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?

Universities these days keep tabs on what happens to their students after they leave and afaik the graduates from our English department has a very high level of employment months after graduating; can't remember the exact figure but have seen it circulated recently; it's one of the things departments are graded on. So it seems there are things you can do with an English degree.

Most of my friends with English degrees now work in the city, they tend to be the best off financially.

"It seems a bit unfair that those with advantages all the way through - good school, helpful parents, money, good uni - then get advanatges in the hunt for jobs."

Yes but it's the way it is. I think it's useful to be aware of this and prepare children accordingly.

Interesting point on Ivy League - I was thinking about this on rereading the article on the Laura Spence affair. International mobility is going to be more important to our children's generation than it was to us - our generation thought it was enough to backpack around the hippy trail. Must be better to demonstrate serious mobility younger.

'She's pushing dd1 to go to Cambridge to do English and when I said 'but what job can you get with an English degree' she said it was the university that made the difference.'
Here's what I did with my English degree from Oxbridge:

Worked in an investment bank. Boring, so I changed and worked in two marketing departments and two public relations companies in London

Published two books.

I have never been out of work. For the first ten years of my life people would give me interviews for jobs just to 'look at' me (their words). When I changed sector, from banking to marketing, I did so because people would interview me.

My English degree has given me: analytical skills, particularly the part of it which involved Anglo Saxon and Middle English. I'm a good decoder of texts.

The capacity to read vast amounts of material quickly and absorb salient points.

The ability to write concisely and logically.

The ability, through the tutorial and seminar system, to take criticism and bounce
back.

I'm sure other universities' English degrees equip people equally well.

I've arrived here a bit late in the day (computer broken - weep) but I kind of see where the OP is coming from. I live near her!

Anyway, two children from ds's school are going to a (selective) private school in September. Neither of these children are in the top sets for maths or English at their state school. And that is out of 90 children set across the year so they are not even in the top 30 for those subjects. So one might assume that the parents of these two children are spending £12K a year in the hope that their dc will be pushed and pulled to a higher level.

Methinks you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear, but I suppose shelling out a ton of money could make a kind of polyester purse.

I do think if you have an average or even less able child the case for sending them to an independent school is much stronger.

I am not saying that there are not bright kids in independent schools, there are of course. But having a very clever daughter I am as certain as I can be that she will get whatever grades she needs to go to whatever university she wants. She also has the back up of a very supportive home , I never had this and had my choice of universities because I was clever. Of course I could have been better prepared for further study, that is where I was let down by my state school. But I am can fill that gap if it still exists.

What I can't help wondering is, if you take one of these children who are not even in the top 30 of their state school and coach them through their A-level and into a good university, what kind of guarantee is that that they will actually be able to cope with the university course, where they will be expected to do most of the work on their own without constant support?

And what is the advantage of getting into a university if you then end up failing your degree or (heaven forbid!) are tempted into cheating or plagiarism because you simply can't keep up. These days, employers aren't just looking for evidence that somebody has been at Oxford=they're a gentleman; they often want a First or a 2:1 from whatever university you attended.

The term is just over here, and once again, exam boards are having to deal with the fallout, not just the failures and resits, but the cases of plagiarism, cheating etc. Thankfully none of mine this year, but even in my very small classes it happens on average every three years or so and it is heartrending. I would much rather my dcs didn't get in, if I didn't think they'd be able to cope with the course.

It's not just a case of ' getting the grades' that steers parents towards independent education, though.A top class school will have a scholarly approach, an enriched curriculum, will differentiate,stimulate minds, encourage and support post A level work and will 'keep tabs' on the progress of each pupil in some depth as a matter of course. The result is that pupils can be taken further than they otherwise might have been.

A Levels have been devalued enough to make it difficult to select university candidates on grades alone.And if education is really just a utilitarian ' get the grades, get the degree, get the job' ticket then I think that's sad. Obviously there's a practical, immediate point to education but it's about so much else.Presumably Oxbridge admissions tutors are looking for that extra breadth and depth of thinking.

Coming late to this too, but I don't necessarily agree that pupils who have been to independent schools will have been pushed further, and be working in more depth.

In my experience of teaching both privately and state educated university students, it is often the kids who have been to the weaker state schools who are the best - they have had to be self-motivated and find their own way through A-Levels and this stands them in good stead at university. Some (although obviously not all!) students who have been privately educated have been so well supported (some might say spoon fed) that they struggle with working independently at university.

I wonder what form this so-called spoon feeding takes....

The form the 'spoon feeding' takes is being in a small class, with no disruptive other children, being able to learn properly and probably being pointed in the right direction re coursework, first 'drafts' etc. I am sure you get the picture, and I am sure that is why people send their child to a private school rather than a crap state school. Surely you can see this is advantageous to an averagely intelligent child?

