71% of 'top people' went to private school, or grammar school

[joanbyers]

Link:
www.suttontrust.com/research/the-educational-backgrounds-of-the-nations-leading-people/leading-people-report.pdf

"Ten leading independent schools accounted for 12% of the leading people for which schools data was available. These are: Eton College; Winchester College; Charterhouse School; Rugby School; Westminster School; Marlborough College; Dulwich College; Harrow School; St Paul?s Boys? School; Wellington College (see table 1 for top 100 schools). "

It's interesting that these leading schools are pretty much ALL boarding schools, the significance of which is that the fees tend to be around £30k/year (so I reckon this is as much about parental connections as anything else)

Wellington does not have a glittering academic reputation, sending handfuls to Oxford. Charterhouse, on £32k/year, has a fraction of the Oxbridge admissions of the nearby Royal Grammar School, Guildford (fees only £13k/year) - which is present in the list, at #58, but behind schools for the rich but dim such as Bradfield

The leading independent schools that aren't exclusively boarding schools (and therefore implying super-rich parents) are all in London, which is home of the elite.

The leading comps are Holland Park School, where lefties send their kids for ideological reasons and which has had £10s of millions lavished on it, and Haverstock School, which is likewise a popular choice with the left-wing elite.

Just 10% of 'top people' attended a comprehensive.

Of course these figures are calculated many years in arrears, so not the best guide for the future, but the 44% of leading people who attended private schools I guess will increase, as the 27% who went to grammars die off (i.e. most of the grammar schools listed are now comps)

Kings Canterbury btw is day as well as boarding ( it's also from 3 years as the nursery through to sixth form is the same school)

How does the army decide with 18 year olds who don't go to university whether they will be officers or some kind of ordinary foot soldier or whatever it is called? Is it decided by accent?

Xenia
the Officer and NCO entry routes are entirely different
its an amusing thing to read up on for half an hour ....

So fi you leave Eton how do you know if you will apply to the Office or NCO routes? If you leave our local comp 34% A - C how do you decide if you apply to be an office or NCO? Is is purely accent?

www.army.mod.uk/join/20165.aspx
www.army.mod.uk/join/20201.aspx
www.army.mod.uk/join/20197.aspx

and the equivalents in the Navy and RAF and Marines
they are totally different career paths
and after 15 years they all come out shouting anyway

The minimum army requirements (for an officer - from any school) are:

35 ALIS points (34 for SCEs) from 7 GCSE/SCE subjects, with a minimum grade C/2 in English language, maths and either a science or a foreign language; plus 180 UCAS Tariff points from at least two A level passes grades A-E or SCE Higher grades A-D.

Okay so if you have reasonable A levels you can do the office route. I was just curious. It seems one of the most class ridden and sexist bits of the UK which I would love to see much reduced.

Talkin, you pointed out Prince Harry's public persona. Jimmy Savile had a 'decent public persona' pinned to his 'philanthropic works' albeit very well engineered. Because of this, most of the general public were deceived. I still don't believe/agree with the notion he's thick - clearly he isn't.

I'm not generalising about HM Forces. I'm ex-service (non commissioned) and don't recall coming across anyone who was "thick" apart from one girl who was a civvy employee and had never served. A few a bit lacking in knowledge, but most were reasonably intelligent. Apaches aside, why would anyone allow a 'thick' person to operate any part of a huge military engine when there's so much at stake?

What does "thick" mean, anyway?

I've met an awful lot of hugely competent, resourceful people who weren't remotely academic and who therefore did not necessarily get particularly glittering exam results. As already pointed out, you don't have to be academic to be good at getting people on your side, to be practical, to have common sense, to have good business sense, to be able to make instinctively good decisions. Academic people are often far less decisive, even when decisiveness is called for, because they are too aware of the details and can find them distracting.

Blissfully - in this case there's the opportunity to attack the Royal family and Eton in one go!

'Thick' in this case means not up to the standard for what is supposed to be a very academic school.

I am sure Prince Harry would be the first to accept that he was given preferential treatment to gain his place at Eton! Let's just not pretend otherwise.

However, I don't imagine he really cares, why would he?? It's all part and parcel of being privileged :)

He seems pleasant enough to me, does the job he's meant to do pretty well most of the time.

What would be the point of the Royal Family if they weren't treated differently from everyone else and constantly thrust into places of public prominence whether they liked it or not?!

I've just got round to reading the article in Guardian about Eton (which I'm sure has been linked and alluded to on that Eton thread that's rumbling on) and it says that some years ago about 40% of boys there were quite unacademic and didn't bother with the work much. Times have now changed and it's heads down. The place probably wouldn't suit the out and out hooray now.

The article also makes the very astute point that actually these boys are very privileged indeed before they get to Eton and it's really the contacts they have anyway, rather than the ones they make there (although it perpetuates it, I suppose) that are helping them on their way to great things.

A very significant proportion of the officers I met while I was an army wife were thick. Very thick. Lots of the soldiers were far sparkier. Same with the wives.

LA, I'm not so sure about entrance though. Even 40 years ago you went to Harrow if you weren't very bright and Eton if you were quite clever and prep schools directed you accordingly. Once you are there they may well work you harder than they used to though.

Why would you want a system where those in charge at thick and those obeying the orders of the thick are bright? I will never understand the attraction of the army to anyone.

I agree with Xenia a few posts back. Dont move to Cornwall and then moan that your children who stay there cannot get jobs!

But where did 70 per cent of the happiest, most content people go? Top does not always equal fulfilled happy life.

Interestingly I have known people that went to sand hurst and he was perfectly normal for comp kids to go and did not go on accent. I also know one very posh public school educated and did not make the cut at sand hurst so ended up being asked to leave. A lot of comp kids join the OTC and them join up to study medicine to avoid tuition fees. A bit risky for me though but certainly it always used more by the less well off students when I was at uni. They joined OTC then became reservists and it funded their uni costs plus gave them connections when they left uni.

Xenia if it makes you feel any better, they learn that accent at Sandhurst, Dartmouth and even more so once they get to Cranfield. Neither of my brothers left school with the officer accent and they both (different forces) have it now

Agree about living in the country but them have always been a cut girl and good idea to live on an easy London commute line to give you more options. It is used round here quite a lot. Live in a good school area with decent schools, commute to London three days a week and work from home one or two days a week or another local office and get a London salary, no need for school fees or high house prices. All but one of our execs do this rather than live in London. I spend one or two days a week in the London office. No need or inclination to live their as train only one and a half hours and the time is going down all the time. It is also easier for flying to Paris or Scotland. Not quite so good for the states though.

What does "thick" mean I have a super bright friend a Kings Scholar at Eton and I watched fascinated as he put his horses bridle on upside down knew something was wrong but just couldn't work out what!! Absolutely no practical skill, another super bright friend is the most cack handed individual I know again I watched fascinated as he wired up a plug, another friend "Oxbridge" at 15 terrible people skills!

Well indeed.

But in the context of schools it pretty clearly refers to the ability to pass exams (or not!) at a high level.

To go full circle.
Harry Windsor is not an intellectual. He was fudged into Eton because of who he is. He got enough exam passes to get into the RAF.
Then they let him loose on helicopters and he found the right use for the way his brain works. Both he and his brother clearly have technical brains - even with the official secrets act, rumblings would be about by now if either of them were NOT good at what they do.
BUT I suspect their paperwork leaves a bit to be desired!

happy
I used to mark ICAEW coursework - intelligence and common sense are not interdependent.

OP
I do not know why the Sutton Trust published this piece of research - I assume they were well remunerated for it - as its inanity devalues their serious work.