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?

That's a shame because innate brilliance ought to win hands down when it comes to looking for the brightest people.
Far more interesting to have innate brilliance than just to be well polished too!

violet - you are right and it distresses my friend because she obviously want brilliant students in front of her. It is sad to think that there is a huge waste of innate talent in the state system. It is bad for our country.

Yes, that's true Campion. I hold my hand up!

All I am saying is that it is true that a private education gives better results, and it's not fair on those who can't pay.

I still don't see what is SO controversial(or lecturing) about that. Surely, that is why people pay.

Equally a grammar school education gets better results but then those children have been selected academically in the first place so not so surprising.However, it is free so theoretically available to all, although I do accept only the ones with 'in the know' parents tend to get the places, but I wish it was truely available to all, if that's what you want. Not everyone wants a grammar school type education.

I'd like to give Margotfonteyn a prize for pissing off independent school parents and comprehensive school parents. Well done Margot.

I don't lose sleep over the paying thing. I wish state schools were decent enough that I didn't feel the need to pay, that's not quite the same thing as wishing everyone else could afford to pay because that's silly. But I do wish there were excellent school places for every child, a level playing field. Most people I know trot out a load of rubbish about the brilliance of state schools, then they rapidly change their minds when their children are 10/11/12. Or they move to Bucks.

Message withdrawn

Ahem Tatt.
Please do not accuse academics of being quite as limited as that.

I can indeed manage a business effectively (indeed run two small businesses on the side in order to bankroll my relatively underpaid academic life) and I am very handy at doing other potentially profitable and useful things, like stripping down computers, making curtains, and all sorts of other nifty things.

So can many of my colleagues.

Thanks swede

It's really not intentional.

I honestly truely think there are just as many averagely bright children in the state sector as in the private sector, and I think it is unfair that the 'average' child who attends a private school should get better results than the same child in the state sector and thus the places at top universities (sorry to keep repeating myself).

So, may be it is down to 'underperformance' of the state sector, does that make it any better or acceptable? I agree with bloss on that count.

I really don't know what the answer is. But I do know that 'average' children get better results from private schools, doesn't make them actually really more intelligent though.

Unfortunately too many state schools have poor expectations of their students eg those in middle groups who improve have difficulty getting into top group sets so are stuck with taking intermediate grades at GCSE. There are some teachers (and I don't think these would ever include the dedicated teachers who post on Mumsnet) who aren't prepared to lift the horizons of able pupils and recommend undemanding courses which can only lead to second rate courses at third rate higher education instituions.
Thank heavens for places like the Open University where so many intelligent people, who have been let down by the system, find themselves as adults.

Am just nipping in before I get back to my marking - only 30 exam papers to go until bedtime. This is almost a replay of a discussion I had in my year 7 lesson today as a few students are off to the grammar next year, while some students who would almost certainly have got a place have chosen to stay with us.

I always find conversations about soft subjects interesting, I would have fallen under Abetadad's definition of a flash of brilliance as despite my substandard state education some 20 years ago I was offered a place at Oxford. I also took a few supposedly soft subjects in Sociology and English Language. My flash must have been quite amazing therefore to overcome that hurdle!! I was though, and still am, obsessed with my subject and that must have come through. In the letter offering me the place it did say something along the lines f there were gaps in my knowledge that needed filling as I had not been taught as thoroughly as other students but they had not doubt I could compete with their other students. But to give ny sixth form college credit I was also coached for my Oxbridge interview and had extra lessons for the entrance exam.

I do think there is little difference between an excellent teacher in a good state school, a grammar and an independant school. My top sets will not be much different to the sets in the aforementioned schools. The work ethic will be similar and the level if teaching will be the same. I certainly do not see the need for my brightest pupils to be give any preferential treatment, they are capable of holding their own. We also guide our students towards certain choices at Key Stage four and five. We do not however offer subects such as latin, Greek etc and I think that is sad and I would like to see that change.

Flatcapandpearls - that's very heartening to hear. What's your subject?

flatcap - that is exactly what happend to my DW. She came form a state school but did well enough to get an interview, a sympathetic interviewer and a flash of brilliance in her General paper got her to Oxford.

She benefitted from being at a state school which had been a Grammar but had just gone Comprehensive. She severely doubts she would make it to Oxford from the same school today as the ethos changed dramatically at her school in a few short years.

That was 25 years ago.

At A level I teach the Philosophy side of Philosophy and Ethics.

I am not saying that all state schools are very good, I have taught in schools that have frustrated me immensely but it is not fair to dismiss them all.

I think Oxbridge are the most forward thinking actually as regards to applicants.

