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* **

Keepyourkidsafe what are these 'underhand' methods by which unworthy students are using to gain a place in medical school? If you wouldn't let your nanny near them you need to question the standards of the medical course, they all sit the same exams at the end of every year. There isn't a tiered system for ex private schoolers and then rogues who should never have got in in the first place.

Can we all take a moment to consider the poor public school pupils who are having their rightful places at Oxbridge jeopardised by rough, underpriveleged pupils who will never meet the mark once qualified

Do you think this will lead to a decrease in places offered at grammar schools or will they still offer similar places as they’re still not private?

There is also the other aspect that many able pupils aren't attracted to the "top" unis like Oxbridge, StAndrews etc.

My son went to a top 50 state grammar school. Looking at leaver destinations over the last few years, they only had a handful going to Oxbridge, despite a cohort of 300.

The school, teachers, sixth form tutors, etc., were all heavily pushing the students to apply for the "top" unis, even organising & financing visits, etc. My son was positively harrassed into going on one of the trips to Oxford. It turned him right off. He was forecast 4 A* (which he achieved), so had the choice, like lots of his friends. But they've mostly gone to a wide range of Unis. My son finally chose a non RG uni which his sixth form tutor gave him lots of stick for putting on his UCAS application, but he loved the place at open days, loved the ethos, loved the location, loved the course (very relevant to modern working life), and it's still a Top 10 despite not being RG.

He went to lots of open days at the "top" unis, including Durham, St Andrews, LSE, etc., but just didn't get good vibes.

I'm not sure it's a good thing to constantly look at Oxbridge at the Gold standard. There are dozens of excellent universities, many of whom have a more modern outlook in terms of subject choice, university life, etc, many of whom rank higher than Oxbridge in league tables etc in certain areas. For a lot of students, especially who come from a non Uni family background, Oxbridge is a step too far.

For example, look at grades and profiles without volunteering names, backgrounds & schools?

But in this case background and school attended is important.

It's not about lowering standards or just letting anyone in. Getting a place at an elite university or medical school is still incredibly competitive. Contextual offers are about recognising that it's not an equal playing field.

A big issue we have is that first generation students and students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds are less likely to even apply to elite universities despite meeting the specified entry requirements because they don't think they will fit in 'because people like them don't go to universities like that'.

@breatheslowandtrust

Keepyourkidsafe what are these 'underhand' methods by which unworthy students are using to gain a place in medical school? If you wouldn't let your nanny near them you need to question the standards of the medical course, they all sit the same exams at the end of every year. There isn't a tiered system for ex private schoolers and then rogues who should never have got in in the first place.

Can we all take a moment to consider the poor public school pupils who are having their rightful places at Oxbridge jeopardised by rough, underpriveleged pupils who will never meet the mark once qualified

A big problem at my son's grammar was that there were a lot of highly able students heading for medical degrees, who really didn't want to become doctors and had little interest in medical careers. They were being heavily pressurised by their families to go into medical school. Many of those were doing it only for the career/money/pension as that's what was being force-fed to them at home. Sad to say, but it was a particular ethnic group who were doing that. Other ethic groups were doing a wide variety of A levels and choosing widely different degrees, but this particular ethnic group were, probably 75%, heading to medical school, egged on by their families. I'm not sure those, who weren't really wanting to become doctors, will end up being the kind of doctor you want to be treated by when you're vulnerable. "Pushy" parents have a lot to answer for.

I have to say I find a lot of Oxbridge policies on inclusion virtue signalling and not actually tackling social deprivation and inequality (not all - there are some which actually are focused on greater inclusion).

But just simply increasing state school numbers actually just means higher numbers from grammar schools and middle class comprehensives. Middle class parents don’t use the money for fees, but instead spend it on private tuition to get into the grammar schools and improve gcse and a-level grades.

I thought that Eton has very high entrance standards and additionally that they take any highly intelligent boy for free. I think it’s wrong to deny those kids places. They’ve most likely worked very hard and are highly capable.

Anyway social mobility is a very funny thing. I know someone who’s the son of a casual cleaner and highly intelligent. As a kid, he was highly intelligent, did really well, benefitted from financial assistance targeted at the poorest. Worked his ass of, society cheering him on. 1st in family to uni. Having aged and got a great job, got rich etc, he’s now despised by society as a “fat cat” and “out of touch” and his own kids are “private school over privileged and should be denied Oxbridge places”. If you succeed in being socially mobile, everyone resents you 🤣

KazzyHoward that is a different case entirely from what I had quoted though. That poster was referring to those at state schools where widening participation is used and contextual offers given. That poster suggested that unworthy students have gained places unfairly.

