Have I done my poor kid a grave disservice in sending him to an independent school?

[Firstgenuni]

I was the first (and only) generation of our family to go to university - as was dh. My parents scrimped and remortgaged to send me to a v middling independent (on a scholarship), and I got a place at Oxford. Dh went state until sixth form, and also got to Oxford, where we met, yadda yadda. My parents (mum is an immigrant, dad left school at 15) always said that there won’t be any inheritance (and there really won’t be!), but my education was their investment in my future.

I did take this to heart, and ds (Year 12) has been in the local independent since reception, for other reasons too (a huge teacher discount of 66% for junior and senior schools being the main one, and load of extracurricular stuff handily on site <given we both work full time> being the other main reason.)
Uni admissions didn’t figure in decisions we made way back. His fair-sized school gets about 15 kids into Oxbridge a year, so good, but no St Paul’s, etc (about 80 apply, I think)

Ds now has his heart set on natural sciences on Cambridge. I know nothing about it - both dh and I did humanities subjects. But we tell him to use the internet to search up natural science taster sessions and essay competitions and online courses, and see what interesting things he can find.
He’s now finding that there just aren’t many things available.

Pembroke college, for instance, that he loves the sound of, is running a taster event for natural sciences - online, but ‘due to capacity restrictions, successful applicants must be attending a UK state school.’ It’s online, ffs!

Newnham college (yes I know he can’t go there ) runs all their essays for UK state schools only now, despite a friend of ds’s at a neighbouring independent winning one of their prizes just last year. Is this the way things are going?

I’ve chatted to his head of sixth, and they are very much offering advice like yes, we are encouraging applications to the Ivy League now too, and look at this great summer course by invest costing over £400. . Meanwhile, his cousin enjoyed a totally free materials science course run in the hols by a major independent as part of their ‘outreach to state schools’ - but is at a very well-respected grammar, with a good sized Oxbridge cohort anyway!

We don’t have £400 for fancy courses. We don’t have lots of connections like a lot of wealthier parents seem to. I feel extremely sad that I have, inadvertently, made it so much more difficult for ds to achieve his ambition.

Obviously he is reading science books out of the school library and pursuing the topics that he is interested in, and he’s watching videos and listening to podcasts, but what can he do to impress that doesn’t cost money, but isn’t restricted to state school students?

And I know I’ll get a load of flack for complaining, but it really feels as though things are being made extra difficult for ds for being the ‘poor relation’ in an independent- and it’s my fault. [eyeroll]

@SarahAndQuack I know this. I am a programme director in a natural sciences and engineering faculty! I was saying a big component is biology. Alongside other disciplines. Please don't assume I'm uneducated. I'm a professor of earth sciences. Hope that helps!

BungleandGeorge · 25/04/2022 09:02
furballfun
I think the stats in your OP say it all - about 80 apply each year, of which about 15 get in. I went to a comprehensive which sent a handful to Oxbridge each year. The majority of those who applied got in year after year, which very much suggests that rather more would have had a chance of success had they applied. And this was a comp that at least had Oxbridge on its radar. That so many from your DS's school are encouraged to apply tells its own story about privilege and opportunity.
you see I view this totally differently. Comps by their nature are not academically selective. Most independent schools are academically selective. You’d expect them to have many more potential candidates because of that.

I didn't explain myself clearly - if 3/4 of one school's applicants get in and 1/5 of the other, then it suggests that there are more potential applicants (with a reasonable chance of getting in) at the first school, my comprehensive in my example. That the second school encourages and supports so many to apply, when, presumably, they know that at least some have a very slim chance of getting in is where the privilege comes in.

@Organictangerine No, a 'maximum intelligence' is plain nonsense. There are natural differences that will mean someone's potential intelligence is higher than others (Einstein obviously being an extreme example) but it's interest which determines success in a field. A less intelligent person who's interested will win out over a dis-interested intelligent person in most cases.

Even if there was a maximum, you're assuming that each childs potential is maximally achieved during their school years. That simply isn't the case.

I do think the 'spoon-fed' line is something that is lazily chucked around as I see no evidence to support it, to the contrary, a lot of emphasis is put on independent thinking.

The example of the brother....you said yourself is very able and capable, but doesn't merit the job he has? Why? Is merit now not based on ability but on whether there's someone else out there who has it it harder than you who might have got it instead if only they'd had your education?

I really don't think I'm confusing the 'window dressing', life is not one big maths test: being able to communicate, negotiate, reason calmly etc are important.

I know this. I am a programme director in a natural sciences and engineering faculty! I was saying a big component is biology. Alongside other disciplines. Please don't assume I'm uneducated. I'm a professor of earth sciences. Hope that helps!

Did you actually read the conversation you were replying to, then? Because the only thing I can think now is that you must have taken my comment completely out of context.

Do you really think it is a good idea for a student applying for natural sciences to do a summer school in a different subject such as archaeology, purely in order to game the system rather than out of genuine interest, and then to tell interviewers that they consider this other subject to be the 'practical application' of natural sciences?

I agree with you that natural sciences is interdisciplinary, and that it includes biology (and some might say it's rather treating other people as idiots to point out this obvious fact). But I don't think, just because a subject is interdisciplinary, that it's automatically fine to assume you could shoehorn in absolutely anything in an interview.

Totally different if a student just happens to have wide interests and is able to explain the connections - that sounds brilliant. But that's not what this was about.

my point was that there may have been more able candidates than the brother, but we will never know because there was no interview - he was simply handed the job based on the fact he had the right connections. Job completely unrelated to his degree. Fine for him of course, but I think it’s satisfying to know you got where you are through your own talent.

