Oxbridge Applications 2019 (Part Three)

[windowframe]

Today is a big day for many... time for a new thread too

Hi goodbye. Apologies if I’ve upset you. I think bright kids, with a real drive will succeed given the opportunities at this school regardlesss of their background. There success should be applauded and I would never dismiss or denigrate it. However, the fact remains the school is picking the very brightest. We need to think about the class of child that experience similar socioeconomic issues but do not have a fantastic brain. These children become the future forgotten generation.

The irony is that the school was borne out of a partnership with an incredibly expensive private school. The sort of institution that riles many on here.

Hubbleisback,

School has highly selective sixth form. Makes me feel a bit uneasy actually.

Yes they are supposedly increasing social mobility but I'm just mot sure of the method.

I am struggling to understand your point. Are there no other highly selective schools in the country? What method is that?

These children are just as intelligent as those at high performing prestigious private schools. Major difference is that most of them have at one time or another, self-taught considerable amount of material in the syllabus in their course of study...and while this might be sufficient to obtain the A*s, it's not always adequate for the Oxbridge interviews, or STEP, for the simple reason that no one has previously advised/taught them to think conceptually and connect ideas from different areas.

Hats off to Oxbridge, especially Cambridge, IME, for all their hard work in East London.

Jano69 He should definitely be hopeful! And encouraged - they don't make offers to people they don't think have a good chance of making them, even if they only just make them, like my DS.

You haven't upset me in the slightest Muggling! I'm off now but just to say that attention should obviously be given to both ends of the spectrum, just not in the same way. Different talents, different needs. This is a specific mission for one end that's all.

I wish I had your confidence that these same DC would have got offers, in the same number, at any old school. Have you seen the grades of some of these pupils at GCSE? The school selects on interview, presumably on the recognition that a lot of these DC have previously been failed. The quoted grades suggest prior schooling which wasn't the best. Why do you suppose that same undifferentiated schooling would have got them offers?

I don't find it ironic that top schools with financially privileged pupils should share their expertise, nor do I think it taints the enterprise in any way.

Hubbleisback

School has highly selective sixth form. Makes me feel a bit uneasy actually.

Yes they are supposedly increasing social mobility but I'm just mot sure of the method.

I am struggling to understand your point. Are there no other highly selective schools in the country? What method is that?

These children are just as intelligent as those at high performing prestigious private schools. Major difference is that most of them have at one time or another, self-taught considerable amount of material in the syllabus in their course of study...and while this might be sufficient to obtain the A*s, it's not always adequate for the Oxbridge interviews, or STEP, for the simple reason that no one has advised/taught them to think conceptually and connect ideas from different domains.

Hats off to Oxbridge, especially Cambridge, IME, for all their work in East London.

Sorry for the duplicate post. My first time posting here.

Hi goodbye. Nice chatting. I think we are in agreement. I don’t think that they would have got same offers at any old school. The resources invested in this school will undoubtedly make it a success for the brightest. I do think we need to take the focus away from the extremes. These debates are always polarised with those either talking about elite private schools or the London Super Academy that takes only incredibly bright, underprivileged kids. I just have a feeling that more focus on the 90%+ of all other schools will help with our education system.

Goodbye this school is highly selective in the sixth form and smacks to me of a 'project.. Children can travel from a distance of 2 hours away to get there. If you select very bright children, give them a huge amount of resources and make Oxbridge the raison d'etre, then you are going to have success - no doubt. There doesn't seem to be anything amazing in this, although the achievements for the individuals themselves are to be greatly admired of course. Maybe we need to go to these lengths to turn things around - but nobody can argue that this is ideal surely. What happens to the children in the lower school who are not selected for the sixth form of the school they have been at for five years? What we most need in this country is a massive improvement in the provision of state education. This will have the most impact for social mobility and when we have children going to our best universities from our normal schools as a matter of course then hopefully we won't have the need for headline grabbing projects like this. For the individuals concerned in this I hope this is absolutely what they always wanted and a massive congratulations. For society as a whole this feels like an admission of failure for much of our state provision or at least the perception of it.

But Muggling, that school didn't take de facto bright kids - it spotted the potential in them and worked with that. I don't think Brampton Manor school has any more resources than other state-funded schools. But its new sixth form was deliberately set up to help disadvantaged children get into Oxbridge. The children were told that they were good enough and that that sort of education was for them too.

•Mailaika*, good first post!

Our local authority was one of the worst funded, and her school was the 4th lowest funded in the country. They made the local and national news because of this.

They didn't want to take funding away from deprived areas, but wanted the govt to increase their funding on education overall.

The state system hasn't failed, Hubble. The state system is doing remarkably well considering the odds against it currently. But one of the things undermining it is the segregation of children according to their parents' income. We will not get properly resourced state education while we have a government - including, recently, every single minister in the Education department - consisting largely of people who went to private schools. And so the system perpetuates itself and the inequalities continue.

