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’s all very well as adults talking about the McCarthyist era and generalised statistics, but young people right now are only jumping through the hoops unis set for them. What else can they do? So to hear such contemptuous disdain from an admissions tutor - “I don’t even bother reading it,’ is an utter disgrace.

@moch11

Here it is again, for anyone who missed it last night and particularly, anyone with a child writing their Oxbridge PS right now -

“Was one of the non private school kids at Cambridge. Now an admissions tutor myself.

I am not prejudiced against private schools, but I don’t read the personal statements. Schools that send a lot of students to our university write a slick letter for the student, some poor kid from South London at a school that Gavin Williams thinks needs 3 grades knocking off will not have an oxbridge tutor to polish up their letter.”

Disgusting so glad my DD has decided not to apply to Cambridge. Her wonderful private education, all her many positive qualities and all her potential will be much better spent at another university. Crack on you’re not doing anyone any favours, state or private applicants and if you’re genuine you need to be removed from your post. No surprise then that St Andrews has knocked Oxbridge off the top spot this year - I’m sure this will keep happening if this ridiculous attitude prevails and Oxbridge will become less and less desirable anyway.

@SkinnyMirror

We should probably return to when i went when 15% of the UK went to university only.

And guess which social classes those 15% will come from??

Moving back to an elite system would be going backwards.

When I was a student it was more like 5%. Because there were no financial penalties, it was probably considerably more egalitarian than it is now. I wouldn’t have taken on £50k in debt, nor would most of my working class peers - of whom there were many.

@MsTSwift

Sounds fair enough to me. The outrage is proving the ops point!

The old rules aren’t working any more. Good thing too.

Hear hear.

Private schools should be abolished, and a decent state education provided for all.

Yes, I think it's a much better idea that only privately educated children, with the odd oik from a State school go to university and that the vast majority of children leave school at 14 so that they can clean, make coffee, drive the tubes, work in factories to facilitate this perpetuation of privilege.

What a fabulous idea, especially given the current left-wing dominance of the narratives around HE.

Btw, SkinnyMirror has been researching this area for 20 years. I do think she's worth listening to.

And contextual offers ARE NOT positive discrimination.

You don't think it could possibly be that Admissions Tutors can see a 'my parent/school wrote this' personal statement a mile off and are more interested in the person applying, do you?

@Xenia

I agree!

I disagree with what the poster said, but I prefer open conversation and I don’t like the atmosphere of snitching on people for comments on social media that are part of a free flowing conversation.

When I was a student it was more like 5%. Because there were no financial penalties, it was probably considerably more egalitarian than it is now. I wouldn’t have taken on £50k in debt, nor would most of my working class peers - of whom there were many.

I'm afraid that's not what the data tells us.

Surprisingly, the fee situation doesn't have a huge impact on the decision on whether to go to university or not ( bar a few very specific groups). It does however, have an impact on where people choose to study.

@christinarossetti19

Yes, I think it's a much better idea that only privately educated children, with the odd oik from a State school go to university and that the vast majority of children leave school at 14 so that they can clean, make coffee, drive the tubes, work in factories to facilitate this perpetuation of privilege.

What a fabulous idea, especially given the current left-wing dominance of the narratives around HE.

Btw, SkinnyMirror has been researching this area for 20 years. I do think she's worth listening to.

And contextual offers ARE NOT positive discrimination.

That wasn’t how it was. I went to what’s now a RG university. The majority of students were from state schools and ordinary backgrounds. People who left school after “O” levels were doing the kind of job that now demands a degree. I can’t see how five years additional education at a cost of tens of thousands of £ to do exactly the same job can be regarded as social progress.

I wasn't suggesting leaving school at 14 for other people children! My son drives a van. He passed his driving test at 17. He could have started working for the two employers he had had - royal mail post man and now a food delivery company age 14. The 2 years to CGSE and then 2 years to A level and 4 at university - ie the 8 wasted years could have been spent learning the trade and getting on in his work.

@Mumof4DC

I think Oxbridge is being forced into this by government leavers. It papers over the fact that they don’t want to spend more money on state education or face up to powerful interests. Easier to make Oxbridge complicit. And this cascades through the rest of the universities too.

Meanwhile there are some very well intended left-leaning academics who are true believers in class war and identity politics, who are more than happy to exercise praxis on this.

I have an idea for parents who are concerned about "discrimination" against their privately educated children. If you genuinely feel that they are at a disadvantage because of their schooling, then why not take them out and send them to state schools instead?

Presumably, you don't do this because you're pretty confident that the privileges that you have purchased for your child will continue to far outweigh the effects of contextual offers for the most disadvantaged children in our society. The issue is not that your children are at a disadvantage in comparison to others, but rather that they are not getting the full extent of the privilege to which you evidently believe that they are entitled.

