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

our private schools are the envy of the world,

Do you have a source for this information, Xenia?

WorriedBetty even in the clear light of day your argument remains utter bullshit. If anything it's worse. What do you base these assertions on? They're completely baseless - your figures appear to have been plucked from thin air (90% of public schoolers do not go to Oxford and Cambridge nor are 90% of Oxford and Cambridge made up of public schoolers).

It's no more than an ill-informed prejudiced rant.

Following on from EvilTwins post, another point to consider is that many working class students and students from less wealthy backgrounds tend to favour vocational degrees - subjects like Engineering, Business Studies, Accounting, Pharmacy, etc which tend to be offered more by former poly's than Oxbridge or Russell Group universities. Also, many students, even if they are more than happy to leave home, still don't want to travel very far.

Zombie, I wouldn't worry if you hadn't heard of RG when you were at school, I doubt if anyone else had either. Not sure what age you are, but RG might not even have existed then.

Why is it just up to teachers to show aspiration though? Parenst have to play their part. As a teacher I try to get the best out of all my pupils from my top sets to my SENs. I tell them there will be no failure and that if they try and wirk hard the world is their oyster. I know that not all pupils can achieve their goals and some goals are just dreams....like the SEN child who wanted to be a marine biologist...will never happen but I never shattered her dream...just nudged her to something more suitable.
We take pupils from our comprehensive to Oxbridge every year and many apply but never get in. So I think in my schools defence that we try very hard but often it is the parents who say...my child cant go to Oxbridge. Most pupils in our school will not go further than Cardiff or Swansea because it is 'safe' for them. I would love to see them fly further away but it is seems to be a cultural thing in their part of Wales which stops them...insecurity mainly but we tell them to apply wherever they want and I would never tell a child they couldnt apply to a 'top uni' because they come from a valleys comp. If I got the wrong end of the stick I am sorry but I get cross when I see threads which blame teachers for all of societys ills!

That's more or less equivalent to pupils from London and the south east, or the midlands not wanting to travel further than Oxford or Cambridge. Anyway, Cardiff is in the Russell Group, so consider your school vindicated, t0lk13n .

On two occasions I have had to pull children of mine out of leading independent schools because the standard of teaching and pastoral care was far too patchy for my (coicidentally very bright) children. I am not alone in having done this - it's a dirty secret the sector doesn't like to share. I've also worked in both sectors and seen good and bad teaching in both.

Parents should feel free to move between the sectors depending on the qualities of the schools concerned, and the needs of their children. The idea that somehow parents are being neglectful because they are paying school fees is just absurd. It's so much more complicated than that.

Sorry, meant to type not paying school fees.

The Russel Group
University of Birmingham
University of Bristol
University of Cambridge
Cardiff University
University of Durham (from August)
University of Edinburgh
University of Exeter (from August)
University of Glasgow
Imperial College London
King's College London (University of London)
University College London (University of London)
University of Leeds
University of Liverpool
London School of Economics and Political Science (University of London)
University of Manchester
Newcastle University
University of Nottingham
University of Oxford
Queen Mary (University of London) (from August)
Queen's University Belfast
University of Sheffield
University of Southampton
University of Warwick
University of York (from August)

NO school has the excuse that one of those is too far away from them.
Geographically only Cumbria and mid Wales are left out.

tolk3in: unless I've read it wrongly, the article is quoting a survey of teachers and finding a proportion self-report as not even mentioning the remotest possibility of aiming for Oxbridge to their G&T pupils.

That in itself is surely worth highlighting by the Sutton Trust in itself? It's not pretending to describe all the reasons why a child may be unsuited or disinclined to actually make the attempt; just showing how hard it is to encourage diverse applications when teachers aren't necessarily supportive.

YT why don't you explain which points you disagree with and why?

cardibach - The teachers at my school were actually in some ways great. As I said I come from a very poor area - was actually featured in a TV expose of pverty as the "poorest area in Britain." Most of the teachers really cared and did encourage us to work hard and expose us to new experiences. So teachers took us to the theatre, museums, art galleries, hill walking, etc as I am sure they were aware that many kids I went to school with would not have had those experiences.

They also did lots of school trips, very cheap residentials, great work experience and link ups with local employers, etc. So I am not being negative in general about my teachers, in some ways they were great and gave way over their teaching hours to doing lots of out of school activities - far far more than other people's experiences of state schools who I have talked to.

But the idea of going to Cambridge or Oxford was not one even suggested and the few times these universities were even mentioned it was always in a posh toffe nosy elitists kind of way. The truth is that I suspect my teachers had no idea what these universities were actually like either. But I didn't apply as I was worried that I would be very very looked down on and so would find it very hard going.

THat's a shame, zombiegames , but doesn;t suggest they didn't think you should have aspirations or that they were ideologically driven to keep you out of Oxbridge as others seem to suggest. I actually have very few conversations with students about theire University choices except when I am a sixth form tutor. The rest of the time I put my effortd into hleping them to get the grades which will open doors for them. My small state school in rural West Wales has pupils applying to Oxbridge every year (some even get places) and students regularly going on to study medecine , so I think we are getting the aspirational stuff right. As have all the other state schools I have worked in.

But nobody even suggested I should apply to Uni. And I do think in a very poor area where parents haven't generally gone to Uni, that you do need to counsell pupils about their uni choices and the courses they choose. The reality is that most middle class parents give their kids enormous guidance with this. My parents cared, but didn't have the knowledge to give me any real guidance.

I was told by teachers at my (very good though non-selective) 6th form not to bother applying to Cambridge, and (after I did) they told my parents I shouldn't focus all my attention on getting in there because I probably wouldn't get the grades

The only member of staff who actively encouraged me was my headmaster, and I know he was extremely proud when I got in.

