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?

Yes, in fairness there was eyelid-batting from you as well Fluffy.

There are so many different types of independent schools. Some are academically selective, some not. Some are faith schools, some boarding schools, some army type schools, there's a couple of horsey schools, some single sex, some mixed etc. There's a really wide range.

Back to the OP, I went to a Russell Group uni (I think? University of Kent) and I did feel a bit in a minority as a state school pupil. It wasn't just about putting them through the test, at risk of being flamed, they had definitely been much better educated than I had. I did feel a bit resentful for the first year - I had been right at the top of the school I went to but I realised how much the state system had let me down when I got there.

I'm following a broadly private school curriculum with my youngest at home, it is definitely superior to the NC.

There's a list of Russell group universities on the other thread, musicposy.

There are a lot of ex independent school pupils at Russell Group universities and at 1994 Group which includes Exeter (waves at Rusty as fellow Exonian) and Durham - famed for independent school types.
Perhaps part of the reason is that independent pupils are encouraged and expected to be able to go to these universities and many similarly bright students at state schools are not sufficiently encouraged and can end up doing less academic courses, which these universities don't rate.

Kent isn't a RG

I think that's interesting musicposy

we have a very bright guy at work who went to his local comp (where only 1 in 3 get 5 A* GCSEs, behaviour not great etc. - wasn't rated like that then but was still not v good in his day!).

He went to a good university but said it really knocked the wind out of his sails at first when he realised the sort of education other children had had access to (in private schools).

He only got into the good university because a teacher took him under his wing and encouraged him (and because he worked bloody hard for it).

Needless to say, his kids are off to private school.

I do think a lot of it is about parental experience.

The universities (RG/Sutton whatever) are crying out for state school applicants as far as I know. The current conversations amongst private school parents of teenagers is the fact that their university application starts off with a handicap when the admissions people look at what school they went to.
Applications from your 'bog standard' comp go to the top of the pile especially for Oxbridge. If the applications aren't coming in there is no way the universities can increase the percentage of state school students.

Yes, that's something I've been a bit worried about. Part of the issue is A level grade deflation - so many children do have great grades at A level, it's easy to discriminate against those with wealthier parents. And that's when they have the same grades - some universities discriminate to the extent of letting in children with worse grades ahead of those with better grades.

As someone who's been in the Oxbridge system (though now working in another uni), I can say that they are indeed keen for state-school applicants. Very keen. And work quite hard at trying to attract them. But if people don't apply, for whatever reason...

Some universities do apply a value-added type system where a student with worse grades could potentially get a place over one with better grades (e.g. if their school has no history of students getting A grades, then a B grade is pretty damn good). But they'd still have demonstrated in other ways that they deserve the place. So it's not as straightforward as reverse discrimination.

Quattrocento where on earth do you live ? Do all bright children really go to private schools there ?

Message withdrawn

Oh btw, my Russell group uni was stuffed to the gills with independently educated children. Massive majority. But this was in prehistory and in any event I read English.

english - full of private school. Now if you'd studied maths, or enginerring or a science, or German it would havebeen different

But I couldn't do any of those subjects Pointy ... Actually one thing I do mildly regret about going to an independent school is that there is quite an emphasis on traditionally academic subjects. To the extent that when I asked about doing Economics A level a polite eyebrow was raised and I was firmly directed to more academic subjects. I meantersay, Economics is hardly Meedja Studies is it?

I realise you couldn't do them, but because you did such an arty subject your perception was of a uni stuffed with private school students

I teach at a RG university and I don't get the impression that they're all private school products; in fact, the jolly hockey sticks to stand out a bit.

as for not being well off just because you can scrimp and save and put your children through private school- that is clearly a question of how you define well off

dh and I are fairly well off as far as our local community goes, but even for us, private school fees for our two children would until a few months ago have been more than our total income, never mind eating and having a roof over our heads

you can't scrimp and save more money than you actually earn

This whole Russell Group thing makes me feel very old. Once upon at time, Oxford and Cambridge looked down on everyone else. Bristol and Durham looked down on everyone except Oxbridge (rumour when I was doing UCAS form was that Durham wouldn't interview you if you put Oxford first - no idea if it was true).

Everywhere else was 'redbrick' i.e. inferior to those four. (Exeter was regarded as a finishing school for public schoolkids who hadn't got in to Oxbridge. )

Turning the polytechnics into universities has made the snobbery much, much worse - now you have perfectly fine redbricks elevated to hallowed halls of academia, on the grounds that at least they aren't contaminated by contact with large numbers of working class kids from comps.

Sheesh. Can we not just agree that it's a good thing that more than 7% of the population get to go to university these days? (Which is what happened under the grammar school system.)

"they're individually hand-held, spoon-fed and tutored in the private sector"

What rubbish. I went to an independent school which is usually in the top five for results and often first or second and I didn't spot a bit of spoon-feeding or tutoring. What I did see was a real effort to get children to think for themselves and take responsibility for their own work and lives and a real love of learning. Not quite the same thing.

"This whole Russell Group thing makes me feel very old. Once upon at time, Oxford and Cambridge looked down on everyone else. Bristol and Durham looked down on everyone except Oxbridge (rumour when I was doing UCAS form was that Durham wouldn't interview you if you put Oxford first - no idea if it was true).

Everywhere else was 'redbrick' i.e. inferior to those four. (Exeter was regarded as a finishing school for public schoolkids who hadn't got in to Oxbridge. grin) "

Argh. Not true, edam - redbrick referred to the date of foundation (loosely) - they were civic universities founded in the C18th/19th. Later on you get a group known in HE as Robbins universities, founded in the 1960's - includes York, UEA, Strathclyde and Sussex ( I think).

And before all of this in Scotland there were 4 universities going about their business when England only had 2 - but they get lumped in as redbricks by people who don't realise that the UK has 6 ancient universities.

RG universities are distinguished by size and by being research intensive, so there are shedloads of places in them - more than all independent school pupils could hope to fill! And then the other high res quality universities (e.g. some 1994 group and others) get mixed up.

Problem is that university groupings have all sorts of labels - some are just to do with date and type of foundation, others lobbying groups to do with size and research, others to do with location (White Rose, Universities Scotland), and these are used for different reasons within HE - outside they get very confused and confusing...

A journalist is putting FOI requests about proportions of private vs state schools kids at Russell Group Unis at the moment so if you keep an eye out you'll see the figures. The Russell group uni I work at has approx 23% of its intake from private schools, but interestingly some of the most popular subjects (e.g. medicine, English) are dominated by pupils from state grammar schools (up to 65% on one course) and I don't think that type of school educates a vast proportion of kids.

"No Sweetfall,it dosen't actually.We have decided what our priorities are and one of us has always been with the children whilst the other worked and no we aren't really rich and never have been.You don't know my circumstances so don't be so aggressive. "

It is by no means aggressive to assert that being able to afford for one parent to stay at home, whilst it may be difficult and dependent on budgeting, still puts you in a relatively well-off category. I find your insulting tone rather well insulting actually

"By musicposy on Fri 03-Jul-09 22:16:40
No, home educating does not rely on having one parent not working. This is completely incorrect. We home educate and both my husband and I work. We could not afford to pay our mortgage (on our very modest terraced house) otherwise. I work from home and my husband works shifts, so we work at different times. The one that is not working is with the children"

Fair point and far easier to concede than the other point. I shall consider this in the spirit of debate

I don't know any HE families who are particularly well off, they tend to be families who aren't motivated by money and possessions IMO.
I can't match up my experience, as a parent,with OP. I haven't seen it all with my DS, or friend's DCs-all from state schools.