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

It is our job to encourage. Despite my flippant comments earlier, all the evidence suggests that hard work and practise, whether at an academic subject, music or sport reaps rewards. A very, very few people will succeed because of natural brilliance; the rest will succeed because they have worked hard, and have been encouraged by parents and school.
Having said that, there are some scary statistics out there that suggest that the home background has an overwhelming influence, and that the value added by schools- any schools- is negligible.

I'm afraid I can't provide the link because it was only ever in my work PC and I've move don, but:

1. Mid 1990s studies conducted by (but not on) Leeds and Southampton showed that across the sector maintained pupils did comparatively better in their finals than in their Year One exams-that is any gap closed over the three years. In some universities that represented former maintained-sector students 'overtaking' their independently educated counterparts. That suggests they make more progress at university.

1. For Cambridge, at least, and using figures five or six years out of date now, a higher percentage of former state school than independent school pupils got a first in all subjects but History. That gap is now, I believe, closed or closing. Again, this suggests the experience is not destructive to bright state school kids.

But a lot depends on what a 'good degree' is, and how to assess the broad range of 2.1s within that.

Amic 'some seem more stupid in practical areas' - yes indeed. A family friend of ours had a very bright son - bright in his area of interest in maths and physics and computing, anyway. He went to Cambridge. His mother dropped him off at the railway station. He called her, upset and confused, hours later. He'd got on the wrong train and only realised several hours into the journey - he'd looked at the departure board and thought there was one train going to all those different destinations! He became a professor of computing science...

(MI is not like this, btw, and neither are my friends from school who went to Oxford or Cambridge.)

I think some state schools can slip into a culture of "well, it's not going to happen around here" without even noticing and that this could well have an effect on their brightest students.

When we visited schools to find ds a secondary, there was one school that seemed particularly low in its aspirations: the teachers who showed us round started talking straightaway about practical programmes and their support for pupils who struggle; they did not seem to have anything to say about academically able pupils.

We had not said anything to indicate that ds was not in the Oxbridge material league, but their default position seemed to be that there wouldn't be any students like that at a school like theirs (fairly deprived council estate), so they wouldn't have to think about them. They didn't seem to spend much time on the possibility of any of their students going on to any university tbh.

I was very tempted to ask a g&t question just to see their reaction, but ds was there and I knew he would have sabotaged.

If the students are that bright, they surely have the nous to do some research themselves - never has it been so easy to research anything via the internet etc- wy are they dumbly relying on teachers to spoon feed thm info about university?

MrsGuyOfGisbourne - back when I was doing A levels, there were a lot of people who were predicted straight As (at least 4) who didn't apply (northern 6th form college) - not only not applying for Oxford/Cambridge, but worrying if they could get onto any course at a red brick that normally asked for As. I can't see that teenagers have changed that much, a lot of very bright young people don't realise they are special unless they are told they are, a lot of teenagers don't have much confidence, they need to have encouragement and people telling them that they could do it, and they will find other people like them when they get there. If you're told by teachers "well, you'd probably not get in, it's a waste of one of your places and it's full of public school boys so you won't fit in and enjoy it even if you do get there." some won't believe it and do their own research and go anyway, others will.

Betty I don't make assumptions unless they're based on fact. I'm not going to follow your lead and conjure up figures out of thin air. adela has re-inforced the point that militantly 'anti-toff' stances such as yours discourage the still under-represented constituencies at Oxford and Cambridge, which makes one wonder who is likely to do that cause more good. I think it's very clearly not people like you.

Oxford and Cambridge are bending over backwards and pouring millions of pounds into attracting applications from those in schools and from areas which send very few students to either; once there, those students have as good a chance at integrating as at any other university anywhere - high intelligence is a great leveller.

Seconded, Dontmind. Particularly the sad fact that 'a lot of very bright young people don't realise they are special unless they are told they are'. Often the brighter they are, the more self doubt they have, which doesn't help.

IME independent schools are far superior to state schools in promoting confidence. I think in that fact alone lies a major discrepancy between the two sectors, which has major repercussions for applications to the very universities which could transform the lives of those students.

Lots of very amusing posts on this thread - abitwobbly now with her hysterical anti-left rants (how would she ciope with someone like me - left-wing and a teacher and went to Oxbridge and encourages her pupils to go there!) , Betty with her charming and entirely evidnce-free tales of thick Oxbridge folk, and Mother with her obvious briiliance and modesty, unaware that maybe she was just a little bit brighter than average. :) And not fogetting Xenia with her usual star turn about rubbish poor parents who choose to neglect their children by brutally denying them a proper paid-for education...

FWIW, I was top at everything throughout school, at the country's top grammar - and when I got to Oxford it was the first time in my life I hadn't been top. I had to work damn hard just to be average. I got my 2:1 but sweated blood and tears to get it.

Betty clearly has no knowledge whatsoever of Oxbridge or she wouldn't write such a load of unproven pants. Grrr.