I think people with views like yours just want to hang on to the status quo and can’t bear the thought of not being able to buy opportunity and success.

One of the most obnoxious and ignorant posts I have ever read on MN.

Those of you using the words eloquence or window dressing: I think the term you mean is “social capital”.

Those of you using the words eloquence or window dressing: I think the term you mean is “social capital”.

Those of you using the words eloquence or window dressing: I think the term you mean is “social capital”.

No idea why my post was repeated three times 🤦‍♀️

@Organictangerine That seems unlikely that there was no interview unless the firm was tiny. There are recruitment processes in even moderate sized firms (at least in my experience) to ensure multiple eyes have seen each candidate an they are qualified.

Oh come off it. You're not sending to state out of any moral conviction, you said yourself that the numbers don't stack up and you will instead pay for extra tutoring and activities to compensate while using the state system so you can use the money you saved to buy a bigger house, go on holidays, get a horse(!) and maybe even put up a deposit for your childs first house.

How is that not buying opportunity and success?

@thingymaboob i would like to call you up on your comment that he will “never get into natural sciences at Cambridge”.

What a horrible thing to say to a parent trying to navigate the best way forward for their child.

Are you the admissions board?

I applied and got in. From Harare. No prep - no privilege - just a girl from a town with a big dream. If my parents had your attitude I dont know where I would be.

Oh and 2 members of my family got into Cambridge Natural Sciences with sheer persistence.

Dont piss on people’s dreams.

because none of that denotes prestige or connections and ultimately it would still be only her own work that could make a difference.

as for the deposit I said it in the context of its a better financial decision than private school which doesn’t have a great return financially

the firm we are talking about isn’t in the UK

I do smile when parents tutor their children to get into grammar school and then lecture others on the inherent inequality of private education.

I see what you mean, tbh I don’t think grammar schools are fair either, should be banned

It's more likely they firstly had the confidence to apply, then when they do they also have the soft skills to do well to in the interview.

I agree

@Organictangerine OK, so your issue is that in the vanishingly few cases where someone has gone to private school, then gone onto university and got a degree, and then been offered a job at a company with no interview (we'll pretend that's true) which for some reason the school which they'd left 3 years ago setup for them, is unfair. I agree, that is unfair.

For the record, a huge number of graduates go onto careers that have nothing to do with their degree, that's who these graduate programmes at the big auditors are targeting.

The Prestige thing is rubbish, we've already seen in this thread people advising to game the system to look like you're from a state school because of it's advantages.

The above is irrelevant to me, I'm not looking to as you say 'hang on to the status quo', it does look like you're trying to justify your tight-fistedness and dress it up as virtue.

I don't find this obnoxious and ignorant at all. I think it's an accurate reflection of the inequalities in the educational system and society.

If your kids go to an independent school, a grammar or a nice comp, you have no idea how low expectations and achievement are in parts of the state sector. I didn't until my DC went to a bog-standard academy (just rated 'good' by Ofsted, with caring teachers and good pastoral care, but academically the expectations are rock bottom).

But none of the education system is fair really. Wealthier families can afford property near the best non selective schools, pricing the less well off out of the school. The kids with the best support at home get into the top sets and get more opportunities as a result. Where does "unfair" stop?

@SarahAndQuack i actually don't think admissions panels are as literal as you are making out in their interpretation of Ucas documents and interviews. Indeed direct connections would need to be made. No one is denying that. But none of us are in Cambridge admissions, so we can't know for sure can we. If I was op I would be encouraging my son to

Get stuck into the reading list they provde on their we page.
Have a look at the publications and interests of key academic staff
Investigate summer opportunities and placements in relevant areas.
Have a back up plan. Cambridge is not everything.

Oh, I've done Cambridge admissions. I think I said so upthread, but possibly not.

I have direct experience of students who have been badly advised, and this is why it bothers me. It's really horrible when you interview a student who has patently been told something that is shooting them in the foot. And I do maintain that turning up to an interview to tell interviewers that you have decided to focus on the practical application of their subject rather than their subject itself, is well on the way to rude.

FWIW, I think this is related to the myth that Oxbridge really like extra-curriculars and 'breadth'. So candidates come in thinking they will tell you that they're amazing musicians and they were brilliant in debate club and they did maths olympiad. There's nothing wrong with any of those things and you can totally make a case for one subject enriching another (esp. things like maths with natsci). But it doesn't take the place of being very convincing about the actual subject itself. And sometimes candidates spend so long telling you how well-rounded they are, that you can't get any idea of whether they'd be any good at the actual subject they're applying for. And ... that's pretty much key.

In what subject though @SarahAndQuack i don't think you're a natural scientist are you? Are you an academic or professional services staff.

Goodness, how quick we are to get on the defensive. I'll save you the trouble. Not natsci, not archaeology either, and most certainly not a professor. I'll tell you, though, Cambridge professional services staff are bloody brilliant and I think many of them would also be able to tell you how admissions runs.

Would it be awfully rude to push for an answer to my question? Do you really think what that original poster suggested was a good strategy for admissions? Because that is all we're really arguing about, as far as I can see. Is it a good idea for candidates to pretend to be interested in something they're not? Is it a good idea for them to tell admissions interviewers what the 'practical application' of their subject is? And if so, can you explain why? It could well be my limited knowledge is at fault here, and if so I'll be the first to admit it. But so far, you seem really cross I've even expressed an opinion, and I just don't really follow why.

(And yes, academic staff.)