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]

@ChesneyHawkesLoveChild I think your situation is a specific one and I can see how you are conflicted as your DD, aside from her current school situation, could fit other WP criteria. However, it sounds like she is in a good place with a HT who has noticed her potential and that does count for a lot.

However, at a more general level, it is totally ludicrous that the OP is saying that their DC is at a 'grave disadvantage' by going to an independent school, especially when both parents are Oxbridge educated and clearly very invested in his education. I agree with other posters that if you genuinely think this is the case, then take him out and put him in a state school to release all that advantage. No? Didn't think so. It really is bad form to covet outreach opportunities when your DC are already in a learning environment where they are genuinely superfluous.

Cambridge have said today they are looking at how comp students can be helped vs grammar pupils. It just ends up being divisive.

OP. A bright DS will be ok at other top universities. It’s the way of life now. Independent schools won’t get the places. This doesn’t mean the DC won’t shine elsewhere. Plenty do.

How is helping a comprehensive pupil divisive?

gumballbarry They are not ‘stories.’ They are the lived experiences of young people I know.
if you don’t want to believe it’s true, because you can’t admit your dc may be the beneficiaries of bias (conscious or otherwise) that’s your problem. To be honest, you’re in the majority in mumsnet, so that should be some comfort to you.

and what about black applicants to Oxbridge? Are you saying they are too thick to be admitted and it’s all in their heads too?

“When you’re accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression”

“You can have excuses or you can have success; you can’t have both.”

Excuses? are you for real?

To be honest gumball if your dc are anything like you, no wonder so many students find it hard to fit in at university.

I don't agree. The division is inherent when you have different sectors of education. The Universities are simply trying to level the playing field, albeit with perhaps too blunt tools.

What do you mean independent schools won't get the places? They are and will continue too but in a more proportionate way. You need to look at the absolute figures rather the change. Simply looking at the change in place allocation is distorted by the fact that it is starting from a very skewed base.

*to

They are the perceived experiences. They're subjective. I don't have a problem, I just find it laughable that you believe there's people at Oxbridge who are hounding Northerners into quitting university. It sounds quite ridiculous.

gamballbarry Iliveinacardboardbox

Even more ridiculous when you come from a Northern city (e.g Bradford, Leeds, Manchester) where the Boys’ Direct Grant Grammars traditionally sent 30-50 boys each to Oxbridge each year, with the girls’ schools sending almost as many (at a time when there were more than 10 men for every woman there) , as many as the leading public schools. There has actually always been a big cohort of northern state grammar school pupils at Oxbridge, who then fed through into successful careers in politics, journalism, culture. Northerners have always had a representation. The issue of bright pupils from certain underperforming schools being underrepresented at Oxbridge is a far bigger issue than some northerners apparently turning up at Oxbridge with a chip on their shoulder.

However I agree that some parents who send their children to private schools should stop getting their knickers in a twist about accessing places at Oxbridge. Your child will achieve their potential on the right course for them at any good university, and where they went will become irrelevant almost as soon as they graduate and start to build careers. What will really matter is their resilience and self esteem, and setting them up to feel they failed if they don’t go to Oxbridge ( as will have already happened to some who didn’t make it to THE top independent school) is not how to nurture that.

’Perceived experiences.’ Give me a break. How far will you go to argue that bias doesn’t exist? It’s ridiculous.
None of the young people I referenced went to the schools from the north who do manage to get a decent amount of Oxbridge applicants. Not are they ‘chippy.’ To even use that word is absolutely disgusting. I bet you say the same thing about black people who struggle to fit in at Oxbridge too. Absolutely vile.

Nor

OP Oxford and other elite unis are looking for well rounded candidates. Has he done D of E, music grades, sporting achievements or anything apart from his science that would make him stand out as a candidate?

They’re really not. We were at a Maths open day at Oxford last weekend and they made it quite clear that they are only interested in academic ability/potential.

Oxbridge don’t care about music or any extras. It’s not true that this helps. All extra learning needs to be subject based. Music, sport etc are just nice things to do if you have the talent but you won’t get into Oxbridge on the back of them.

I meant that Cambridge are talking about dividing state grammar pupils away from other state educated pupils. The latter will get priority. Many parents who live in grammar areas will find that divisive.

I don’t really care who goes to these two universities. It’s up to them. There are others who will happily take the very very bright DC who don’t get in and their careers won’t be dented at all. So parents like the OP just need to accept their DC has been to a great school and can still do very well for university and job. Make sure he knows how to use his “privilege”.

I meant that Cambridge are talking about dividing state grammar pupils away from other state educated pupils. The latter will get priority. Many parents who live in grammar areas will find that divisive.

