If you can afford private education but remain in the state sector cont.

[happygardening]

Thought I repost the OP although the debate has moved on a little .
It's going to be hard to avoid this becoming another state v private thread, but what I'm interested in is a slightly different take on that debate. It's not "which is better?" but "if you think state school is better even though you could afford private education, then why is that?"

The question is based on the assumptions that the DC in question is/are reasonably bright (so might benefit academically from academically selective education), that the state school is non-selective (as most people don't have access to grammar schools), and that you hope for your DC to go to a good university (to make the £££££ fees worthwhile!)

I've been mulling this over ever since I heard some maths professor from Cambridge talking on the radio about the age-old private v state inequality of Oxbridge admissions. He was all for improving access for state school applicants but said that the simple fact was that for maths, even the best state schools generally teach only to the A-level syllabus, whereas the best private schools take their maths/further maths A-level candidates well beyond the syllabus and so the state school applicants are at a huge disadvantage - they simply don't have the starting level of knowledge required for the course.

This made me wonder: with this sort of unequal playing field, if you have the choice of private education, what reasons might you have not to take it?

Would be interested to hear from those who've made this choice - how it's working out, or if your DC have finished school now, how did it work out? Did they go to good universities/get good jobs, etc? On the other side of things, if you paid for private schooling but now regret it, why?

My DC go to a state school by the way.

.

[Yellowtip]

Bonsoir I'm referring to undergraduates and recent graduates at a single university; I've no significant knowledge of those elsewhere.

[Bonsoir]

If you are in the business of moulding nerds, MordionAgenos, you probably aren't also in the business of incubating entrepreneurs. Which is where the problem lies.

[MordionAgenos]

Bonsoir despite your dismissive attitude people often labelled as 'nerds' are often the ones who have the good ideas and the vision. All the people skills in the world won't make up for a lack of imagination or intelligence. Sorry.

[Yellowtip]

But of course nerd on MN is used to denote someone who got into a school or university which the poster's own DC didn't or couldn't. It's used only perjoratively and signifies a sniffling unhealthy little type who never plays any form of sport and has no friends except a small number of identical types. This belittling makes the belittler feel better about themselves and their spurned DC, so acts as an important psychological prop.

[Yellowtip]

Playing lax doesn't compensate for imagination or intelligence either.

[Bonsoir]

I haven't dismissed nerds. I'm as nerdy as they come (INTJ)! But I know that the world turns because of entrepreneurs...

[LittleFrieda]

Yellowtip - you seem unable to grasp the fact that as an applicant, you are looking for just one single place, it really doesn't matter about the other 99.5%. If your application fits on the spread of the previous year's offerees, how on earth could you conclude someone did not stand a chance, when Oxford have already said 40 applicants (20% of the intake)

By the way, we don't have children at Habs nor have we ever had children at Habs. My son received his 7 A and 3 A grades (all IGCSEs) way back in 2008, when grade inflation was a bit lower (I think you'll find the mean proportion of A grades for med at Oxford in 2010 was considerably fewer than it is for 2013). And my son received offers from all four of his med schools that year (UCL, Newcastle, Sheffield, Barts) which was v much good enough for him and most certainly good enough or me. I have no idea what you mean by your vile comments. My son was v pleased with his school and I was very pleased to pay his school fees.

[LittleFrieda]

My husband is INTJ and I'm an ENFP, apparently this is the perfect combo. Bonsoir, what was your uni subject?

[Yellowtip]

It wasn't intended to be vile Frieda, apologies. You simply seemed to be championing the 6 or 7A applicant from Habs or Habs type schools very strongly and crossly. I didn't say no chance, I said very slim. Or rather I said that an applicant with 6 or 7As from a top performing school would be very unlikely, statistically, to get an offer. As indeed they would. I'm struggling a little with your close reading though. Oxford said 40 extra applicants were shortlisted either because they were extremely close to the last cut off score or because there were serious mitigating circumstances affecting their GCSEs or BMAT. That's very different from 40 getting in! And that part of the process doesn't provide a safety net for ordinary 'good candidates' from top performing schools who haven't got either mitigating circumstances or very, very nearly the required shortlisting score. This process is overwhelmingly numerical and deliberately so. You misunderstand it I think.

[LittleFrieda]

YellowtIp This is from the Oxford Medsci website:
"The applications of candidates who do not make the shortlist are then reviewed in detail by tutors, taking into account any individual circumstances - both academic and non-academic - that might indicate that GCSE and/or BMAT performance is likely to have underestimated their potential. Any applicants deemed worthy of further consideration are then reviewed by a cross-college panel, alongside applicants immediately below the initial shortlist.   As a result of this process around 40 additional applicants are added to the short-list."

It is perfectly possible that a boy from Habs who runs cross country for his country undershot a little in GCSE, or a girl from Habs who competed in the final stages of Young Musician of the Year under performed just a bit in her GCSEs, or a Habs boy whose mother died, or a Habs girl who started her own community project. Or a Habs boy who was depressed. You can't possibly know the school background of the few students who had below average GCSEs who were offered a place. And we don't know if all those 40 or none received offers. But your reading of the stats is dangerous. For example, would you conclude that you have no chance of getting a place if you receive a BMAT av score of above 85%? Because that's what the stats say happened last year, but it would be a silly interpretation of them.