My dd goes to a state comprehensive. She won't benefit from contextual offers because she is not disadvantaged and she doesn't need them. She is on a level playing field with the kids from independent schools and I'm entirely confident of her ability to compete with them. The vast majority of state educated children do not need and will not get any kind of special treatment. This is not just a stick with which to beat the privately educated. It is about doing something to address the enormous disadvantages faced by a minority of children against whom the odds are so heavily stacked from birth. I honestly can't for the life of me understand why anyone would resent those kids being given the tiniest crumb of support in a system which is so overwhelmingly against them. I just don't get it. Your kids, and mine, will be just fine.

“You don't think it could possibly be that Admissions Tutors can see a 'my parent/school wrote this' personal statement a mile off and are more interested in the person applying, do you?”

That may well be the case. They can make their own judgement on that. But to literally not even bother reading personal statements yes or references, purely based in the school they are coming from, is deplorable.

Students do not ask for this system, by the way. In Cambridge’s case, they ask for a second PS in the form of the SAQ. So how contemptuous to get kids doing this and then sneer on social media that their efforts will not even be read. If the system is failing, it’s up to the likes of Cambridge to change it. Not insult applicants for doing what they’re been asked to do.

And by the way, any child can have a teacher or lecturer as a parent, or a neighbour / friend who can help with the PS. This whole thing is beyond ridiculous.

So there are thousands of young people right now, writing their PS and all that malarkey - only to hear they are not even going to be read?

It's always varied hugely between university and course. Some universities/course teams absolutely do read personal whereas others don't and offers /admissions are dealt with centrally.

If they aren't read at the initial application stage thru can come into play if an applicant is borderline or in clearing.

[quote Empressofthemundane]@Mumof4DC

I think Oxbridge is being forced into this by government leavers. It papers over the fact that they don’t want to spend more money on state education or face up to powerful interests. Easier to make Oxbridge complicit. And this cascades through the rest of the universities too.

Meanwhile there are some very well intended left-leaning academics who are true believers in class war and identity politics, who are more than happy to exercise praxis on this.[/quote]
How long have you worked in the higher education sector?

@moch11

Here it is again, for anyone who missed it last night and particularly, anyone with a child writing their Oxbridge PS right now -

“Was one of the non private school kids at Cambridge. Now an admissions tutor myself.

I am not prejudiced against private schools, but I don’t read the personal statements. Schools that send a lot of students to our university write a slick letter for the student, some poor kid from South London at a school that Gavin Williams thinks needs 3 grades knocking off will not have an oxbridge tutor to polish up their letter.”

The poster said she attended Cambridge and is an adissions tutor - she doesn't say she's a Cambridge admissions tutor. Think some posters are misreading this.
Incidentally, I have heard from a friend who's an academic (not Oxbridge!) that they use software to "read" personal statements and only advance applications containing certain key words (e.g the name of the subject!)

I used to work in a university. I was quite shocked to find that they didn't read personal statements, but apparently this is common across much of the sector.

Cambridge interviews a lot of candidates so actually has a more thorough admissions process than most.

@AlexaShutUp absolutely spot on.

For universities such as LSE, the PS is very important and is the deciding factor, as they don’t interview and all applicants will obviously have the grades. Same with UCL.

If tutors at Cambridge think it’s fine to brag about being openly biased according to their own agendas, this is a problem for everyone. Obviously.

@SkinnyMirror

How long have you worked in the higher education sector?

So, the only prop fit to have an opinion on the higher education sector are…the higher education sector.

The rest of us are paying for it and we aren’t stupid.

Which jobs were these @Blossomtoes? I cant think of many that accepted you straight after o levels that now require a degree.

whoop - you are right, it doesn’t specifically say they are an admissions tutor at Cambridge specifically (though does give that impression). Thankyou for pointing that out.

I wonder if, when this poster submitted their application for this post of admissions tutor, the panel took one look at it and said, “ Oh look, a privileged toff from Cambridge. They will have had help won’t they. Don’t read that, Chuck it in the bin.”

Because that would be illegal wouldn’t it?

[quote Empressofthemundane]@SkinnyMirror

How long have you worked in the higher education sector?

So, the only prop fit to have an opinion on the higher education sector are…the higher education sector.

The rest of us are paying for it and we aren’t stupid.[/quote]
Just because you are ' paying' for a university education doesn't mean you are an expert on how universities function.

Having an opinion is fine but passing these off as fact is unhelpful for everyone.

@Porcupineintherough

Which jobs were these *@Blossomtoes*? I cant think of many that accepted you straight after o levels that now require a degree.

Just about every job you can think of. How many supermarket managers do you think had degrees 40 years ago? People worked their way up to those jobs.

Common sense tells you that if 50% of the population are now graduates when it was 5%, a huge number of graduates are going to be doing what used to be non graduate jobs.

Just because you are ' paying' for a university education doesn't mean you are an expert on how universities function.

Conversely, it doesn’t mean I don’t either. Explain how this isn’t the case.

Having an opinion is fine but passing these off as fact is unhelpful for everyone.

I feel this is what you are doing. With an additional dollop of trust me, and no need to explain yourself and some professional arrogance.