Oxbridge Entry and Equality

[KnitterAndTwisted]

I keep hearing from Oxford and Cambridge that they are aiming to increase the numbers of admissions from state schools.

Then;
A friend with a son at a highly regarded private school in South London tells me that her son has been invited to an introductory taster day at Cambridge. In discussion it transpires that they have invited a cohort from that school as they are under target for admissions from that borough. So they go to a ^private* school in that borough? Where probably most of the kids at the school live in other boroughs! And surely the only reason for borough based targets (this is a deprived area) is to monitor state school intake?

Another friend, at another private school tells me that a Cambridge Admissions tutor (one quoted in an article about getting state students into Cambridge) has been to her son's school and given them lots of tips as to how to get in: how to pick a college and subject, make a good application. Do private schools pay Cambridge for this (and thus enable Cambridge to pimp themselves out for money to wealthy private schools) or do Cambridge take it upon themselves to tour independent and public schools? It would have taken a whole day to get there and back).

Then I gather from the recent cheating debacle that Cambridge runs a niche set of exams as an alternative to A Levels, largely (maybe solely) used by private schools, and is the only exam board where practicing teachers, in these schools, are allowed to be the ones who set the questions.

Other students gain access to Oxbridge to do Classics / Greek / Latin, surely largely from a private school intake because it is an uncommon subject in state schools. Having got in to do that subject, they then swap courses to study subjects that they may not have got in to do had they applied for that in tne first place. So their private school curriculum leap frogs them in.

It is hard not to think that pleas that they want to attract state school students is not hypocritical.

I am watching incredibly bright kids (not mine ) in our school ace their GCSEs and A levels, and no one from Cambridge Admissions has been cosying up over sherry in the staff room at their school.

Have to stand up for Oxford here. DS in Y10 now 11, just attended a week long all expenses paid residential summer school there with 40 other children from state schools in deprived areas. The whole thrust of the week was to 'demystify' Oxbridge, encourage them to apply there and to teach them learn how best to be successful. I saw no reason to think it was anything other a serious attempt to get more state school children, from deprived areas, in.

There are loads of these access days. My DCs attended several of the Oxbridge colleges where academics were approachable and massively encouraging. Can't help but think it's just sticking plaster after most of the damage is done, however. And most admissions|academics know this if they are honest. By yr 10, pupils may have made poor subject choices (non-facilitating, such as critical thinking, childcare,etc). Yet if comp schools target any earlier, in Yr 7, they will be in the soup for secretly selecting just a handful of pupils. So far better to open up access to shadow education (tutoring) at an earlier stage to disadvantaged pupils. Then get universities to offer on actual grades instead of predictions.

dameof I know of lots of children paying for tutors at our local comp.

By yr 10, pupils may have made poor subject choices (non-facilitating, such as critical thinking, childcare,etc). Yet if comp schools target any earlier, in Yr 7, they will be in the soup for secretly selecting just a handful of pupils.

^^ This, in spades. And don't ask our elite world class universities to be solely responsible for redressing the imbalance that results from low parental aspirations, poverty, lack of of opportunity. We'll do our bit, and then some, but we can't do it all.

It's not the fault of private schools if some comprehensive schools engage in things like early entry for GCSE, poor advice about facilitating A levels and fail to replace A level teachers half at through courses. All of which has happened to friends' children at our local school.

Our local head is much admired but he doesn't come from an academic background himself and doesn't seem to know how to nurture and push the very bright children in the school. And not enough of the parents and governors seem to challenge him with regard to doing this. That's not oxbridge's fault.

And don't ask our elite world class universities to be solely responsible for redressing the imbalance that results from low parental aspirations, poverty, lack of of opportunity

I think this is right. There is without question inequality in our education system for all sorts of reasons, but it is not the fault of Oxbridge or Cambridge and nor is it within their power to put it right.

All Oxbridge can do is reach out to those who have already been disadvantaged and let down. They cannot erase the previous 18 years of life experience their students have had.

They are just an easy target for people to blame because they are elite institutions and a lot of people in society can't seem to handle that.

I would suggest that the state schools are at fault, not Cambridge. I know a few kids how have been told at their state schools not to apply to oxbridge at all (you will be glad to know that one of them defied her school and got into medicine while the other two are planning on applying anyway).

What the hell? I thought Oxbridge turned out amazing gifted intelligent leaders across the world? If that's the case, who better to solve the problem?

My boys were educated at non-selective state schools from 4-18 and both have had success with Oxbridge applications. IME Oxbridge are very keen to reach out to bright kids from non- inde, non- selective schools. By the time ds1 was completing his application, I could have given theOxbridge admissions tutor's talk myself, I had heard it so many times from all the opportunities we had been given!