Interesting: teachers misconception about state school pupils ending in top Unis

[camaleon]

"Fewer than half of teachers at state schools would advise pupils to apply to top universities, a new study shows - but many do not realise that a majority of Oxbridge students come from state schools"

Article here

mumsy dd looking at sixth forms recently was asked what careers she was considering. At the first she suggested medicine to be met with a very sceptical look and to be told she'd need a minimum of 8A*s in a tone that suggested she may as well not bother trying, so at the next she modified her aspirations and suggested physiotherapy or pharmacy - to be told with grades like hers she shouldn't muck around with those but should try for medicine. Both schools had the same school report in front of them, but the first was the independent and the second was the state school. To say state schools are less ambitious for their pupils is a huge generalisation, but it's true the expectations of both school and family make a huge difference to children imo.

A lot of state schools do lack aspiration though - both the secondary schools I attended in the late 1980's discouraged me from applying to Oxbridge.

Ds1 attends an average school in the fairly affluent middle class area where we live. It is fairly typical of non-selectives in this area, and no effort is made to push or inspire those in the top sets who just coast along.

Some state schools might do a better job, but there are a lot that don't.

And it's not just about schools encouraging pupil's aspirations; what concerns me equally is when they are actively discouraged from pursuing certain careers or applying to particular universities, as happened to me (and I am sure still goes on).

Families are important BUT it depends on how influenced a child is by school/teachers.

For example, I trusted my parents above anything - they encouraged me to try for Cambridge and believed in me 100%. If they had been more vague, or deferred to my teacher's opinions, I wouldn't have applied.

Xenia I think the choice of peer group is much more nuanced than 'private good, state bad' as I imagine do you. I expect, with that in mind, you chose the particular school carefully.

I know my experience growing up in a small, northern, university town isn't typical of many places but, as mentioned above, my friends at the local comp were children of professional graduates with high expectations, confidence and awareness of the university system.

Peer group and population are not the same thing, there were also lots of children with different backgrounds but enough of us to form a critical mass and enable us to get on with fulfilling expectation unimpeded, also creating a culture of expectation that others could join in with.

The local private girls' day school was not especially academically impressive, in fact my comp's A-level results were often better but I think girls were sent there precisely to mix with a perceived socially desirable peer group and avoid a perceived less desirable one. Many of the pupils were children of local business people who themselves probably hadn't been to university. In this instance these children probably needed the greater support with university applications offered by their school as they didn't have that academic capital at home, as we did. I was happier with my academic peer group.

One other thing I'd mention on the general topic is I have met people who were hot-housed through A-levels and propelled into good universities by private schools, only to fall at the first hurdle of independent study and struggle badly or drop out as they'd essentially over-achieved at school and weren't up to the demands of their course. It may have looked good for their school to have got them in but I don't think it was in their best interests.

lottie you may have met some privately educated students who struggeld and dropped out but the stats show that this is not common.
Students from disadvantaged backgrounds are far more likely to drop out (though the factors driving this are likely to be fairly complex) as are students at much lower tier universities.

It is like the oft peddled MN observation that pupils prepped for grammar school often fail to keep up. No evidence to back this one up either.

I wonder if these are things we might like like to be true. The universe making things fair in the long run...but sadly nothing but a few anecdotes to back them up.

It is certainly a complex topic. Parents will often move to a leafy suburb with a posh comp eg leave inner London for outer.

If you pick a private school where most people cannot get into whatever they earn as their IQ is too low (is like the old state grammars) you can pretty much ensure 100% of the class will be going to good universities. I am not saying that ensures all is well (and anyway "well" could be leaving school at 16 to become a priest or whatever else is the child's aim) but it's more likely they will not waste chances.

There are plenty of posh private schools for not so bright children too. They can add a lot of value and like plenty of state schools do a good job. Also have a look at what caeers are being recommended in career roome at school - plumber or surgeon etc.

TalkinPeace you may have just exemplified the justification for the bursaries :). I used the term debt averse because debt aversion was the term of art used in the discussions at the top universities which followed the announcement of the fee hike to £9000. If the better off aren't debt averse then they'll continue applying; conversely, if, as seems to be the case, the less well off are debt averse, then that acts as a further disincentive to apply which Oxford and Cambridge are rightly keen to counter.

pickled my 21 yr old DD will start on £45K or something like that if she passes her Finals and her salary will shoot up again in a couple of years. It's called Magic Circle.

And Talkin, you can't use Monty Python as an indicator of cultural norms and expectations 35 years on !!!! (Even ignoring the satire).

