Why on earth would you go state if you could afford private?

[Schmedz]

This thread is for Maisie and happygardening . I like dares!

That said, there is one Etonian on the list of new undergrads at this particular college but no Westminster students at all. But perhaps none applied. Big old pretty college mind you.

But Yellowtip I dont know where you live but there is plenty of "parental investment (not necessarily financial) and pressure" at our local comp and you cant tell me these parents don't exist at grammar schools.

"at a private school all/most are encouraged to apply."
Tiff do you have children in the independent sector? I can assure you even at the most selective this does not happen.

My DS was at Eton. He was straight A/A* through GCSE, AS and A2. He did not apply to Oxbridge and the school made no effort to encourage him.

Many independent schools I think are pretty determined to increase their numbers of successful applicants because this is what many parents are paying for. I'm not talking about Westminster et al although they are increasing their number slightly year on year but now the less selective ones are also keen to get more into Oxbridge.

Maybe this obsession with Oxbridge is what should be questioned? There are some very rigorous subjects e.g. marine biology, meteorology, where Oxbridge either doesn't teach them or only does the odd module. If those are where your interests lie, it would be a pity to pass them up for straight biology or applied maths/physics just to go to Oxbridge.

Yellow do you believe that independent schools are enabling the profoundly mediocre to get places at Oxbridge and others.

I suspect that's not the case now - it was a generation ago when Prince Charles could get in with a couple of not very special A levels (although even then, I think an exception was made). Prince Harry wouldn't have been able to get in, even if he had wanted to.

Given just how competitive entry is to some subjects, it would be surprising if the mediocre-but-over-schooled were making it to Oxford in, say, PPE. I have seen several recent PPE applicants from France and they were all radiantly stunning in every way. Some made it, some didn't. But they were all exceptional candidates.

happy you may be guilty of generalising yourself. It's an entirely different ethos in the state sector.

Yes my kids are in the private sector.

I accept that private does not equate to highly academic and that private schools that rank 50 (guesstimate) or lower have an Oxbridge record that won't be too dissimilar to that of a reasonable GS.

However, I have personal experience of a number of schools in the top 50 and they all insist on a slate of GCSEs As and A* as a condition for entry into the 6th Form. I find it hard to believe that these schools don't encourage most of their kids to apply to Oxbridge. They may not all be good enough to get offers but most of them are good enough to apply and be in with a chance.

Or are you talking about Oxbridge not always being the best for a subject? If that is where you are going then I accept that for certain degrees your tutor will be pointing you elsewhere.

Ok if italics won't work, I'll try bold. I referred to applicants, not offerees. Might as well do capitals too: APPLICANTS. There will be profoundly mediocre APPLICANTS etc.

"If those are where your interests lie, it would be a pity to pass them up for straight biology or applied maths/physics just to go to Oxbridge.
I doubt this is happening but most probably want to read more conventional/mainstream subjects at undergraduate level (my own particular area of interest can be studied at undergraduate level but mainly offered by top universities only at post grad level as its a bit niche!) it is these who schools are trying to get into Oxbridge and schools are responding to their customers demands.

Tiff your school is obviously very different from my DS's super selective they send between 34-37% a year to Oxbridge but I know from a talk the other day only the best are encouraged to apply.

I was given a selection of applications to look at recently. Described as 'representative' ie acceped, rejected, pooled etc. And I thought they were bloody impressive. Not iomany where I questioned their decisim to give it a punt.

Tiff, Why would good schools actively encourage most pupils to apply? Even among those students good enough, many (Most) will be disappointed. A school that is good in the way I think you mean it is more likely to be managing expectations , advising as best theyvan with the knowledge they have of pupil and proposed course, and celebrating the success of its students in whatever choice they make.

That's interesting happy. At DS school, if they're likely to get the grades they're encouraged to apply. Their seems to be an acceptance that there is a cetain lottery aspect to it. So why not give it a whirl? If you fancy. Ditto Ivy league.

Of course, there are parents who send DC to state school and do all the extracurriculars privately. I know of a family that does this and DC does tennis, ballet, jazzdance, drama, flute, piano, karate... (and those are JUST the things I know of).

But this is a very, very time consuming process where you will desperately need a SAHM, and in the above case, said mom is driving from place to place for a good part of the day, summer camps, etc. - which all together would still cost a lot. In families where both parents work, this would prove impossible as there will be no one to chauffeur said kid around. To give their DCs the same opportunities, they will HAVE to go private. Private schools around us (we are spoilt for choice in the private sector, but DOOMED in the state sector) offer LOADS of extracurricular activities

However, should such parents be penalized by the wider MN community because they do so?

But a well schooled, interested applicant with parents who are able to facilitate supporting experiences is a good applicant with a chance of success which increases if they choose their subject from the less popular. They needn't be exceptional intellects.

Tasmania - in much of continental Europe, families do exactly as you describe because there are no independent one-stop-shop schools in the Anglo-Saxon model.

Tas whever I hear parents saying they will 'fill in the gaps' I think good luck with that one. If you have the time and energy to do sports/music/drama/latin/maths etc and you have teens who are willing, well, you're a better (wo)man than me!

happy - my kids aren't anywhere near 6th Form so I've no personal experience as to.what is said by the school to individual pupils.

I was merely making the point that most of the 6th formers are going to get AAA or better so, on paper at least, they stand a chance and that I can't see a £18k a year school taking the money and telling a pupil they aren't good enough for Oxbridge.

Anyway, it comes down to what you mean by 'encouraging'. The school invites people from Oxbridge to come and talk about admissions and courses. Any one who is interested can attend. Whether a master will go up to a 'mediocre' candidate and 'encourage' him to apply for a highly competitive subject that said candidate has no chance of landing is something I'm not privy to.

Bonsoir

I know. But literally 100% of all my former classmates in Continental Europe who have children work either part-time or are SAHM. Only those who don't have kids are still working.

However, life is such that a house/renting is much cheaper than in the UK (think 50% off sales) - they find it hard to justify spending more than 20% of one's income on housing, as many do here (which they think is nuts). And even with one salary, they have enough left over to do fab holidays abroad AND save.

Continental Europe is completely different beast...

slip - most of the top selectives will turn out a significant number of students with expected grades of AAA or higher. With the basic academic requirement met, the lottery that is admissions then takes over.

And like the lottery, anyone can win :)

Anyway, as I said in my post to happy, 'encouraging' can simply be the school laying on speakers.

...... Having said that happy, DP was advised not to apply to read English at Oxford. Instead, the tutor advised that, if Oxford was a must do then DP would stand a good chance for History.

Anyway, I don't understand why I am spending so much time litigating whether a few/ some/most/all at selective schools are encouraged to apply to Oxbridge :)

"'slip - most of the top selectives will turn out a significant number of students with expected grades of AAA or higher."
So do the "top" comprehensives .as indeed do the not top
Comprehensives! Are those As somehow different from private and
Selective school As? Or is there some other reason that RG universities seem to take more private and selective candidates?

seeker - I guess it was only a matter of time before you turned up and steered the conversation towards selective v comp sub thread . Predictable as always.

As a teacher who has taught in both, and went to both as a child can can safely say not all children are suited to private school and you certainly cannot guarantee a better just by paying.