Having seen at first hand the huge difference between highly academic grammar schools and secondary modern schools which have to educate the other 70% (roughly!), I don't have any problem with DCs from comprehensives or secondary moderns given preferential contextual offers over those from grammar schools.

But totally agree with @TizerorFizz that Oxbridge is no longer the be-all and end-all of university applications, if it ever was. They may still have a certain cachet but lots of other universities are doing just as impressive things in specific areas. I'm not convinced that 5 or 10 years into a career anyone really cares about where you went to university, it will be all about how well you do your job.

If Oxbridge actually wanted to help disadvantaged pupils they would scrap the whole elitist admissions system that takes an expert to navigate in the first place. Especially the good cop/bad cop interview process.

They could easily introduce a basic computerised CAT test (end of Year 12) plus predicted grades and then use a lottery system to allocate places university wide on the various courses- for those with the same score (subject to achieving grades). College places to follow later - who really cares what College they go to. They could introduce various depravity factors to moderate the CAT result and by all means, lower grades required for certain students with really hard backgrounds.

The point is Oxbridge still want the best and want to keep all their traditions. They still want rich people who leave money to them in their wills. They don’t want to help the poor & naturally bright. Same applies to grammar schools which most people tutor and prepare extensively for.
Oxbridge just want to be seen to be fighting the Bojo Etonian privilege. It is another hypocrisy.
In addition, the whole process if far too stressful and not good for the mental health of the students. It is antiquated post Covid, in particular. They are just going to churn out more and more stressed kids with issues.

The system should be simplified entirely so that students coming in are naturally bright enough to keep up. Without the faff and the pomp. That will attract far more state school students then complicated algorithms of which school X or Y went to.
We all know that in truth, privilege starts in the womb and is dependent on the mother’s level of education, nutrition, wealth, books at home etc.

@Abuildingwith4wallsandtmrinsid

That is hearsay regarding interviews. They are subject based and no one has the process you describe these days. That might, of course, be a problem. Myths. Don’t spread myths about Oxbridge. The advice: “it’s not for the likes of you” are more rife than 60 years ago! Ordinary DC from grammars did go to Oxbridge and thrive. The only difference is that these dc are now in comprehensives. No one does the extra term to do the entrance exams now but these universities do have to decide who gets a place with some courses over subscribed by x10.

Do always assume ordinary folk can get there. I don’t agree with dropping all tradition. How would you choose who can go when so many apply if not by additional tests, essay submission and interviews? I don’t agree the brightest from state schools are put off these days and that percentage will grow. What DS won’t do is move away from their home area if they are not encouraged to do so. By anyone. That is what needs to stop.

I cannot see anyone agreeing to a lottery! Cat scores don’t tell you anything about the students ability to benefit from an Oxbridge style education and their wider interest in their subject. That would be a NO from nearly everyone!

@TizerorFizz - I am not spreading myths. I matriculated 1998 and definitely had the good cop/bad cop interview. So did some of my DCs’ friends very recently (state educated).

If teaching were truly good at Oxbridge, in all cases, then any naturally very bright child would benefit from an Oxbridge style education. Why do they have to have a wider interest in the subject before getting there? If they are working as teenagers, in difficult conditions etc. how are they realistically going to get that?

What is the point of shifting between different sets of middle class kids for your intake (independent vs state etc).

Why does the term have to be 8 weeks so poor kids don’t get accommodation all year round when back home there is no spare bedroom left for them anymore?

I know why - because Oxbridge wants to continue just as is. That is where the true problem lies for me, not with who is going there.

@Abuildingwith4wallsandtmrinsid
So you applied over 25 years ago!!! As I said, you are incorrect regarding today’s interviews. It’s saying things like this that puts DC off. You should not do it.

Do you really believe there are enough FSM DC to supply the whole of Oxbridge each year? I don’t see that middle class is wrong. In fact millions of people who were working class 60 years ago had DC go to university when the sector expanded in the 60s. Many middle class people were working class. DHs family in times past were straw plaiters and farm Labourers. Plenty of us didn’t have middle class forbears. So why should our DC not have a chance to have a great education just because we grabbed our chances, like millions of others did.

There is nothing wrong with middle class. But there is something wrong with middle class kids of bankers/City lawyers going to independent schools vs middle class kids of doctors/Human Rights lawyers going to state grammars versus middle class kids of professional musicians/filmmakers going to comps in London being treated any different from each other. Their inherent privilege is the same.

In addition, Cambridge, in particular, has a very middle class vibe which can be alienating to those not from that type of background. It seems the admissions system is so arduous to put off anyone who wouldn’t fit in like a glove - being kids of the above category.
So yes I am for a lottery system for all children who are naturally bright, whatever their background. I think they would all benefit - and they would benefit from the bigger social mix. And I would prefer for it to be skewed towards children who really have been disadvantaged (young carers, FSM, refugees etc).