@MsTSwift

Oxford called my father (head of 6th at a comp at the time) as candidate not been great at interview. He could tell them the candidate was from the poorest part of the city and was the daughter of a single mother who was a cleaner. Looked at in that way her lack of “polish” was understandable she was an incredible applicant and she was in!

This is built in to the applications nowadays as not only are their school postcodes, but their home postcodes are looked at, their gcses will be contextualised in the context of how they have performed v the rest of their school, some of the aptitude tests are now being contextualised and written submitted work is also looked at (with the teachers markings included so that they can see the standard of marking).

Cambridge had a target of getting to 69.1% state admissions by 2024/25 and were already at 68.7% in 2019 cycle. I am not sure they have issued 2020 figures as these will be rather strange I assume due to the fact that more people were admitted due to CAGs.

My anecdote was years ago my dad long retired so glad to hear process much more sophisticated now !

@GeorgiePorgieOrgie

Do you think this will lead to a decrease in places offered at grammar schools or will they still offer similar places as they’re still not private?

Grammar schools are incredibly over-represented at Oxbridge. Only 5% of secondary school pupils attend grammar schools; however, they represent circa 20% of places.

The over-representation is way more significant amongst grammar school students at 4x compared to private school pupils at just over 2x (using the correct statistic that circa 17-18% of A-level students are in private school).

Yes I assumed that was the case but wanted to mention it to people coming to the thread so they were aware that there is a lot of outreach and widening participation work being done.

Unfortunately the barriers are sometimes within the pupils own schools rather than at Oxbridge itself. Some schools don't even realise they have a link college for the area who will help them.

www.ox.ac.uk/admissions/undergraduate/applying-to-oxford/teachers/link-colleges

The children I have mentored at our leafy comp often don’t want to go to oxbridge uni’s. They see them as stuffy and stuck in a time warp and feel more at home at other uni’s they look around.

@WoodpileHouse

Take for example a mechanism called A to B......where a leading medical school would allow students from certain postcodes & backgrounds entry to the medical course which requires A's but would let you in with B's......I wonder whether those that implemented this sub-standard mechanism would allow those students that benefited from this system to treat them should they every find themselves on the surgery table?? - Doubt it but they are happy for the rest of us to suffer this fate!

I would be very happy as I would assume a child that managed to get Bs despite attending a poor school would be a much higher quality candidate than one that got As from a top school with all the advantages that goes with attending a top school. Plus the I would have concerns the person from the top school might not have the ability to relate to and understand the average person.

100% agree

Our school has seen a signifant drop in numbers (I would say halved in the last few years), I would think it is very hard on the boys that don't achieve what they wanted. Our school is a very mixed bunch of boys, half state school primary and half prep upon entrance. A lot are on bursaries which means there is a very good mix of children across all social classes and cultures. I always think every private school is labelled like Eton but definitely aren't like that at all.

@seasonfinale - yes, an Oxford interviewer told me that an L7 (toxteth) postcode on an application woudl absolutely g'tee an interview because of the achievement it represented to even get to that stage.
I think however that the real reason for the reduction in top private school numbers heading to oxbridge is because they're going to MIT / Stanford / Yale etc instead. My old school is sending about 1/3 to the US and Singaporean universities now compared to 1 or 2 / year in my day. This corresponds with a far higher proportion of russian, S.E asian kids in the school of course.

I think the whole thing will backfire terribly for Oxbridge in the longer term if they don't manage it carefully. We can debate the fairness of it all ad nauseum, but the reality is that students from more wealthy backgrounds often bring with them a huge amount of extra funding which contributes to the on-going success and current prestige of the colleges and university. Parents of new students (and then later students themselves as alumni) contribute massively to building projects, research, events, prizes, awards and also by leaving legacies in their wills. Once this gets diluted by a greater % of 'poorer' students then the overall Oxbridge 'offer' and 'prestige' will be diminished.
The keen, bright student from a comprehensive may rock up, excited to study their specialist subject, only to discover the research funding for the Professor who attracted them has been cut because an alumnus donor has decided to support the uni that DID offer their grandson a place instead ( e.g. St.Andrews, Edinburgh, Durham, Warwick etc).

