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?

You absolutely don't need Latin to do English at a top university. It's got very little to do with English. can be handy, but not essential for (say) medieval history, but my dh, who teaches that at one of the best history depts in the UK, didn't do any Latin until he went to university (he's also a state school product, as are many of his colleagues).

Latin and Greek are fine and interesting and worthy of study, but not fundamental to other subjects as appears to be suggested sometimes.

I have many friends who have been at the top academically selective independents and they had such great teachering (most ex university dons) that when they got to Russell Group and occassionally Oxbridge the lecturers and courses were dull and dire compared to the education they had received at their school. They were at least 2nd year level and the quality of their written essays were superior to the vast majority of their state school peers. This is not because they were heavily coached or brighter but because the contrast in state v's private is massive in virtually every way. This is not a good thing.

Some comps do do Lain, fircone (eg ours ).
Your DS probably has an unfair advantage in applying for English - aren't most applicants (MC) girls so they like to have a bit of evening-up on gender.

My kids' state primary does Latin. It all comes down to teacher showing willing, IMO.

snorkle, yes I am hung up on the no. of 'average' pupils who do better in the private system, because they are the ones who are getting the places at the RG universities! Which is what this discussion was originally about.

I absolutely agree the whole system is riddled with inequalities.

However, I am willing to stand corrected. I think it's an interesting discussion. I really don't know what the answer is.

Just to add a couple of anecdotal comments from my personal experience.

I began to look at Oxbridge entrance whilst doing A levels in the early '80's but my left-wing FE college tutor gave me zero encouragement to pursue that line of enquiry and I lacked the self-confidence and the supportive parents that might have helped me to try. I ended up with two A's and a B which in those days was more unusual than nowadays and would have given me every opportunity to get into Oxbridge.

The careers advice at my state comp and the FE college was lamentable [massive understatement]. I lacked confidence and have fuddled my way through life without much career success. They were no doubt trying to deliver the best educational experience for me that they could, within their budget and ethos and some of the teaching was good, particularly at college, but they didn't even pretend to care about me as an individual and assist me to make the best of myself as a person.

Now I am able to pay for my dd to go to a nurturing, selective independent school. She won a place a top state Grammar too, but we feel that she would benefit from the added value, good pastoral care, and through course and careers advice on offer at the indie.

Yes, she's privileged to enjoy an education that will hopefully bring out the best in her. I'm determined to do what I can to help her overcome the same lack of confidence I see in her that I suffered with.

If that environment helps her to achieve more of her potential in life (not just RG group uni entrance) then it's money well-spent.

This is why I'm privately educating my dd - so she will more help to realise her potential than I did.

Agree wholeheartedly with everything you've said topflight. It is high self-esteem and high aspirations and determintation that helps children reach their full potential - whatever that may be.

i have graduated 3 russell group uni and never met any hand held spoon fed socially inept twits of which OP speak.

but frankly yes money buys education and oppurtunities.Nae shit sherlock

most likely socio-economic determinant of qualification obtained is parental qualification and professional status.

having said that neither of my parents attended uni ands i am 1st in family to attend

and hard graft and determination.

Totally agree ScottishMummy.

DD will be the first of our family to attend Uni (except my brother) and she has an Oxbridge offer. Hard graft and determination she has in bucketloads.

Totally agree with topflight, and am happy to pay for my children to get the kind of happy school life and enthustastic committed teaching that I would have loved to get. I didn't because I was a lab rat in the comprehensive, levelling-down experiment which combined two excellent grammars and two excellent secondarty moderns to produce what is now the lowest added-value school in the country. It benefitted no-one, and alleviated no deprivation, just reinforced it.

topflight/MrsGuyof Gisbourne - my DW was actually told not to apply to Oxford by her teachers at the newly created comp she went to. She had to do it herself with zero support. she got in partly by intellect, partly by luck and partly by sheer bloody mindedness.