What Brampton is doing is allowing disadvantaged children the same access to top universities as others. It is selective, but it is selecting in terms of academic potential, not grades. When you look at the stats for children from Acorn postcodes getting into Oxbridge, it is right that a school is taking the initiative in this. 43 per cent of state secondary teachers do not even suggest that their brightest pupils apply to Oxford or Cambridge, which is why those universities need to do more outreach work.

Hi cinnamon. Nice to chat. What gives you the impression that Harris Westminster doesn’t take “de facto bright kids”?

Yes state education is failing because of lack of funding. These children at this particular school are being given a taste of what it might be like to be at a selective private school???

Not sure of the grade requirements yet as track hasn't updated and it didn't say in the e mail.

The standard 'eye watering' Maths offer is: A star A star A (Mathematics, Further Mathematics + another subject) + 1,1 in STEP 2 and 3. ds has one A star already.

It will be far easier to recruit young Oxbridge graduates as teachers in that area though. That fact alone has a big impact on how much less easy it is to replicate this in areas of rural and coastal poverty, some distance from London.

So very true, Goodbye.

Lucy Kellaway is teaching in Hackney, I think. Though she is not young.

The concentration of educational resources and opportunities available in central London (free access) is hard to believe at times. You can register toddlers at a number of music conservatoires where they are taught (from age 4) by world renowned music teachers. Most universities incl. UCL, IC, LSE run master classes throughout the year for years 9 upwards I think.

This may sound counterintuitive but if you are a low-income family with young children, London is the best place for them.

Projects like Brampton worry me because they distract form the real issues. The fact that we may be reliant on such as this for social mobility is a concern. I would want eventually to be able to say to these children: 'You have the ability to apply to any university you want. You will not have to go through a stressful highly selective process at 16. You will not have to travel 2 hours to another school. We have the resources and teachers to support your application here. Of course you can still socialise with all the friends you have grown up with.'.

LittleSpace - I feel your pain. The joy of Monday is a distant memory. It is going to be so tough meeting the grade requirements.

Yep. The maths teachers are really happy which is lovely. I'm the one who is worried and trying my best to hide it.

Dilemma with what to put as insurance but I think he wants to go for it and put his other favourite. He would be happy there but it is a high risk strategy.

Thankfully ds is currently stress free and doesn't get exam nerves. He does not take after me!

DS goes to a non selective state college, this college has a good system to send children to Oxbridge and other Universities.
In y12, students has the chances to go to career fairs at college with lots of big company and university stands. there are evening speech to enrich each subjects, there normally are 4-5 evenings per subjects. They have invited Cambridge lecturers to give one speech. They also organise transport to Oxbridge open days.
In Y13, there is one meeting for tutor to go though Personal statement with you, then the Oxbridge administrator have a look. Then they offer 1 mock interview before the interview. There are lunch time class once a week from Y13 for entry exam and step etc.
Of course, the college has a very good results even it is a non selective.

Brampton Manor isn't a project nor is it spoon-feeding its students.

How can you draw so many inferences about a school you know so little about?

These are self-motivated kids making use of the resources available in London universities and other places in London. The resources are not in Brampton Manor - they are available elsewhere and all over within London. For instance, some of the students would have been attending UCL Horizons Programme for 2 years prior to joining Brampton Manor. Why? Because teachers in previous schools spotted the potential and told them to apply to UCL.

Never mentioned spoon-feeding and had not made that inference. These are children who I am sure have absolutely got to Oxbridge on merit. It does not change the disadvantage on a wider scale.

Just returned here and saw my "trendy" comment taken up. I see it was explained, though. Yes - it's not the pupils who are trendy, but trendy types can easily scoot over to Newham. Even Michelle Obama turned up at one East London school to give a motivational talk. As Bowchicawowow rightly observes, who can be arsed to make a trek outside the M25, let alone the far reaches of East Anglia?

And, as I always say, there is a massive effort made for children on pupil premium, from deprived areas etc etc. But what about the masses? My local school has hardly any pp pupils. But is the area affluent ? No, it is the land of the "just managing" . And it is frankly a cultural wasteland. The teachers aren't great intellects or inspirational figures, they're all a bit blah.

I'm sure there's great potential out here in dullsville, but who's interested in helping the white lower middle classes? If there were to be a study of how many of this demographic gets to Oxbridge, this would be the most unrepresented group.

It does not change the disadvantage on a wider scale.

It would be hard to create a level playing field in education right across the country. Not saying it shouldn't happen, btw. Maybe technology will change this in future?

Atm, you are not going to attract top teachers to schools situated in rural poor areas where public transport is non-existent and teachers have no access to good further education institutions or social life i.e. no enrichment opportunities for student or teacher.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't make changes where the environment affords us a fantastic opportunity to do this. I am not up to date on this but think Westminster School shares resources with Westminster Harris.

I imagine it would be easier to make a change in the education available to the underprivileged in a place like Winchester than it would be in Great Yarmouth, I don't know.

Agree wholeheartedly Irma. It is not headline grabbing news attempting to help the huge swathes of kids left to plod in peripheral areas. Much easier to make a big thing about a completely atypical school where very bright, motivated kids are succeeding. Until we stop polarising and start look at the majority of kids who are not getting a great education, we will not drive up standards.