Are top private schools getting fewer oxbridge offers?

[Ijustwanttoask]

Just read in the papers about the drop in Oxbridge offers to Eton in the last few years. Is there a same trend for other big name public schools and top London day schools too?

In the past years, these schools generally happily announce the numbers of Oxbridge offers they get around this time of the year but I haven't seen much for 2021.

* Title edited by MNHQ by request* **

Getting the interview is a very large part of battle in getting into these companies. And the hiring managers are no less bedazzled by Harvard and Oxbridge than anyone else. The fact of the matter is that, on average, graduates from the very top schools have accomplished more than graduates from other schools. The very best graduates from a good US state school like Berkeley will be more than competitive with the average Harvard grad, and will likely be competitive with the best from Harvard. But the average Berkeley grad will have achieved less than than the average Harvard grad both as of entry to college and upon graduation. Which makes it a simpler and safer bet to hire the Harvard grad unless the Berkeley grad really outshines them. Which doesn't happen that often.

@expat96 I thought you were talking about a manager knowing a candidate and getting their CV considered, sorry wires crossed.
Agree the dazzlement of the big uni's still an allure.

I think it goes beyond getting an interview which has to be fairer now with all the scrutiny. It is much easier to get experience if you attend an independent school - that’s where the contacts begin. If you are staying with a friend for a weekend and their parents have friends round, how wonderful when those friends own the company/are on the board/work in the industry you want to work in and lo! that’s your summer holiday sorted out. It’s not even malicious. You were just in the right place in the right time.

@expat96

Getting the interview is a very large part of battle in getting into these companies. And the hiring managers are no less bedazzled by Harvard and Oxbridge than anyone else. The fact of the matter is that, on average, graduates from the very top schools have accomplished more than graduates from other schools. The very best graduates from a good US state school like Berkeley will be more than competitive with the average Harvard grad, and will likely be competitive with the best from Harvard. But the average Berkeley grad will have achieved less than than the average Harvard grad both as of entry to college and upon graduation. Which makes it a simpler and safer bet to hire the Harvard grad unless the Berkeley grad really outshines them. Which doesn't happen that often.

Accomplished more what?

@dipdips I don't think you read me too wrong. These shops have some very good people and a lot who are good but not particularly special. Especially at the entry level, even in the front office, responsibilities can be fairly tedious and mundane. You don't need Harvard or Oxbridge grads to do these jobs. Partly because of this, job requirements are rarely so well specified that you can rank every candidate precisely. Because of this fuzziness, a lot of candidates could potentially be considered "tied". Having a very selective college on your CV is one way to break these ties. And yes, having someone very senior interested is another way. Neither will get you the job if you are clearly unqualified. But both can be very useful if your other attributes aren't enough to make you stand out, which is the case for most applicants.

Our local, Ofsted outstanding, 6th form college in very middle class leafy SE suburb (where average house prices are £600k upwards and most within a mile are £1m+) is on the list for contextual offers from some RG universities, based on the fact that there is one council estate on the edge of their catchment

I find this hard to believe. Generally speaking to get a contextual offers you have to satisfy at least 2 criteria out of three: deprived home postcode, deprived school and in receipt of FSM. No one is going to get a contextual offer on the only basis that the school backs onto a council estate.

Surely the final destination is Oxbridge for UK for many parents with very academic children however it isnt everything. Parents also pay for educational experience including facilities and extra curriculum activities for these 7 years of their children educational life.

Our local, Ofsted outstanding, 6th form college in very middle class leafy SE suburb (where average house prices are £600k upwards and most within a mile are £1m+) is on the list for contextual offers from some RG universities, based on the fact that there is one council estate on the edge of their catchment
individual universities set their own criteria for contextual offers and usually draw from a wide range of data and school attended is just one of the factors. These include:

Individual factors ( are they underrepresented in HE/that institution)

Area Data: This may include the Participation of Local Areas measure (POLAR), Index of Multiple Deprivation. POLAR data is is used to estimate participation in higher education based on postcode.

School data: This may cover whether the applicant attended a school with relatively low average attainment at Key Stage 4, or in a deprived area.

Intersectional data: Data which takes into account more than one measure of deprivation, such as UCAS’s multiple equality measure (MEM).

Participation in outreach activities or programmes

Individual pupils at this school may get contextualised offer because they are first in their family to attend university and they live in a postcode with low participation.

Alternatively this school may have a partnership agreement with certain universities which means favourable admissions criteria- for example, a guaranteed interview if you meet the entry requirements. This is different to contextual offers.

@breatheslowandtrust

Our local, Ofsted outstanding, 6th form college in very middle class leafy SE suburb (where average house prices are £600k upwards and most within a mile are £1m+) is on the list for contextual offers from some RG universities, based on the fact that there is one council estate on the edge of their catchment

I find this hard to believe. Generally speaking to get a contextual offers you have to satisfy at least 2 criteria out of three: deprived home postcode, deprived school and in receipt of FSM. No one is going to get a contextual offer on the only basis that the school backs onto a council estate.

Virtually every state sixth form is on Bristols list for lower offers- plain to see.

Virtually every state sixth form is on Bristols list for lower offers- plain to see.

They also clearly state why. These schools fall into the bottom 40% for average attainment and typically have a high percentage of students who live in low participation areas.

