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* **

@malteasergeezer I would agree (based on my own experience of friends' DC).

@UntamedWisteria

I simply don't believe it's easier to get into London super-selective grammars than some of the private schools.

Of course it isn't. Would you pay £40k a year if you could get the same thing for free?

Lots of people do (look at the secondary thread)... It's not the same offering . The top academically selective private schools outperform the super selective grammar schools' results and offer co-curricular opportunities that simply don't exist in grammar schools.

[quote Soma]@NewModelArmyMayhem18 we had friends that started formal tutoring from the summer before reception, happily sent their DC to state primary and DC had on average three tutors a week throughout primary. Plus extensive EC six days a week, including three different classes on Saturdays.[/quote]
I hope this isn't really true. That much formal tutoring from such a young age is unconscionable.

Although the grammar schools are selective, they are still bound by the same funding issues as comprehensives, still have 30 odd children to a class and so can't offer that specialised attention you get at a private school. You may be less likely to get disruptive kids in your class but the teachers are still overstretched, budgets are tight. And £40k really is the very top end of boarding school fees, London day schools are more likely to be £20k - admittedly still out of reach of the vast majority of the population - while I assume day schools elsewhere would be quite a bit less.

I never fail to be impressed at the unshakeable certainty amongst many these "top private school" mothers that their darling offspring are, to a boy [or girl], Übermensch whose natural place at the uppermost pinnacle of society is Gord-ordained from the minute they get their letter of acceptance from Colet Court prep or wherever.

They're probably right most of the time, although maybe not for exactly the reasons they like to think.

In at least some cases I suspect the many £000s of pounds spent on schools, tutors, music, sport, interview practice, application strategy, the years of military-style precision timetabling of their children's schedules, etc etc etc might have played at least as big a part as underlying ability.

@rattusrattus20 I agree - and my kids are AT private schools!

If people don’t think these schools help their children do better, why send them there?

Yet suddenly when it’s Oxbridge offers an A* at Eton is ALWAYS just as well deserved as one from a state school

@SouthLondonMommy unfortunately I expect it is true. I met a north london mum about five years ago who was paying for a tutor for a child not yet 3!

@rattusrattus20 I totally agree with you. Heck on one of the secondary education threads, one MNetter talked about 'braving' the super-selective grammar offer her DC currently has!

A lot of the pupils at super-selectives have access to very similar opportunities as their private schools peers. They may not have the state of the art facilities, drama suites, music studios etc but they still produce very well-rounded young adults with diverse extra-curricular interests. Some of whom are extremely talented in drama, sports, music etc.

[quote Foxhasbigsocks]@SouthLondonMommy unfortunately I expect it is true. I met a north london mum about five years ago who was paying for a tutor for a child not yet 3![/quote]
North London is its own universe...

On the primary thread someone's daughter has been accepted into NLCS and has been told by others she'll have to tutor her DD throughout as its standard. The Good School Guide indicates that its true too.

Why?! There seems to be an obsession with tutoring in that part of London. It doesn't seem to yield any better academic results. Either the teaching at the schools are totally rubbish or the schools aren't able to differentiate work so it is challenging enough for the most able. I doubt either is true so it is really hard to understand.

[quote NewModelArmyMayhem18]@rattusrattus20 I totally agree with you. Heck on one of the secondary education threads, one MNetter talked about 'braving' the super-selective grammar offer her DC currently has!

A lot of the pupils at super-selectives have access to very similar opportunities as their private schools peers. They may not have the state of the art facilities, drama suites, music studios etc but they still produce very well-rounded young adults with diverse extra-curricular interests. Some of whom are extremely talented in drama, sports, music etc.[/quote]
No one is saying grammar schools aren't good. They simply don't have the same financial resources and the results aren't quite as good (look at the league tables) as private schools. These facts are why many people choose to pay when they have the choice between the two.

The IOE in UCL believes its the funding gap that explains why private school students with the same ability as state school students on average get better grades at A-level. The study controls for ability based on GCSE results for students that only transferred to private school for A-levels) and comparing their outcomes with those who remained in state education with similar GCSEs.