IME (as a lecturer at an RG uni) there are plenty of students such as those Lottie describes - who have been tutored and chivvied into getting the A-level grades to come here, but then can't cope in the more intellectually-independent culture of university. A handful every year drop out, usually right at the beginning of the degree when they realise they're in over their heads. But they mostly end up with a 2:2 - which, to many of our students, is tantamount to a failure.

It will be interesting to see what happens when they make the planned change that if a student obtains grades of ABB then universities can admit them regardless of caps on numbers. It is likely to mean there will be a rush of those with the higher grades (and by no means does everyone receive ABB or higher) to the top 20 places and much harder for those lower down the charts to get the brighter people, expansion of better places and decline of lower ones which in fact might be a very good thing.

It should also make it easier for any children of ours getting ABB to go to better places rather than ending up at a second choice.

Finally got through the cycle of other stuff and back to this thread!

Lots of points to answer, which naturally I will help with. Its interesting how despite asking for specific figures and a comparison, the questions have still been avoided in favour of arguing a pre-conceived conclusion .. ho hum.

As regards the 'Magic Circle' - that is a classic demonstration of how salary is not related to ability or competence. I can explain that if you like, because the intelligence behind the posts on here does seem to miss points that I see instinctively, but having gone up against Magic Circle barristers I am certain that these firms suffer from exactly the kind of poor thinking that I have been describing on this site - Of course this is an advantage to anyone who wants to win a case, and/or a kind of tax on people who select firms based on cost and perceived status - but that is a separate point. OF course good luck to your offspring, but she would be well advised to get humble first - if she really wants to be a solid lawyer or other worker in this area, I would advise some eye-opening before the cosseting - but that requires and investment (in terms of lower/no salary) that I suspect YT would ignore in favour of comfort. I wonder how far the fruit falls from the tree!

Oh yes - and as regards the 'left wing' argument - lets not forget that the professional associations and organisation are the first and most successful Unions...

Betty barristers don't work for law firms generally. They're self employed and work out of chambers.

Magic Circle law firms are predominantly (though not entirely of course) made up of solicitors. You do understand how the legal system works right?

Oh Yes, you are right, there is no way someone could start in a magic circle law firm and then move to the bar. Sorry

Well of course you can, but you wouldn't be called a 'magic circle barrister'.

I just assumed you were mixed up.

But forgive me, you are abviously far more intelligent and knowledgeable than anyone else here. Indeed, if your ability matches your arrogance you are no doubt a thing of wonder.

In any case, this wouldn't prevent a magic circle firm appointing a barrister, or for a barrister to also work in/for a magic circle firm in a different role.

As regards the magic circle firms being comprised of solicitors - like any large organisation there are plenty of other roles.. it seems you are in 'discredit' mode rather than 'strong case' mode.. sigh

Thanks for the sarcasm or compliment - never really sure of the real psychology behind that but I like 'true words spoken in jest' route... I was up against a magic circle firm who appointed a barrister who was Oxbridge, Cliffords and then Grays Inn something. I didn't really care - we won! :)

Oh clever you!!!! You should be so proud!!!

That proves of course that everyone in public school is thick. Everyone at Oxford is thick. And everyone in the MC is thick...yup, absolute proof.

I wouldn't go that far, but I respect your right to hold those views of course.

betty you remind of a woman I know who is convinced of her own brilliance, but has achieved the square route of fuck all, so spends her time doing down the intellect and achievements of others.

No doubt it makes her feel a whole lot better...

That's nice dear.

Is it you?

I cannot really follow the points being made. Solicitors and barristers and equity, even the best ones who earn c £1m to £2m a year (of which there are only about 3000 mostly in London) are just a service industry. We all know the real money in the UK is made by those who sell a business and indeed who may serially do so. It's all relative. There are clever people in all walks of life. There are plenty of people who are perfectly happy to earn £30k a year too.

Obviously most graduates of Middlesex ex Poly will not be as bright as most who graduate from Oxbridge and employers know that and recruit accordingly but some from poor i9nstitutinos or who don't go to university are pretty good anyway and do fine in life. However it remains the case that it is much easier to fall than rise and if our children can get good A levels, a good degree from a good place life tends to be a bit easier than if they leave school with very little, hence why most parents are quite keen on good schools.

fight, fight, fight, fight

Sorry that 'manchester poly' statement is incorrect - because of the many biases including opportunity bias, 'brightness' is, sadly, not predicted by institution.

One example I have tried to communicate is that top unis have an intake bias towards private schools despite the fact that private schools select more by income than ability or 'brightness'. On top of this there are opportunity, application, selection, resource, perceptual etc etc of which none are predicated by ability or intelligence.

There is NOTHING to prevent a super bright kid from going to manchester met in preference to Oxford or Harvard or wherever. Nobody will stop it, nobody will whisk them away to another institution no matter how obvious their ability.

Its a shame so many people can't understand this.