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* **

Caravaggio - as I said it must also be board specific and subject specific as no "booklets" for any igcses that mine have done.

I am always bemused OnlyTea by how on these threads only that specific poster's experience must always be the norm too!

The teaching is the same. We all trained at the same colleges or on the same courses. Believe it or not, people move between the sectors too. You will get the good, the bad and the ugly whichever sector you choose. I would say state schools follow fads more - sometimes good fads and sometimes useless fads.

@MarshaBradyo
I read the question as what are grammar or comprehensive?

need new specs.

Isn't the advantage of fee paying smaller class sizes not teaching? Never heard anyone try and claim the quality of teachers is better in fee paying sector (sometimes heard the reverse.)

I would say state schools follow fads more

Usually because they are handed down by the latest incompetent Education Secretary.

The disparity between GCSEs in state and private schools is a scandal IMO - the IGCSEs are far less challenging. It's an outrage that the IGCSEs even exist.

It's a pendulum swing. I did O levels and then went private for 6th form. First parents' evening the school basically said we must have misled them about my O level result in one subject as the gaps in my knowledge were so extensive!

DS is at an independent and of 10 GCSEs only one was an IGCSE. So there is some generalisation going both ways on here. I am in favour of those who will get the most out of an Oxbridge education being awarded the places and in favour of outreach etc.

Sorry, but I’d rather not, as I’ve already said it’s my local area and it would therefore be outing.
It’s in Surrey and appears on several contextual offer lists, including Warwick and Bristol. I’m sure you’ll be able to work it out.

(My last post was meant for @dipdips)

At my dds excellent girls only state the higher sets are larger as the class need less one to one teaching the lower the set the smaller it is. On a results basis their results are the same as the local girls private. I genuinely struggle to see the value added myself but guess people have their reasons and are entitled to do so. What they should not be entitled to is a leg up to a better university by dint of paid for education.

@dipdips

Isn't the advantage of fee paying smaller class sizes not teaching? Never heard anyone try and claim the quality of teachers is better in fee paying sector (sometimes heard the reverse.)

I don’t think any class, however small, will do well with a poor teacher.

I’ve had kids in both state and independent. The benefit of (selective) independent was small classes of similarly-able students able to work at the same pace, with good resources, led by a (believe it or not!) very good teacher who wasn’t ground down by endless form-filling and the need for crowd control of more disruptive students.
That’s broadly what grammar school students get too.

My own school life was at a northern inner city comprehensive which, to be fair, was not too bad, but only because it had instigated its own, inner, two-tier system within the school itself.

I'm a tutor at Oxford.

One of the reasons I don't send DC to private school!

(Not because I want to game the system. Because I recognise that our admissions processes were historically biased, privileging the well-coached over the intellectually curious. State school students also tend to improve more when they arrive, and underperform relative to private school students in first-year exams while outperforming them in Finals.)

Small class sizes, tailored sessions to help with Oxbridge entrance (including speakers and specialist consultants drafted in), help with MAT and ELAT and other specialist papers, interview techniques. That is what you're paying for with private and which state can't provide. And before anyone says state should, the reality is they can't - too busy fire fighting on limited resources. Thus state candidates may well get the same or better A level grades, but they do not get help in those vital steps in the process. This is the key difference and one which I'd like to think Oxbridge thinks about
Although I'll tell you a story... DS applied to New College Oxford to do English, did sufficiently well in ELAT (without school help) to get an interview, got to the interview abs was asked in the interview why on Earth he thought he could get into Oxford from the sort of school he'd come from. DS was rattled by the discriminatory question and alas didn't get a place. He asked for feedback afterwards and guess what? He didn't perform well in the interview.
Applied to Cambridge the next year after an excellent gap year and 3 A stars and got in.
That is the kind of nonsense that goes on.

@hopsalong

I'm a tutor at Oxford.

One of the reasons I don't send DC to private school!

(Not because I want to game the system. Because I recognise that our admissions processes were historically biased, privileging the well-coached over the intellectually curious. State school students also tend to improve more when they arrive, and underperform relative to private school students in first-year exams while outperforming them in Finals.)

Hops are they mostly grammar from state? if you know

Ifailed ha I appreciate your reply in that case!

Sorry @hopsalong my post looks like it's in response to yours. It's not! It's just my anecdote and in fact we agree.
We told DS after his New College experience ah well it's important you get in with your tutors at Oxford so maybe it wasn't meant to be. But that sort of question shouldn't be on the table should it?