They actively encourage state school pupils to apply. Certaily the pupils they get from my DCs grammar school are of the highest calibre and would have no trouble 'catching up' if necessary. They should continue to recruit the very brightest pupils from ALL sectors.

Interestingly my state school also used to be a grammar, I as also passed between 2 colleges so maybe they saw something in me but were not sure. The school which was not amazing when I went is now not a very good school at all.

"That's a shame because innate brilliance ought to win hands down when it comes to looking for the brightest people.
Far more interesting to have innate brilliance than just to be well polished too!"

Unfortunately I have to disagree with this because in the working world it is not the genius who generally climbs up the career ladder. They are often quite, nerdy and chaotic. It is better to be more articulate and polished with a good level of brightness and shrewdness from an employment point of view. At the end of the day we all further ourselves educationally to earn more money but often those brilliant people are not interesting as they have appalling social skills.

I don't think people do educate themselves just to earn more money. When I did my degree it was because I loved my subject and wanted to know more. How much I would earn neve entered my head. In a similar fashion when I started my second degree it was not to earn more money. Infact I chose my career not having a clue how much I would earn and not really caring.

It's very heartening to hear you say that flatcap - it confirms what I believe, that the top sets in a good state school are not particularly different from a private school. That's certainly my ds's experience who has been in both - the main difference being that his state school classes are bigger, but for him that's an advantage. Top sets are expected to get (and do get) A*/A grades. Those are the statistics it makes sense to compare when thinking about these things. Makes no sense to compare 'global' school figures when a comp will contain come classes where the kids will get low results - you need to look at the peer group your child will study with.

Yes I am supposed to be marking some top set exams now, most of whom are targetted an A. I pitch my lessons to the A. I wish I had a class smaller than 30 to be honest, I hope I give them all they would get at the grammar or an independant ( many of our students could afford school fees so we are a choice not the default option) but it does mean that they often have a tired teacher.

So at the moment i am marking year 10 papers, I teach 3 short course groups and one long course group. So that is 120 papers at a minimum of 10 mins per paper that is a lot of hours! If I had less marking to do I could spend more time planning lessons, meeting students etc. That is the drawback of a state school IMO, the time factor.

If I were to ever pay for a private education for dd, which is very unlikely but we have come close in the past, I would be paying for smaller class sizes and less jaded teachers.

Message withdrawn

"Most of the teenagers I know do very little extra curricula stuff anyway" Perhaps this is the problem - There was a study recently that correlated the number of extra-curricula activities a school offered with its academic performance. Maybe the way to improve state school standards is to get teenagers off their backsides and doing stuff.

margotfonteyn you seem very hung up about the performance gap of average students between state and private schools. I'd hazard a guess that the gap in performance of average students between top and bottom performing state schools is even greater, but somehow you don't seem worried about that although it is no more fair to the average children attending those schools. As the whole system is riddled with inequalities the way forward is to raise the standards of the lowest rather than doing away with the best.

this document shows a little how attainment varies across different abilities for state and independent schools. Figure 2 shows there are actually very few children scoring 100 & below at MidYis in private schools, so perhaps not as many average children there as you think.

No I studied theology, i was at a disadvantage because most of my peers had latin, biblical Greek, quite advanced german and some even had Hebrew. I never managed to catch up with the Greek and dropped it in my second year, but found that I shone in Hebrew, perhaps because there was less catch up to do.

I am actually now a dinosaur in my subject, when I entered teaching the A level option was a Biblical/ Theology one for which I was perfectly qualified. I am having to do a Philosophy degree in order to keep teaching A Level which is fair enough and what I would want for my dd.

The argument being put forward here seems to be that private school pupils are better educated so are getting a higher proportion of university places.

Surely the obvious solution is to raise the standard of education in the state sector so that all state school pupils are as well educated as their private school counter parts.

If universities start giving out more places to state school pupils by making it easier for people to get in with lower grades this will just encourage people to send their children to state schools and employ private tutors. It will not help the really disadvantaged (who will not afford private tutors) and will penalise the families in the private sector who are not well off and have made huge sacrifices to give their children a good education or whose children are there on bursaries.

It is also ridiculous that so many A grades are given out these days which is devaluing the qualification.

Ages ago I started a thread on whether my ds would be disadvantaged by not doing Latin. Are people saying that yes, if he wanted to do, say, English at a top university he might as well forget it?

If private and grammar schools are offering Latin and Greek then why don't comprehensives?

Although my sil who is a French and German teacher in a fairly run of the mill comp maintains that in a few years' time there will be no foreign language teaching in comprehensives. The kids just can't or won't knuckle down to the spadework and drop languages as soon as they are allowed.