If a teacher or parent or student himself believes a child is Oxford material, then he should be encouraged to apply. I personally think GcSE A* grades are a very silly measure to recruit Oxbridgers.

At Birmingham med school the av A* at GCSE is the same as Oxford. I understand it has one of the worst reputations for the percentage of students who complete their medicine degree. A large proportion of them fail their first year exams.

[Yellowtip]

Of course all comers should apply Frieda. Nevertheless they should have proportionate expectations so that they aren't set up for a fall. Yes of course all those 40 added to the shortlist may have received offers. Highly unlikely though, in probability terms. Really, the bottom line is: look at the lowest GCSE score to be offered a place, bear in mind that the scores of those from top performing schools will be adjusted down and then ask yourself how likely it is that a 6 or 7A* candidate from somewhere like Habs will be the one?

[seeker]

Wow- are there still people who give even the time of day to Myers-Briggs? Who knew!

[Yellowtip]

Since I'm able to flesh out the statistics with some degree of actual knowledge, I'd say the ludicrously high scorer interviewed but not offered a place will almost certainly be an international applicant who was pipped at the post on other qualities by the other international applicants who compete for a miniscule number of places.

A less likely scenario, but one which does happen, is a massively arrogant home applicant, far too cocky already and with his cockiness compounded by his mega BMAT score, who swaggers in and pisses off the tutors. They need to be able to teach these students one to one each week. They don't need that kind of grief.

I'm glad you can now spot your obvious mistake re. the 40.

[Yellowtip]

I thought the acronyms were professional organisations I didn't know about seeker, so resorted to Google!

[Yellowtip]

The application process at Oxford is far more complex than that at Birmingham Frieda and the drop out rate at Oxford is incredibly low.

[Yellowtip]

I see only one international was offered a place this year out of thirty two interviewed, so my money is definitely on that. The international applicants from the Far East tend to have mega high BMAT scores, which shouldn't really surprise.

[Amber2]

Bonsoir: "If you are in the business of moulding nerds, MordionAgenos, you probably aren't also in the business of incubating entrepreneurs. Which is where the problem lies. "

Really? You'd better tell that to Zuckerberg, Jobs and Gates et al

[Bonsoir]

What is your point, Amber2?

[Xenia]

ENFJ here....

I work with lots of different people. I work with some where only one person in a small organisation can speak to outsiders as only they have the people skills. They make sure that one is used for meetings (and even that one is pretty weird). I don't think you can generalise about what makes one successful or not. If they have a good product or core business they can sometimes make it go well if they get in the right people to do things. You need a mixture of people in most organisations.


I am an ex Habs parent although she didn't try for Oxbridge so I cannot say I am an expert on that. I doubt her career is any different or the worse for that, but I would certainly not have stopped her trying. In fact I think the school suggested it at one point.

[Amber2]

The point Bonsoir is Gates, Zuckerberg et al would be nerds in your book, and even if Jobs was more of a marketeer he needed his Wozniak to get going


Xenia made the point - you need complementary skills in most successful enterprises, and I also don't think the terms nerd and entrepreneur are mutually exclusive ...and I am talking from first hand experience of such companies having work with a few.

[LittleFrieda]

I think Myers Briggs is really good. Even more accurate than horoscopes.

[Tasmania]

Bonsoir - in the real world, the nerd and the entrepreneur would get together and combine their skills to form companies, etc. Steve Jobs was no doubt intelligent, but everyone readily admits he was the charismatic entrepreneur that carried Apple's. Steve Wozniak was the nerd - the technologist.

They weren't the perfect partners, and - apart from the thing that is Apple - had little in common, but hey... it worked.

[Tasmania]

Bonsoir - in the real world, the nerd and the entrepreneur would get together and combine their skills to form companies, etc. Steve Jobs was no doubt intelligent, but everyone readily admits he was the charismatic entrepreneur that carried Apple's vision. Steve Wozniak was the nerd - the technologist.

They weren't the perfect partners, and - apart from the thing that is Apple - had little in common, but hey... it worked.

[Tasmania]

Most good entrepreneurs are actually marked by two things: (1) they are intelligent, and (2) they think outside the box/are rebels.

Point 2 is what makes them not just go and "safely" work for any company. It takes a lot of courage, determination and near rebellious attitude to do that. But once they do it, I do hope they have brains, too.

The reason some people think intelligent people won't make good entrepreneurs is that a lot of people who the general population perceive to be "intelligent" are often just well-taught, heavily supported and cocooned... who may never have made it otherwise.

I have met a few kids who seem to possess both innate intelligence and drive, and the difference to more "normal" kids is astonishing. However, some teachers do not like such kids, as they are often also impatient and challenging. They'd rather have the kid that always follows... and who may end up being a good accountant, but not an entrepreneur.

[Xenia]

Most of those who set up a business and do well are fairly bright and as we know most people who try to set up a business fail.

For my children I would like them to have at least the capacity to own, not just be hired out even if the hiring out came with 5% of the company's shares as it gives them options and choices to control their own destiny. So if there is work which gives them the potential to do that longer term rather than ties them to employment for life, I would be glad.

Good exams, good degrees etc (and life skills of robustness, stoicism, coping, internal happinees) give them useful tools in life which means it is more likely they will manage financially than just say living off a man for money or the state or one employer.