to think many parents who send their children to the lower quality independent schools are so pretentious it is cringeworthy?

[Barrelofloves]

Is it due to insecurity? Because I have found the seriously loaded/titled folk are not like that at all.

If you have a regional accent you can still be quite clever, phew that's good to know.

Russell Group uni's should take the brightest kids from state over the independent school leavers as they have got there despite not having the priviledge of private school which is obviously better. Also the parents who can afford to pay private school fees should be paying the same hefty amount for another 4 years to subsidies the clever kids from poorer backgrounds. That all sound fair to me.

Well I'm glad I did all my recruiting in the public sector, against agreed job requirements. I've never looked at where someone went to school or what university they attended except out of curiosity really, and never as a factor in shortlisting. I look at can they do the job on the basis of experience and qualification. Sometimes a degree is one of those qualifications, but as usually I'd be looking at 10-15 specified requirements it's a pretty minor one. Terribly written CVs are not unusual I agree, and I have been amazed at some of the poor quality people submit, but I've not noticed any connection to the particular university they attended. I think that is just snobbism to be honest.

But I've ever recruited direct from university, and experience is usually my number one essential characteristic when it comes to shortlisting. Given that in the public sector sacking people is a nightmare, I was also very careful wen recruiting.

I did interview once with someone who felt that the most important characteristic was whether someone had suitable shiny shoes. Prejudice comes in many forms.

If he can't afford to carry any baggage then he probably should think about it quite deeply.

I do get the good degrees, get the good university up to a point, and possibly the good A levels, perhaps. But the 'good school' bit on top of all the other things? Nah.

Thanks for answering my question Xenia . DH and I started out thinking smart as you put it. I am a teacher and DD does indeed have music genes/plays 2 instruments. We could probably just about afford it (2 other DC to factor in). However, we have decided to opt out of the educational arms race and avail of the highly regarded state schools in our area. We are even close enough to some excellent grammars but I am not even sure if we'll go down that route.

What in your opinion is the biggest draw back of a good state school education?

I haven't given my A or O level results for years. Whether I worked hard or not in my teens isn't terribly relevant as to whether I will work hard now. Recruitment wise I'd only look at GCSE results if I was recruiting someone very junior. But then I've also only done recruitment as a planned activity, and looking through a whole bunch of applications (easier than CVs as you can specify exactly how you want information presented and therefore winnow much more quickly) in an afternoon with fellow shortlisters I can usually throw out all the duff ones at speed on the grounds of doesn't fulfill minimum requirements. Quicker than thinking about what sort of educational institution they attended, and whether that met my personal standards.

I went to one of the leading universities worldwide for the course that I chose, but it's not in any UK good group as far as I am aware (always ranking highly with students, but that's another matter). It has some world leading schools, and others that are fairly rubbish. I wouldn't expect the average business recruiter to have knowledge at that level of detail, so my point is that by limiting what you even look at the risk is that you may miss the person who would bring the best skills to your company.

Your school isn't part of your qualifications. And you might argue that good school, good A levels, good university, good degree is a somewhat easier route than poor school, good A levels, good university, good degree. Takes more to achieve the latter I reckon. He might be missing out.

Totally agree with Nooka about school results.

All that time vetting to the nth degree, because he can't afford passengers or whatever, but not thinking too deeply about the vetting process itself, because it's good enough. Still, his choice of course.

We (fairly) recently decided to give a job to someone from an ordinary university with an ordinary sort of degree over someone with a first class degree from Cambridge. The guy from Cambridge was very arrogant, and gave a presentation full of twaddle. The other person had thought about the job more, and their presentation actually matched what we were looking for. Of course the Cambridge guy had been working for a consultancy, so it's possible that the arrogance/irrelevance was sources from that experience.

I read/heard (can't remember it was a while back) an interesting insight from a CEO in the States saying that he'd rather recruit on aptitude and attitude than on skills/experience/background because you can train people in the right skills if they have the aptitude, but attitudes are much harder to change and much more likely to cause concern. This was in the context of working with "difficult" doctors though, so maybe not translatable outside that world.

So you'd have though he'd have thought about the school thing in this instance then... Nah - I'm just nit-picking now. Sweeping generalisations get me all riled

The IT guy. His baby. Had to be the best. So had to be from a 'good' school. But then you say he doesn't have time to think about the school thing too deeply.

However, that is clearly what I am doing...and I shall stop

No. I know that. I'm saying that I don't think his reasoning was correct re schools. And you said he probably didn't think about it that deeply.

Anyway - it works for him.

Oh I don't think anyone actually does it. But it was an interesting observation, especially given that the discussion was about medical staff, where training and skills are generally rated as being way way (way) more important than any personal skills (and take years if not decades to acquire). But there probably are a disproportionate number of doctors with serious personality issues, given the way that senior doctors (especially from the more prestigious branches - surgeons and the like) used to run their firms, where once you were at the top of the heap you could essentially do what you like without challenge. And of course dysfunctional individuals with the power of life and death are a big problem to manage.

I know the OP is being flamed but I kind of agree, I sometimes find there seems to be no middle ground between

aspiring middle classes and their general ittitatingness, the bugaboo-organic everything-over protective-wooden floorboards-boden stylee

shameless stylee rubbish-in-garden-pitbull-ten kids by different fathers

maybe thats my area of London, and I do live in a nice "normal" area now, but some of the middle class parents are so...I cant explain it but even being from middle class parents myself I would NOT want to hang out with them

await flaming!

Having had experience of both state and private schools, I have met proportionately just as many (if not more) pretentious people in the state sector.

I get more than a bit fed up with the Mumsnet attitude that choosing to pay for schooling makes you a small-minded snob who only wants to mix with white families who have three Range Rovers and a spare car for the live-in housekeeper. It's pathetic.