@OnlyTeaForMe

I think the whole thing will backfire terribly for Oxbridge in the longer term if they don't manage it carefully. We can debate the fairness of it all ad nauseum, but the reality is that students from more wealthy backgrounds often bring with them a huge amount of extra funding which contributes to the on-going success and current prestige of the colleges and university. Parents of new students (and then later students themselves as alumni) contribute massively to building projects, research, events, prizes, awards and also by leaving legacies in their wills. Once this gets diluted by a greater % of 'poorer' students then the overall Oxbridge 'offer' and 'prestige' will be diminished. The keen, bright student from a comprehensive may rock up, excited to study their specialist subject, only to discover the research funding for the Professor who attracted them has been cut because an alumnus donor has decided to support the uni that DID offer their grandson a place instead ( e.g. St.Andrews, Edinburgh, Durham, Warwick etc).

And can't you see that this exactly what's wrong with current system?

@TheJerkStore

Yes, and that's what I meant by We can debate the fairness of it all ad nauseum but underneath this there is an important point.

Why are students attracted to the 'Dreaming Spires' ? Much of what makes it so attractive and exciting is driven by the underlying wealth of the place. Fully-funded professors who can concentrate on their work and aren't distracted by scratching around for their next grant. Beautiful college building and lawns maintained by legacy funding.
Libraries donated by alumni overseas benefactors.

There is a tipping point. Once it is no longer seen as exclusive the money will move elsewhere. I think it is already on the way. I recently heard an Independent school Head of Sixth Form describe Durham and St Andrew's as the 'New Oxbridge'.

Yes, and that's what I meant by We can debate the fairness of it all ad nauseum but underneath this there is an important point.

It's my job to debate this 'ad nauseum' as you put it. It's very important that we strive for equality in HE ( not just Oxbridge) as there are still some deeply ingrained inequalities and this translates into inequalities in the labour market.

It shouldn't come down to rich parents - the universities themselves need to address this. The solution isn't to stop widening participation or be cautious of this, it needs be a structural change within the institution.

It is really important to get the brightest kids on the best courses for the good of all society - I want to have the best doctor not the best connected one. That has not been happening for years and I think we should all be delighted if that is now starting to happen as our country will benefit in the long run. And for people saying that it is terribly unfair on fee paying school children - unfairness is the business model that fee paying schools thrive on - the unfair advantage that parents are happy to buy in to until it gets turned back and used against them. About time it was evened out a bit (not enough yet, but a bit.)

@TheJerkStore

Yes, and that's what I meant by We can debate the fairness of it all ad nauseum but underneath this there is an important point.

It's my job to debate this 'ad nauseum' as you put it. It's very important that we strive for equality in HE ( not just Oxbridge) as there are still some deeply ingrained inequalities and this translates into inequalities in the labour market.

It shouldn't come down to rich parents - the universities themselves need to address this. The solution isn't to stop widening participation or be cautious of this, it needs be a structural change within the institution.

Well then that's where we diverge politically, because I think perfect equality is a pipe dream and risks bringing everyone to a lowest common denominator, whereas a degree of inequality promotes competition and aspiration. Each to their own. There are no 'right' answers. And I say this as a product of a Northern city comprehensive who managed to get to a top RG uni and was inspired to do so by reading "Brideshead Revisited" .

@OnlyTeaForMe That was a brilliant bit of expectation management from the head of Sixth form. We can no longer promise to get your average children in to the very top uni's - because it is increasingly more about intelligence than schooling - but we can still get them into the band B ones where they will find plenty of students just like them (which we know really matters to fee paying parents/children) and get on to decent courses.

There are lots of inequalities that I am only just beginning to fully understand, as my children are now year 12 and 13. They have a background of both state and private, before I get flamed. One child private, one state.

1. Private schools pick the easier exams. There is no doubt that getting a 9 at GCSE is harder than getting an A* at IGCSE.
2. Friend's child at private school has been told she can keep sitting mocks till she evidences the A level grade she needs for her university choice.
3. Private schools gave higher CAGs last year and probably will this year.
4. For medicine universities look at GCSE grades to allocate interviews - there is a bias to the private school pupils who sat easier exams and got A*s.
5. Oxbridge contextualise so state school pupils get in much easier with the same A level profile.
6. Some other universities hand out easier offers to state educated sixth formers if their school is on their lists.
7. If you have a bright child at sixth form and they want to go to Oxbridge it is a disadvantage to keep them or put them in private school.