades is excluded from.

We have not gone so far yet that employers find the 70% of Oxbridge which went to state schools (not sure what % becomes if you add state grammars) are so contextualised and behind that graduates from say Durham are better and thus start preferring Durham for example. The market always decides as we are lucky enough to live in a relatively free country, so when the system ceases to work employers will continue to hire the best whether that be from Sunderland ex poly or Durham or Oxford.