Put that same child in a 'bad' school with supply teachers, the class having to be 'controlled' before any teaching begins etc., and they are not going to achieve the same standards, with all the will in the world.

These are extreme examples but that is the basic premise behind the argument. I really don't see how it cannot be understood.

University tutors know it too.

It's a shame that there is no clear way of selecting students/employees by 'who has made the most of the opportunities they have been given'.

I think it's only a certain sort of employer which recruits only or mainly from Oxbridge or Ivy League, (city banking, city law firms, and similar). Most of the jobs I've ever considered wouldn't be that sort of job.

I have a degree from Oxford and one from Manchester, I enjoyed both places but found my time at Manchester more intellectually demanding than the Oxford course. And for many jobs, a good degree from somewhere like Manchester will be valued similarlhy to a degree from Oxbridge.

If my dc were dithering between Oxford and Manchester, I wouldn't know which to recommend, each has advantages, and certainly I wouldn't see Manchester as academically inferior. Less traditional, yes. But I found it easy to keep up academically at Oxford and had to work harder to try and keep up with the best on my course at Manchester.

That's not spoonfeeding though - that's just teaching. You really can't equate the absence of disruptive pupils to spoonfeeding. That is really sad.

It's the student that has to do the work - they are in the examination room on their own. A teacher cannot force a student to learn or to prepare - they have to be motivated to do it for themselves.

The only time I have seen too much help with coursework (ie teacher draughting) was in a grammar school, where the work was sent back again and again until it was 100%. I don't have coursework in my subject, but the most help my colleagues give is in setting tight deadlines for each stage, and obviously in setting the stage at the beginning.

Sorry to use the term 'spoon feeding', I know it is a bit emotive.

Teaching students who have been to the 'best' schools - both state and private- , it is often hard to avoid the impression that they have been 'coached' and given a very clear idea of what to write for particular exam questions (e.g. a list of bullet points). They have also obviously been given intensive help with their coursework. This is not a criticism of the schools or the teachers, clearly this is the best way to get the best results at A-Level.

(This raises a whole other set of questions about what A-Level tests, but that is another thread.)

However, it does not necessarily prepare the students that well for some degree courses, where they have to work extremely independently, and write a very different sort of essay. In some cases, the very bright student who has been to a more ordinary school, and has had to work on his/her own more, will cope better.

E.g. what margotfonteyn says about teachers reading 'first drafts' - yes, this can help students with their essay writing, but when they get to university and no longer have someone to read their first draft, it can be rather disorientating and disconcerting.

Fennel - were you doing undergraduate degrees at both universities? Because if doing postgrad work then you would almost certainly have had to work harder.

x-posts with Fennel and scienceteacher

Very much agree with Fennel, I also have Oxbridge and non-Oxbridge degree, and found the non-Oxbridge degree (my ug degree) far more stretching and stimulating (and it wasn't at a tip top place like Manchester!)

Scienceteacher - I suppose what I am getting at is that students from less good schools have to be much better motivated to get the same results at A-Level, and in my subject, motivation is one of the main predictors of success. Which is why I love teaching mature students like retiredgoth (sorry to hear you had to drop out, RG), as they are usually incredibly well-motivated.

Quattro - this doesn't hold true in my case. My non-Oxbridge ug degree was infinitely more intellectually demanding that my Oxbridge pg degree.

Well, yes, one was undergrad, one was MSc and PhD, and it was a competitive MSc course. But even so, I was surprised.

You are just assuming motivation, diesel. You have no idea how motivated an independent school candidate is. They could be extremely driven.

Reading between the lines is very dangerous. If you don't feel that the A-level system is adequate (ie by allocating places based on grades), then there needs to be a different system (eg similar to the USA SAT, MAT). When we are talking about fairness, it is not fair to pupils who do all that is asked of them in the prevailing system, and them somehow lose out to students who do not achieve as highly.

By all means change the system - but don't penalise innocent victims. It is no fairer to sink school student for having a rubbish homelife vs a student whose genuine achievements are downgraded for social engineering purposes.

I get fed up with having to justify educating my ds privately. I'm not saying he deserves better than anyone else's children ( I'm not even saying he gets better schooling) It's just right for HIM. If he goes to uni, I hope he chooses one that's right for him then.
We do go without luxuries to send him and I don't want a 'return' on it other than a well rounded and happy child.

Oh... and he's not "spoon fed"... he's encouraged to be independent!

Exactly, shockers.

I don't think it is a question of 'justifying' educating one's child privately, it is a question of accepting they are advantaged, compared to some others.

Of course they are, that is why people to choose to pay for education, when the alternative is not 'good enough'. (sorry if doesnt make sense,am trying to watch the tennis here too!).

Unless they do change university entrance requirements and bring in an American type SATs system it will never be fair. Oxbridge in a way IS fairer because of the interview, separate unseen tests etc., but again pupils need to be 'confident' enough to apply in the first place.