So let's get this straight - you disagree with my figures.. but you don't know why or have any other reasonably thought out arguments against them. You peg me as 'anti-toff' in order to minimise my argument, rather than actually arguing with it. You just don't seem to want to understand my point, I suspect because if you did engage with it properly your current prejudices would be more difficult to hold.

You don't actually have any idea at all about the numbers - so how in the hell can you be so confident that my arguments are so wide of the mark? .. You know why don't you - you are reliant on feelings being more accurate than facts. I hope to god you aren't Oxbridge.. except of course that it would prove my point perfectly!...

So agree - Yellow - am forever saddened by my pupils' low expectations and frustrated by how little support they have had over the years to believe in themselves. Labelling people as 'bright' or not is only half - or probably rather less - of the story. Success is about hard work as much as anything - but to be motivated to work hard you have to believe it will not all be in vain and you will or can reach your goals.

Betty - you said this:

"Oxbridge takes nearly 90% of public school pupils, across all ability ranges - as public schools are selected more by income than by ability, the ability distribution is roughly similar to the population as a whole - with some skew for scholarships (though this too is debatable). "

That is entirely bollocks. Sorry, it doesn't deserve a better term. those figures are entirely invented.

How can you demand serious evidenced rebuttal of your 'arguments' when they are based on made-up figures??!!!

Ok Betty, knives out: which of the two is your alma mater? :)

So.. (I'm struggling here to think of a more basic way to ask this)

1. What are your figures then?
2. What makes you think mine are made up if you aren't comparing them with anything at all?

How many people do you think go to Oxbridge each year?
How many Public School kids go there?
What percentage of public school kids is that?
How many kids from state schools would the top 1% of abilities represent?
How do the two figues compare EVEN IF they were selected accurately as the top 1%??

C'mon throw me a frikin bone here I can't believe two of you are that ignorant. Unless of course you are both a cluster of the thick ones from public schools who are there because of all the biases!

Thank you bread. Betty, your posts are white noise.

abitwobbly - just to add that you need not fear we are being overtaken by brilliant Chinese etc students either. I teach many on pre-sessional courses here and can assure you the average standard of these students is extraordinarily low - far, far lower than here. You seem unaware that a 'degree' in most other countries is only about A Level standard here. I have had the weird situation of having to teach basic statistics to a post-grad going on to do a Masters in a numerate discipline! My highest maths qualification is an A in my O Level over 20 years ago!!

We have nothing to fear. Not for a verrry long time.

Racist

Cross posted, obv.

Betty if you can account for the droves of disappointed Etonians, Wykemists, Westminsters, Paulinas - let alone the other less academic independent school students - who don't get a place, then I'd think (slightly) more of your vacuous argument.

Racist how?

'Droves' not familiar with that unit... what does it represent?

Betty - see figures at bottom of this article given below - from 2008 so not up to date but can't be arsed to waste any more life doing your research for you! - state school numbers have of course risen since then.

But as you can see, a v v long way - on a different planet in fact - from "90% of public school students go to Oxbridge" as you stated, or even the only-slightly-less-daft "90% of public school applicants to Oxbridge get in" - which might be what you meant? Either way: - utter bollocks. Approx. 30% of public school applicants got in in that year - v approx 25.5% of state school applicants. Not a vast divide.

www.tes.co.uk/article.aspx?storycode=6055970

UNDERGRADUATE ADMISSIONS, CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY 2008

• Applications received: 14,498

• Maintained sector applications: 6,689

• Independent sector applications: 4,095

• Applications accepted: 3,531

• State school acceptances: 1,762 (59%*)

• Independent school acceptances: 1,277 (41%*)

• Percentage of state school applicants accepted: 26

• Percentage of independent school applicants accepted: 31

• UK acceptances only

UNDERGRADUATE ADMISSIONS, OXFORD UNIVERSITY 2008

• Applications received: 13,388

• Maintained sector applications: 6,123

• Independent sector applications: 4,521

• Applications accepted: 3,170

• State school acceptances: 1,538 (48%)

• Independent school acceptances: 1,328 (42%)

• Percentage of state school applicants accepted: 25

• Percentage of independent school applicants accepted: 29

(Remaining 10% made up of oversees or ?other candidates?).

Bbetty - I'd now like to see chaper and verse for your hilariously ludicrous claims.

Oh. And an apology would be nice too.

Betty - Re racist - no, it's just a fact. Degrees from many countries are equivalent to our A Levels. That includes America BTW. Does that still make me racist? No, we just happen to specialise earlier in this country than most others.

Another puzzling thing is why are most of the schools in the top 30 for A level results in the country in bioth sectors in the SE of England? It's always puzzled me. Do people with a high IQ move from places like the North to the SE as I did so those breeding down here have brighter children or are the schools worse outside the SE?

bread I for one find those figures really interesting. Thanks for posting. From what I found, though, only 18% of post-16 students are in independent education, so I guess the question is why are so few students from state schools APPLYING to Oxbridge? Which brings us back to where we started. I think it's way too simplistic to say that schools aren't doing enough to encourage their most appropriate applicants, as it would be too simplistic to say that the universities need to more to attract these applicants. A culture shift is needed. No easy answers.