TTopflight, I can absolutely see where you are coming from. It is such a shame that you were not encouraged.

I am privy, by the work I am doing at the moment, to see how grades have changed over the years and 2 As and 1 B would have been pretty brilliant then.

I remember when I was doing my PGCE. We had a lecturer talk to us about primary education, and he was talking about the purpose of primary education.

There was a belief that the purpose of nursery education was to prepare the child for primary, the purpose of primary education to prepare for secondary, the purpose of secondary education to prepare for higher education, and finally the purpose of higher education to prepare you for life.

That means that over 20 years of your life are simply spent preparing for something else. How sad that these years aren't viewed as part of life already.

I certainly see school as part of life and I want my children to enjoy their schooldays. I don't want these days marred by bad behaviour, bureaucratic target setting, vandalised buildings etc. I don't want them marshalled from one pen to another. I don't want them to be treated as an anonymous person in a crowd.

Therefore, I pay for their education. It is a sacrifice (with five children), but a willing one. I am convicted for my choices by having spent several years in a variety of state schools (including 'outstanding' ones).

I don't think my children are average, but I think my older ones have the potential to be lazy. My eldest DS gained mostly A* in his GCSEs which reflects his natural ability, brought out and encouraged by his excellent teaching & learning environment. He was not 'spoon fed', whatever that is. He was encouraged, stimulated and held to task.

Unless spoon feeding means having teachers who care, and are giving the scope to put their caring into action. There is so much more to teaching that dishing out facts.

ST - well said ( as always!). 'Spoon fed' is a meaningless gibe - from what I have seen, independent education encourages bold, independent thinking, and gives children the ambition to aim high and not always go for the easy option or easiest subjects. And I totally agree that each stage is not just preparation for the next step - what a sterile view - but needs to be enjoyed for its own sake - learning and love of learning and thirst to learn more is its own reward.

Absolutely agree with Mrs Guy. My DS2 has improved remarkably since going to an independent Sixth Form College where classes are of 3-8 rather than the 25 our local state sixth form colleges are forced to have because of poor funding in the further education sector. He has been helped to reach his potential by dedicated teachers and he has worked extremely hard and with great enthusiasm.
Anyway, can one really be "spoon fed" Maths or languages or sciences (or any other academic subject)?

Most people that say spoon-fed have never had any experience of the independent sector. Its a waste of time arguing with them, instead just be smug that you know your kid is being educated in the best environment and is growing up less judgemental than the inverse-snobs!

Perhaps the "spoon-feeding" refers to the systematic help given to pass exams well? Perhaps that could be called "good teaching" at one level. After all, it fulfills government targets, doesn't it?

In itself, exam-passing (however that is achieved) is a pretty good organisational technique to learn for later life, (getting the work done to an excellent standard in any job), but sad if that's at expense of the creative, philosphical, exploratory side of education. All the evidence I've seen in the indie sector has very much been towards developing thinking skills and aiming high - and not simply being handed the answers.

Idealistically, I think education should teach children a, the wherewithall to earn a living using their particular individual abilites and interests, but b. at a deeper, heart level, to enable them to discover the person they truly are. At that point of self-discovery, I think exam and career choices become more obvious and the motivation to succeed comes more easily. IMO the independent sector often focusses and succeeds in doing this to a better extent than the state sector.

The OP talks about "average" children doing well enough to get to RG unis. Well, roll on the day when every child clever, average or otherwise, is given an environment (state or indie) that nurtures them so they know how to leave education and live life in a fulfilling way. Schools aren't the only influence, but our children spend an awful lot of hours there.

My dd has just had her induction afternoon at an indie school where her Year Head talked about how our dds well-being was her "number one priority". Contrast that with the "welcome" letter from the state Grammar (in the top 30 in the country for exams results) my daughter received when she got a place this year. The letter began, "Dear new year 7 pupil". They couldn't even address the letter to her by name. Small points, but this highlights the difference in the ethos of the two sectors.