I went to a mediocre comprehensive too many years ago to count. I applied to Oxbridge but didn’t get a place. I was a top performer in my school and these days would have probably qualified for a socially engineered place. With hindsight, I honestly wasn’t good enough. Not because I didn’t have the potential but the teaching I received at school was really poor. It was only when I went on to another university that I realised the huge gaps I had in my education. Maybe if I’d been given a place I would have caught up but the pressure on me would have been huge and really not good for my mental health. It was not Oxbridge that failed me but my school. I really hate the way Oxbridge are being asked to compensate for the failings of state education.

And by the way I have done very well without an Oxbridge degree.

It's not social engineering
It's not just that state education tends not to be as good as the independent sector. It's multiple factors of disadvantage.
It's about social, cultural and economic capital

It's about not being disadvantaged because of where you were born, your parents education, your parents occupation or the school you attended.

Exactly Muchtootall, the skills of how to handle work loads, pressure and rounded education couldnt be just learned over night. Indeed if the state school child was very able, self motivated and have been self learning (if indeed the state school was failing and the child doesnt have any tutoring either paid or non-paid) then certainly the child needs a little “bonus” in their Oxbridge application, however there are many conditions to follow to avoid abusive of the system.

Then there are parents, schools who play the system. I have read a paper about a state school in East London that sends so many children to Oxbridge and it turns out the school acceptance is on selective ability or parents move children to state 6th form only to be more “favoured”.

@Muchtootall I think kids turning up at uni feeling like they have massive gaps in their knowledge is literally what universities are for. In fact, if all of my students dont feel like that, then I'd consider it a failure on my part. So the way you felt was just right. Thats the whole point of going to uni, to stretch your knowledge.

You are also assuming that those who had got in from private schools didnt feel as you did, you dont know because you didnt go, but i would hope that all undergraduates feel like that - I certainly did and I went to Oxbridge and a few other top unis.

The point is that kids from state schools with lower grades perform just as well as private school pupils with higher grades once at university. The data is clear so its nothing anyone needs to speculate on.

"I'm all for getting a more diverse set in to Uni's in general but not at the expense of lowering standards"...

I really hope this poster did not mean to be so condescending to some of the ' deserving hard working working class children who cannot attend elite schools for reasons outside of their control.

Similar to colleagues who went to Russell Univ(including Oxbridge) performs no better than non-Russell ones. It was all very over-rated (or wasnt it?)

Let's not forget grammar schools where people from all sorts of backgrounds compete fair and square based on abilities.

Ha ha! Maybe when my parents went to grammar school back in the 1950s. Not today! They are the preserve of sharp-elbowed middle class families who can afford the right post code and the right tutors.

Not the melting pot you imagine.

So why are Oxbridge picking proportionally more private schooled students? What do they have that Oxbridge like so much? How can state schools prepare their pupils so the same degree? I think we need to be pulling the state system UP, rather than saying private schools are unfair.

If more was invested into the state system, private schools would look less appealing for many parents.

Oxbridge will, and should, take the best pupils, no matter what school they went to.

@KathySeldon I am not really sure whether Oxbridge will/should.....etc....anything. In practice, by now universities in the UK are run for money. The aim is to get lots of students - preferably high fees paying ones and that means overseas ones for example over UK ones.

Privately educated kids are smart - especially if they come from the right private schools. They are competitive to get in and gone are the days when nice but dim kids went private. Why do they come across as better - essentially they look the part, they are more polished, have been drilled to the ninth degree, are super confident from having been told they are the leaders all their lives etc. If you put a privately educated v state educated kid side by side - a kid from private school will just be shinier. But! They are not automatically the smartest or the best - just more polished.

So why are Oxbridge picking proportionally more private schooled students? What do they have that Oxbridge like so much?

I wonder if it’s due to the fact that many private schools are highly selective, so only take those who are likely to succeed academically.

Oxbridge will, and should, take the best pupils, no matter what school they went to.

Exactly what widening participation is all about!!!

I wonder if it’s due to the fact that many private schools are highly selective, so only take those who are likely to succeed academically.

So why is it so wrong of Oxbridge to take these brighter pupils?

@KathySeldon academic success and being bright are not the same thing though they are often related especially when it comes to school. However, being bright is to do with intelligence - academic success is rather different that's just about being able to get the right grades (increasingly often by getting ghostwriters to write essays for them in the case of some of my students).

I would also suggest that people often misunderstand what universities are for and how the themselves see it. Top unis dont care about students - teaching is v v secondary though necessary evil in order to maintain funding. In an ideal world university would get rid of all students and academic would just do research, but thats not possible. So universities then select a few to get in. Mostly they would like as many international students in - as they pay the highest fees. Then if unis have to they will take a few British students - who are mostly selected according to UCAS - Oxbridge interviews and lets be honest - most people pick their own. Most academics are white, male, middle class - almost all academics all over have gone to the top unis (they wouldnt be where they are if they hadnt) so they tend to select people who are like them. Privately educated, white, middle class - mostly male though it varies a bit by discipline. Most academics, especially at Oxbridge/top unis, dont really care all that much about students - because they are judged on their research and not teaching, and therefore dont care all that much whether they pick the top, best etc.......so on average they will favour private, male, mc etc because it's easier, assumed to be more reliable.

So in this conversation about unis, Oxbridge, being smart etc there is often quite a large gap between how unis see things and the general public.