All this stuff about private school kids being overrepresented in universities..

[fivecandles]

out of interest does anyone know whether if a child goes to a private school up to age 16 but then a sixth form college or FE college to do A Levels the student would count as private school or state school in the stats? And how would university admissions tutors look on such a student?

Fair enough JoanofArgos :) I am glad to hear that.

thelastresort

It certainly isn't the fault of those children. They get what is offered to them both in terms of teaching and advice.

However, I'm sure the way to tackle that, isn't to force the universities to accomodate it. Doesn't that just pass the problem along?

xenia - let's hope none of those silly highly educated girls enter a poorly paid profession like teaching, eh?

Interestingly, the vast majority of my old school (expensive selective girls' school) aquaintances can't (or won't) be educating privately. Of the ones that I know are, it's because they married well or their parents are paying.

Makes you think on so many levels, though, doesn't it?

Oxbridge interview because they have an unusual structure where there is much more one-to-one contact. They want to make sure that they can stand the person they will be shackled to for the next three years.
Other Universities have gone for mass education - 300 to a lecture - so they don't care so much. If courses are ten times oversubscribed then they are not that difficult to fill. I should imagine that Universities don't have much time to finesse their selection procedures. They will probably pick up on some easy statistic (say free schools meals), find a handful of applicants to fit that criterion and Bob's your uncle. They will not have the time to fully judge the minutiae of every person's whole school career so we will be back to the usual position: the system will cater to those at the extremities, who get special consideration, and those in the middle are left to fend for themselves

So if I'm being naive, why is Manchester university asking AAB to do Eng lit and American Studies (v pop) ?

Thelastresort, I don't think it is impossible to teach a decent range of academic subjects or to teach throughly simply because of a mixed intake. State schools should be able to provide an education that is appropriate for children with different aptitudes.

If state schools cannot provide an adequate education for the children who are the most academic, then the state school system needs to be changed.

"Universities want the "best" students but Oxbridge want the ones they can stand to be shackled to for 3 years. What entitles them to call those that match their personality the "best" students?"

No one mentioned matching personalities. It's about matching the student to the teaching style. Oxbridge have a one-to-one system, so someone that cannot or will not engage in a system like that is not for them.

"So if I'm being naive, why is Manchester university asking AAB to do Eng lit and American Studies (v pop) ?"

You raise a question that I would love to know the answer to. Just because they say that the offer is AAB doesn't mean that a prediction of AAB will definitely get you accepted. I'd love to know how many students on a course like that actually have in excess of the asking tariff.

As MillyR says "State schools should be able to provide an education that is appropriate for children with different aptitudes."

Surely this is what setting is for? Surely the vast majority of Comps are setting by ability and offering the top sets a proper range of academic subjects and good teaching? So why do people think their education is inferior?

As I said before (and as many others have said) I do think that Universities should be making allowances for children who have managed to get good results from schools where that is the exception. But I think it would be wrong to give some sort of blanket grade inflation to all state school applicants. The very idea is crazy - there is a wide spectrum of state schools, some of which have extremely privileged pupils who don't need a leg-up from anyone!

Some people working in education have always argued, since Comprehensive schools came into existence, that setting and streaming undermines Comprehensive education.

If Comprehensive education is meeting the needs of the very able, then there would be no need to give lower A level grade offers to children from certain schools. I don't know if state schools are meeting the needs of all children.

I certanily agree with Joan's good post.

Mrs Mip it makes me think girls but less of ten boys make bad career choices, that's what it makes you think and the sooner we can get m any more girls into those well paid even if it means more boys doing low paid "female" work the better.

Comps do set mostly and I doubt there will be blanket preference for all pupils at state schools including grammars and the best comps but we'll see.

Well now Gove has brought in this EBacc, hopefully more state schools will encourage their brightest pupils to take those subjects, some of which are at the moment the preserve of the private schools (eg an MFL at GCSE), and they can then start giving the private sector a real run for their money. It will be interesting to see.

It should at least stop the problem of some pupils not taking the prerequisite subjects at GSCE before even contemplating applying to top universities, and thus there will be more proper competition for the places.