Every teacher who discouraged me either had no knowledge of Oxbridge, or had applied and been rejected.

@ Betty:

1. I strongly disagree with your statement 'The best students do NOT go to Oxbridge' because while some extremely clever students go elsewhere or don't go to university at all, it doesn't in any way follow that the ones who jump through all the academic hoops to get in to Oxford or Cambridge aren't the best.

1. To re-iterate what I've already said: your numbers don't make sense. How did you arrive at the figure of 90%?

What's your problem with Oxford and Cambridge?

My dhs cousin was told there was no point in applying for London Fashion School as nobody in the school was good enough to get in, she applied and got in.

But back when I was at school in the 70s I wasn't even given the slightest encouragement to do A levels let alone go to university. I was one of the top performers at the school. I did apply for the Wraf , which I realise was completely wrong for me, but I took some sort intelligence tests and my score was very high and meant if they accepted me I could train for any job in the RAF, so more than capable of A levels. It is a different world today.

I don't think much has changed tbh, certainly not in non-selective, 'average' state schools.

My DS currently attends a school which utterly lacks aspiration. He is in Year 9, is top of top set for every subject. This is not a boast btw, we are in a selective area, this is not a selective school, so the majority of pupils are not at all academic.

DS's teachers tell me he will of course get Bs at GCSE. That is as good as they think the top half of the top set in the school should achieve. There is no interest in helping children at the top attain higher marks, all the effort goes into improving the bottom line of how many get C's at GCSE (about 30% in the last stats I saw).

Very few children go on to sixth form, even less to university (and certainly not Oxbridge/Russell Group). My DS has in 3 years gone from wanting to be a Doctor to be intending to be a builder . Despite all I do to encourage him, being at a school which utterly lacks ambition is affecting him, and indeed all his fellow pupils.

Hatesponge
I wrote about my dcs ordinary state above. It does accept 10% on aptitude for technology but all the others are local made up of a wide variety of abilities and classes. The children in top sets are expected to go to RG universities.

all of the comps round here send their top sets to top unis
our 6th form college sent a coach load to Oxbridge last year
5 of whom had been at my DCs school

it comes down to a weak SMT and I hope that the new Ofsted approach will penalise heads who are too lazy to get the best out of their kids.

Oxbridge is only full of posh kids because the weak state schools are too idle to fill it with THEIR bright kids.

For those claiming that the "majority" of Oxbridge students are from state schools, a quick google search indicates that in 2011 it was 58.8% (so yes, a majority, strictly speaking) but a similar google search indiacates that 7% of British school children go to independent school, rising to 18% of over 16s. So even if we take the Over 16s only percentage, that means that Oxbridge is taking nearly 40% of its students from less than 20% of those potentially eligible. It is ridiculously simplistic to blame state schools for this.

I would be thrilled if one of my Year 13s went to Oxbridge - but that would involve one of them deciding to apply. This year, there were two who would have stood a chance, in terms of grades etc, but neither wanted to.

EvilTwins
read here
www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jun/15/a-level-subjects-preferred-by-universities-by-private-school-and-comprehensive
It DOES come down to schools not expecting their kids to do well.
And I am focusing on the RG as it is spread all over the country and the Oxbridge Collegiate system does not suit a lot of people

How DARE Knowlsey only put 1% of their students in for three Academic A levels.

I agree with seahouses - who says all those super bright kids actually want to go to oxbridge? Maybe just maybe they decided to go somewhere else instead
At 18 I would rather have gone somewhere with a bit more about it than either oxford or cambridge in terms of a social life and people - each to their own

That article does NOT say that state schools don't expect students to do well. It says that state schools offer subjects which are not likely to get students into RG universities so that they can publish "decent" looking results:

"mis-sold low quality subjects that are not accepted at top universities to boost school and local authorities' results"

which is a completely different argument. Not once does it say "state schools tell kids to do Media Studies because they're not capable of maths".

So this comes down to league tables. If schools didn't have to publish their results in the way they do currently, perhaps more state school would "risk" offering subjects they currently don't.

It seems there is a golden combination of an aspirational culture at home and at school. Because a lack of either one undermines a child's confidence that a top university is "for them". But perhaps the odds of one side of the coin being missing are greatly increased in the state sector. Because by definition, families who aren't that fussed won't fork out £13k PA for a private school.

(Am increasingly determined to pluck up the courage to ask push-mummy-type questions about Oxbridge entry when we go to look round secondary schools for DD ... even if she is only 10 and eyebrows will be raised )

State schools were massively unambitious when I was in high school during the 80s (no dear, you don't want to go to art school, be a secretary or a nurse!) I don't see why that should have changed as it would seem this is a sector so frightened of change, of trying to get kids to reach that bit further in case they fail and blame is apportioned that it is best to continue feeding the lowest common denominator.

My dts1 (10) wants to be a pilot, has done since he was 2 without wavering and I'm still unsure what started it. Anyway he and his twin brother will be encouraged to do what they want to do.

Why is it always about Oxbridge anyway? People are so hung up about who went to public school. It is the parent and not the child who chooses so why should they then be held back and face a life of snide criticism because their parents put them on that path? Smacks of reverse snobbery.

As a parent I will support, encourage but never push my boys. Maybe they'll want to do something for a few years before uni, maybe they'll not want to go to uni. It's not my life to lead, I just have to ensure they are comfortable in themselves to speak out unlike their stupid old mum. After what I went through I am very aware of what school will push them towards. (Although to be honest their chances of having a decent life will probably not be met in this country.)