How do we feel that private school kids fill Russell Group Unis?.... Controversial alert.

[faraday]

Yet I am increasingly finding that most of the people I know who have chosen private have done so because their DC just couldn't cope either socially or keep up academically in the local state schools (or a mixture of both!)- so they're individually hand-held, spoon-fed and tutored in the private sector- then emerge ready to grab those limited places from perhaps more clever but marginally less 'graded up' state school kids?

Many things are equivalent in terms of points, but we don't rate them. For example, I had an applicant who had done loads of disco dancing qualifications, which added up to the most monumental total, but we disregarded her because it was not a dance course, but a course that requires a lot of essay writing.

I like applicants who learn languages for fun, play musical instruments at grade 5 or above, do Duke of Edinburgh awards and play sport at county level. But most of all, I like applicants who can write essays!

Boffinmum, I would have loved to do the IB instead of A levels, it would have fitted my interests much better at the time. I've always been a generalist, always done mixed interdisciplinary subjects.

I'm pleased to see the IB coming in more, it's taught in our local 6th form. do you get many applicants with the IB at Cambridge?

For goodness sake, no-one in the state sector is applying to Oxbridge imagining their General Studies A level is equivalent to Chemistry, History, Maths or whatever!!!

This'll make Swedes laugh. I am the proud owner of a certificate, given at our 6th form prizewinners ceremony, "To Fennel for Effort in General Studies A level". .

I have many academic qualifications, before and since, but I'm particularly fond of that one. For its utter uselessness.

I know that at least one of DD's offers specifically excluded General Studies from the offer - it certainly wan't very rigorous - DD got an A with pretty much no effort whatsoever - she said the politics & consttution papers were simply a comprehension exercise & needed no prior knowledge to get 100%.

The 6th form college she was at insisted on all students taking General Studies as well as 4 subjects in their 2nd year - if they dropped a subject after AS they were expected to take another to AS in the second year to fill their timetable.

The Principal said that the point of this was that if students had free periods at the beginning and end of the day they would not spend them studying - the timetables were constructed so that almost all free periods came in the middle of the day & singly, so it wasn't worth the student's while to go home. The college's results seem to bear out his view that students do better if they are kept at it; even if you take out the General studies, they are impressive. Last year they trialled A* at A level in some subjects (not the ones DD did) but I'm not sure what the results were.

I seem to remember the Principal mentioning at the induction meeting that he was on some sort of consultation panel with Cambridge admissions, so he may have had some kind on inside knowledge - he was certainly keen on encouraging as many as possible to apply.

On most prospectuses it will state clearly what the entrance requirements for courses are and that that General Studies is not accepted as part of the offer requirements - e.g. 3 A Grades, not including General Studies (or whatever the tariff equivalent may be).
I remember doing non examinable courses in contemporary political history and philosophy and the examinable Use of English course as well as my A Levels, so these were probably equivalent to doing General Studies.

The percentage of 3 As at A level has gone up beyond recognition over the past 25 years or so. So have children today really, really become more intelligent over the years? Or have the exams become easier to pass? Or have some schools got better at teaching? And do some schools have smaller classes, more resources in order to do so?

I am absolutely NOT disputing that the pupils work just as hard, but it is patently obvious that more children of less ability are getting the top grades.

It is not their fault. There will be pupils nowadays who still would have attained the top grades years ago, but I am sure there would be many of wouldn't have (at least one of my DCs included!). So we have to look at how these pupils are getting these grades and how some are more likely to get them than others.

LOL BoffinMum - it just goes to show, really: I've also done Oxbridge admissions, and - on the contrary - I tried to ignore (in the main) extra-curricular achievements like music to grade gazillion, or DofE, or county level sport, precisely because not all students have access to these things, and in general, it is the more privileged students (either by wealth or by family support) who do them.

The majority of Oxbridge interviewers I know are increasingly only interested in a student's intellectual capabilities (rather than their "all-round" achievements).

I'm no longer interviewing for Oxbridge (am in a different uni now), but I still pretty much ignore these things during UCAS season: I'm much more interested, as you say, in whether a student has the ability to write essays and actually succeed at their chosen course. I'm thoroughly disinterested in whether they can dance/throw things a long way/run fast/play the tuba. Etc.

And tables like this of no value.

Basically it just cons those in the state sector into believing the gulf between state education and independent education isn't as scary as it actually is. And makes people complain later on when it looks like universities are favouring Independent school pupils, when in fact the reverse might be closer to the truth.

Hooray for Penthesileia!!!!!!

Fennel -

There is a two fold thing going on here. Pupils at some state schools are being conned that the A levels they are taking will get them into a 'top' university is true, but also pupils at some private schools are being conned into thinking they are brighter than they are because their exam results are so good!

I still think if GCES and A levels were made harder it would equal things out. Only the absolutely top percentage would go to the top universities.

LOL margotfonteyn. Not at all.