If treating children with care and respect gets them better qualifications and better uni places then that's the best practice the state sector should try to emulate.

As a parent I had a choice to make. Yes, I'm grateful I can pay to give dd advantages toward her making a success of her life.

For goodness sake, no one is saying a private education isn't a good education! It obviously is, otherwise people wouldn't pay for it. A grammar school education is just as good.

The point is 90%+ (I would imagine) of the population do not have that 'choice'. Does no-one really not 'get it' , or is it really just me????

Therefore it is not an equal playing field when applying to university. Simple as that.

I am beginning to get very bored with this thread.

I suspect that what some people believe to be spoon feeding, I just see as teaching.

I care about my students and make time for them. I am interested in the whole person, not just about how they learn my subject. I know about their families, their problems, and how they are doing in their other subjects.

I plan my lessons according to their needs. If they need more, I will give them extra lessons at before school, at lunchtime, after school.

I will absorb as much information from the awarding bodies as possible, so that I can help my students with examination technique.

If they fall short in examinations, I will have their paper returned so that we can see where they went wrong.

I guess that is spoon feeding.

I don't think most people equate spoon feeding with teaching. I think the most inspirational, skilful teachers know exactly how to educate children - and it's far more than just passing exams. An excellent teacher is one who tunes into who the child is, whether they are bright, average or weak, and is able to engage the child and move them forward. I am constantly astounded by the calibre of new teachers I see coming into my school - very impressive.

From the way the OP talks you would think that independent schools were just exam factories, cramming it all in and testing until noone could fail. I actually think this applies to the state sector more.

my experience of the private sector is that the public exams are a hurdle to get over so that the pupils can have the most options available to them. They are concerned with giving the students the best education they can, to instil in them a love of learning and a thirst for knowledge which sets them up for the rest of their lives no matter what field they choose. Unfortunately they have to conform and work to the exam syllabus as well as this.

In my case, when making the choice with my dd for her secondary education, the Grammar school was not "as good" as the independent sector.

The Grammar is a good school for getting top qualifications. But not so good, I anticipated, at developing dd as a rounded person with the ability to use those qualifications to actually fulfill her potential in life.

I don't think anyone would question that there's not equal access to nurturing schools. Or that an excellent school experience gives an advantage for RG uni entrance.

But the OP asks us how we feel about clever pupils in the state sector missing out in RG uni entrance because of nurtured, but possiblly inherently less clever pupils in the indie sector.

Well, if the indie lot are the students best able to hit the ground running to get the most out of the degree course, then that's the best choice admissions can make. You generally choose the best candidate for the role in the job market, don't you? You can't make uni admissions depts responsible for righting the wrongs of the inadequacies of secondary level state education.

The real issue is taking the best teaching practice and ethos of the indie sector into the state sector for the benefit of all pupils who have a will to benefit from that.

Or vice versa. The private sector can learn a lot from excellent maintained schools.

Another major misconception on this thread is that average students are getting into Russell Group universities.

My DS is a very clever boy (inherantly), and has achieved highly so far (he is in L6 so we don't have any A2 results for him yet, but he is predicted 4 As in his A2 and a further 2 As in his AS).

He is well above average (and not due to spoon feeding).

I worry that he is not going to get into a RG uni. It is definitely not a shoe-in. He will probably put 3 RG and 2 insurance on is UCAS form, to be safe.

I cannot see any average (eg MidYis 100) students getting into RG universities, unless by fluke or unbelievable progress). I would suggest that you have to be well over 120 to stand much of a chance.

And when you say average, you have to define what you mean. It obviously doesn't mean A-level achievement, so what does it mean, exactly?

I know at my school that we monitor actual achievement vs PIPs, MidYis, Yellis, and Alis tests. But not all schools are as thorough.

"PIPs, MidYis, Yellis, and Alis"

ST has segued effortlessly into a foreign language. Unfortunately I don't know which so I can't translate.