Why?! There seems to be an obsession with tutoring in that part of London

Is it just for the hurdle stage? An arms race almost. Others do so everyone does. Eg at a certain age 11 plus or 13 plus you need to be in top numbers and everyone else is tutoring. Other than that it’s not much help.

@SouthLondonMommy @Foxhasbigsocks definitely true.

Tutoring. Was the same
Problem when we lived in SW London. We literally ran away and joined the equivalent of the circus - a comp. our friends thought we were abusing our children! Tutoring was rife and contacts weren't shared. Parents were cut-throat and children were twitchy. We decided we didn't want to play that game and opted out by running away!

I’m not sure what the rate of tutoring is in SE London to get into independents. Could be the same or lower.

Honestly, half of my friends kids go to independent schools and I don't know anyone who tutors for the 4+. My daughter got offers for two highly selective schools with no tutoring.

I am aware people tutor for the 7+ but once kids are in why, on earth do people in North London continue to tutor kids. NLCS is a through school! Why keep tutoring...

@scentedgeranium We did the same as you did - and then out the other end years down the line you realise all these DC turn out the pretty much the same anyway, give or take the odd Oxford wonder or druggy drop out which pop out from either sector!

It would be interesting to look at what the % of public school vs state school Oxbridge successful candidates was back in the 50s and 60s in the aftermath of the education reforms which gave many WC/LMC children access to grammar schools (and thereon to university including Oxbridge). I have quite a few friends from solidly affluent professional families whose own parents very much progressed 'up the ladder' several rungs in one generation through education.

Somewhere in the past few decades, meritocracy seems to have been paused. Maybe many of today's state school Oxbridge students were yesterday's private school ones? So it looks as if progress has been made (in some respects) but really it hasn't.

@NewModelArmyMayhem18

It would be interesting to look at what the % of public school vs state school Oxbridge successful candidates was back in the 50s and 60s in the aftermath of the education reforms which gave many WC/LMC children access to grammar schools (and thereon to university including Oxbridge). I have quite a few friends from solidly affluent professional families whose own parents very much progressed 'up the ladder' several rungs in one generation through education.

Somewhere in the past few decades, meritocracy seems to have been paused. Maybe many of today's state school Oxbridge students were yesterday's private school ones? So it looks as if progress has been made (in some respects) but really it hasn't.

This chart looks to me as if it's showing progress.

www.timeshighereducation.com/opinion/oxbridge-access-question-has-not-been-settled

apologies, that was completely the wrong chart, this is the right one

Thanks for that @rattusrattus20 but shocking that there was a two decade 'dip' twixt 1980 and 2000.

I'm not sure if it's a coincidence but the Assisted Places scheme was introduced in 1980 and abolished in 1997. So there would have been large number of bright pupils shifted from state to independent schools during that period.

According to Wikipedia (sorry don't have time to find a better source) by 1997 there were 34,000 pupils supported by the scheme in 355 schools. So it might be that this scheme skewed the stats for the period it operated showing pupils from independent schools whose fees had been paid by the state?

@NewModelArmyMayhem18

Thanks for that *@rattusrattus20* but shocking that there was a two decade 'dip' twixt 1980 and 2000.

-Hey, that's what a proper Tory government can do for you-

I think I've read a few times that the early 80s is when private school fees, and presuambly therefore resources, really started to skyrocket.

www.tes.com/news/uks-privatestate-school-wealth-gap-may-be-biggest-world

I am not really aware of the assisted places scheme at all (shame on me). Yes, you are probably onto something there @sandybayley. Also, some of those were the Thatcher years. It was quite a polarised time societally, so maybe there was also some backlash against the whole Oxbridge privilege thing?

No worries @NewModelArmyMayhem18 - DH wasn't on an assisted place but did get a 100% scholarship to one of the MN lusted after SW London independent schools in 1984. His parents wouldn't have qualified for an assisted place but they couldn't have afforded the fees.

Interesting to note that it was a Conservative government that introduced the assisted placed scheme.