@MsTSwift
It’s the old ‘you can choose to spend your money on a car...’ argument, isn’t it? The problem is even state education is unfair. The area in which I live has kept the selective state school system - I could make a fortune providing 11+ tutoring the children of the well-off. The well-to-do London middle classes might send their children to a comprehensive but it will be a different kettle of fish to the comprehensive in a deprived part of the north. If colleges are going to play with admission criteria, they need to be very certain that they aren’t just helping the middle classes in leafy suburbs. I think I saw up thread it needed to be based not just on postcode but FSM eligibility and so on. Could any of the tutors who posted explain how they decide who would be eligible for lower grade admissions?

Just another point about something I’ve noticed on the news: is it fair to say that London state schools are in receipt of more money? They seem very new and shiny compared to the state schools I know (not in London).

@BustopherPonsonbyJones you're right. State funding isn't equal either. Our children's school in cornwall was definitely at the end of the line for funding! And that's wrong too. But that being wrong doesn't make the giant uplift gained by the private sector fair when it comes to nabbing the top uni places

[quote BustopherPonsonbyJones]@MsTSwift
It’s the old ‘you can choose to spend your money on a car...’ argument, isn’t it? The problem is even state education is unfair. The area in which I live has kept the selective state school system - I could make a fortune providing 11+ tutoring the children of the well-off. The well-to-do London middle classes might send their children to a comprehensive but it will be a different kettle of fish to the comprehensive in a deprived part of the north. If colleges are going to play with admission criteria, they need to be very certain that they aren’t just helping the middle classes in leafy suburbs. I think I saw up thread it needed to be based not just on postcode but FSM eligibility and so on. Could any of the tutors who posted explain how they decide who would be eligible for lower grade admissions?

Just another point about something I’ve noticed on the news: is it fair to say that London state schools are in receipt of more money? They seem very new and shiny compared to the state schools I know (not in London).[/quote]
Oxbridge don't generally give lower offers based on contextual factors ... they do use contextual factors to make sure their interviews and offers go to students from a wide range of backgrounds, but they still all have to meet the same target grades. The only exceptions are the recently introduced entry route to Cambridge via a foundation year which is aimed at bridging the gap (and they have to pass the exams to transfer onto a degree course) ... www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-england-cambridgeshire-55635300

In my career so far, I have seen many examples of how, once the ground is levelled, children from disadvantaged backgrounds outperform the children from advantaged backgrounds.
Similar grades to start with, similar capabilities on paper. What is obvious though is the fact that the children from disadvantaged background got those grades in not-so-ideal circumstances vs children who had more opportunities. Most of the time, this means they are smarter and work harder, outperforming those from the advantaged backgrounds.
It’s been a recurring theme in my two-decade long career so far. This is why we need to bring this change as this is a huge loss of talent otherwise, which can cost us our future and standing amongst developed nations eventually as Asia and Africa accelerate their progress.
I highly recommend Mathew Syed’s Blackbox Thinking.

So are all private school kids thicker than state school kids with the same grades?

@makemineatriple765 I do find that when I meet a comp kid who has got really great grades I feel an extra level of respect for them. Maybe it is not so much intelligence I am respecting but their perseverance, resilience, self starting attitude, self belief.

@makemineatriple765

So are all private school kids thicker than state school kids with the same grades?

I said it is a recurring theme. There are some great exceptions I can think of. But it’s usually the trend that gives you important information. I am saying this as a parent whose DCs are going to excellent schools in areas quite out of reach for an average house buyer in the U.K.

[quote dipdips]@makemineatriple765 I do find that when I meet a comp kid who has got really great grades I feel an extra level of respect for them. Maybe it is not so much intelligence I am respecting but their perseverance, resilience, self starting attitude, self belief.[/quote]
This is a good point. One of the current issues with the university education system is that we place too much emphasis on the grades and not the real life skills like resilience and ability to deal with tough situations while keeping a cool head.

Certainly in our town the state schools got more into oxbridge and st Andrews than the private. It’s a bit tricky to quantify as the sixth forms are larger but yes anecdotally and what was said online it seems dramatically more from (very good) state schools. I know a few at
good private schools whose kids got into very normal unis - not RG - which state school kids got in with Bs and Cs. Hard to think that expensive education was hugely worth it in those cases.

What about super selective private school? Are those kids never hugely bright? Or is it just their surrounding bolstering them. And if it’s just their surroundings then no one should want to go to Oxbridge because it offers all the benefits of a super selective private school.

A lot of patronising comments on this thread.