I have to say - and obviously I'm speaking for myself here - but the most frequent piece of advice I give (both in the past and now) to people who ask me on Open Days, etc., about how to improve their chances of getting in is, "Do not waste valuable space in your personal statement blethering on about how many instruments you play, or how many sports you compete in." The personal statement is such a short document, but it can be really important in distinguishing students from one another (when their grades look similar). The last paragraph should be reserved for any extra-curricular material the student thinks relevant to their application.

If someone can convince me in their statement of their genuine intellectual interest in their chosen subject, and demonstrate that they've also tried to think outside their school curriculum (so, so, so tedious, e.g., to ask students in interview, "So, what other poetry have you read?" - after they've trilled on about loving poetry because of all the Blake they read in 6th form. Blank stare. "None"... I don't mind per se that they haven't read more: it's more the "lie" that they love poetry. No, you love bits of Blake...), then they stand a much better chance, IMVHO.

Yes, I have heard conflicting views on the merits of extra-curricular activities as a springboard into Oxbridge.

I was listening to someone who said she was swamped with applicants who had been building orphanages in Africa - but knew that this was a programme particular to a number of independent schools and that appearing to be caring and altruistic doesn't come cheap.

DH has done mock interviews for Oxbridge at DS1's school for years. He is always amazed that applicants will put academic interests down in their personal statement that cannot be substantiated in an interview. These applicants never get in to Oxford/Cambridge but will get into a Russell Group/1994 Group university. He can generally tell which ones will get into Oxford/Cambridge because they are really interested in their subject and able (with a little help) to discuss the questions DH asks or solve problems he poses.

gosh, yes, building orphanages in Africa is so passe, I did that in the 80s, (then, of course, it was evidence of Proper Commmitment and Initiative, not like now) and my niece (state comp) is currently raising £3000 to do that this summer.

It's just like A levels, building an orphanage in Africa just isn't worth what it used to be.

I think some independent (and indeed state) schools are still labouring under the impression that being the sort of fellow who will fit into your college (e.g., by being jolly good at cricket and patronising the natives) is still totally relevant.

Now, of course, there are still interviewers for whom this is true: there are hundreds and hundreds of people interviewing every December - some of them will be "old school" in this respect.

But increasingly, it just isn't true anymore. There is a lot of pressure, across the sector, and particularly at Oxbridge, to make the admissions process fairer and more transparent.

This is not to say that independently schooled students are not also "better" at writing a more intellectually appealing statement (not least because their schools often help the students to re-draft them, while for others it is obvious that their statement is entirely their own work and perhaps even the first and only draft).

Oh God don't start me on the Building Orphanages in Africa lark. The place must be crawling with eager trying for Oxbridge teens.

Snap, Lilymaid!

LOL Fennel!

ha ha

So what's the new orphanage? Starting up an organic meals on wheels service delivered on your home-made solar-powered moped?

I have found a reference to the "needing 2 grades higher at A level" but not the original paper.

It's from Sutton Trust research in 2006 which:

"revealed that every year approximately 3000 state school students do not gain admission to the Sutton Trust universities ? even though they are academically qualified to do so. This ?missing 3000? would make up about 10% of the 30,000 undergraduates entering this group of universities each year."

The report found that a state school pupil needs to get two grades higher in their A-levels than an equivalent pupil in an independent school to stand the same likelihood of attending a Sutton Trust 13 university.

But the implication is that many of those aren't getting in because they're not applying, rather than that there is positive discrimination towards independently educated children.

The Sutton Trust universities are likely to have more privately educated students than say the Russell group, it's partly how they are defined. Russell group is defined by research income and/or output, Sutton Trust includes measures of student satisfaction and so on. Which is partially dependent on things like a jolly nice location with lots of super extra-curricular activities. The sort of universities which are known for a high proportion of privately educated students.

Ones in the Sutton trust and not Russell group include I think, York, Durham, Exeter, St Andrews.

And in the Russell group but not Sutton trust you get, I think, the big redbricks with a good research output. Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham, Newcastle.

I work in a Sutton Trust uni at the moment, they joke that they recruit from all 4 corners of Surrey.

I think there was a lot of discussion fairly recently on the fact that independent schools are more likely to be optimistic when assessing predicted A2 grades than state schools. So, independent candidates are more likely to get offers - or apply to the universities that require higher offers - whereas more state school students can find they have exceeded their predicted grades but have ended up at a university which didn't require such high grades.

Snorkle - Yes, but what were their A level subjects? The inpendent school applicant offers Maths, Chemistry, History and French and the state school applicant offers Maths, Film Studies, Art and General Studies. All at A grade and all the same A level points, but really not equivalent at all.

DSs' school tell them to keep as many options open for as long as possible. A min of one modern language and Latin to GCSE are compulsory. And at A level they recommend you keep at least one subject to balance - English Literature and Maths, Chemistry and Physics, for example. And they absolutely tell you in fourth form that if you want to go to Oxbridge you are going to have to get a very decent clutch of As and A*s at GCSE.

LOL at 'recruits from four corners of surrey'.