Yes, I hope that's the case.

I was a little surprised by the prescriptive nature of humanities ... I would ahve included music, art and RS, myself, but it's definitely a move in the right direction.

But they can do Art, Music, RS aswell as the subjects that constitutes the EBacc can't they?

My DS2 is doing Eng Lang, Eng Lit, History, Geog, Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Spanish,Maths - therefore the EBacc (phew, as obvs chose these before the EBacc was invented :)) but is also doing Design Technology (but could have chosen Art, Music or PE).

Sure, I was just guessing that timetabling might not allow...for example I would have thought Eng, Eng Lit, Maths, science x3, French,Latin and Music would be just fine.

But wouldn't pass the criteria iyswim.

But I'm not too bothered really. A vast improvement on sme of the crap some schools have ben trying to peddle as equivalent.

It's a pity they didn't include iGCSE which is hard which meant Manchester Grammar which must be in the top 20 - 30 schools scored 0 on the new criteria. They ought at least to correct that.

There 5 core subjects are those plus 3 others you HAD to take in state and private schools in the 1940s to get your School Certificate and you had to pass all subjects. If you failed even one you had to redo that year at school. Private schools have stuck with those 8 core subjects which just about everyone in all the better private schools will do and univesrities ilke them and presumably some state grammars and comps do them too but it was amazing that only 15% of children have them. It just shows what rubbishy subjects some state schools are pushing children to study although there's nothing to stop a clever teenager or parent going on line and seeing what GCSE employers and universities like.

Well, let's hope they bring in the iGCSE to state schools too for the brighter pupils!

I am positive there are many who would excel at these too, and then we can see some real competition for the places at the top universities, rather than a shoo in for those who are already advantaged by taking the desired examinations at the moment.

Certainly at my DCs' grammar school, there are plenty champing at the bit to take some harder examinations.

I write UCAS references for students (I teach A levels in a Sixth Form.) I always mention the student's background if they have particularly struggled.

I'm not sure whether everyone appreciates how difficult it is for a child in school to get a handful of grade As and the odd A* when only 17% in the year get 5 grade A-Cs. If the class is running riot, it's incredibly difficult to concentrate. If the teacher is absolutely crap and doesn't even seem to have a copy of the syllabus, it's difficult for the child to do well. I have taught really excellent pupils who would have flourished in a different school and yes, I do write a very detailed description of their school experience in their references.

I'm not saying someone who goes to private school should be discriminated against - obviously that's wrong. But when you have a student who has worked so hard on his own, despite every hurdle you could give him, then it's difficult not to hope he gets that place above someone else.

Absolutely atswimtwolengths :). Even though my DCs are/were at a grammar school, I can completely see how hard it is for some children less fortunate than mine.

And the univesrities currently allow for that and most private school parents are happy with that preference given. What would not be fair would be a blanket policy that for a university to charge £9k not £6k (and they need to charge £9k to maintain current funding so don't have much choice) they will need to ensure lots of children are from state schools not matter how privileged those state schools are whether in suburbs with average house prices of £600k or whether state grammars.

There so obviously isn't going to be a blanket policy whereby all private schoolchildren are discrimated against, for goodness sake. Why on earth would anyone do that, least of all, the present government???? I think you can rest easy, Xenia

However, it would be slightly hilarious if Gove et al encourage the great unwashed to actually start competing on an even playing field and then they start winning...... :)

atswim I don't think you will find many parents in the independent system arguing wiht that.

Children schooled in such dire circumstances of course should receive recognition.

But we are told on these boards ad infinitum by state school parents, that most state schools are not like that. In fact, we are told , with wagging finger, that we paying parents are wasting our money.

You see what I'm saying, here.

Indeed. They cannot have it both ways.

If the result was the best candidates didn't get in the universities woudl privatise or some of them or more of the better but discriminated against children would go abroad.

The "great unwashed" do compete and do very well. Most children go to state schools in the UK and many of them get good exams and jobs. It is not as if no one from a state school is at any RG universities.

It's also as if no-one at a state school is at Oxbridge either, (quite alot from my DCs' state school actually.... :)).