To think universities should state separate entry criteria for Indies?

[Wacamole]

DD who is on track for 3A*s at A’level, thought she’d give Oxbridge a go after being encouraged by her teachers. All very excited, doing super curriculars etc. Only just been told she doesn’t meet minimum entry criteria that would be expected from an Indy, which is straight 9s. She doesn’t have straight 9s, she has straight 8s (couple of nines), not only that, the course she wanted to apply for at Cambridge doesn’t require Maths at all, but school has advised they won’t even look at her if she doesn’t do Maths AND Further Maths. She is doing neither. Apparently an EPQ is also mandatory even though none of this is mentioned on Cambridge website.

All this second guessing, reading between the lines has been really confusing.
I have no issue with universities asking for higher entry criteria for students from indies for obvious reasons but wish they would be more transparent and state this on their ‘Entry requirements’ same way they state contextual offers?

We abolished grammars in the NE where I am from in about 1970. I remember being offered the chance to take it just to see what mark I might get even though everything was now comprehensive. I didn't take it however. I was at a fee paying school there anyway. My parents went to state grammar schools from relatively badly off homes in NE England. I am not sure children in NE England hav done as well since grammars gone eg my father and uncle went to one grammar and last year I notice it got no one into what I would call a good unviersity and yet my father and uncle read medicine at Durham in those days., Why are no children from that same area - Bishop Auckland reading medicine at Durham (or Newcastle University ) now when children did in the 1930s and 1940s?

Except that some private schools are doing similar with their bursary funds.

now when children did in the 1930s and 1940s?

This predated free state schooling, though children were required to have an education.

Some benefactors would pay for scholarships for bright pupils from poor backgrounds to be able to afford to stay on at school, or to access grammar schools at all.

That generation was not a golden age by any stretch. Provision was patchy and much depended on whether the pupil was able to find financial support

It was between the end of the war and the start of comprehensive education that there was the nearest to universal access to grammars in England. Though of course there were still plenty of indirect barriers

Yes, two of the independent schools my DC are in have outreach programmes going into local primaries and identifying potential applicants. This is nothing new. They also run Saturday schools throughout year 5 to familiarise these pupils with the format if the entrance exams and the kind of questions that might come up in their respective 11 plus assessments. I believe 20-25% are now receiving bursaries (many of these full bursaries) in one school and the other is catching up. Once in the school, there is a policy that no pupil should be denied a trip or opportunity in the basis if financial circumstances. There is a fund for this and nobody would know who is in receipt of bursary help unless the student tells people.

Ours do good bursaries but not outreach to primaries.

Also, when your DC joins the school you pay a holding deposit and when they leave, it’s common to donate the deposit to the bursary fund. This alone finds a significant amount of free places in the sixth form.

One of the schools won a Times award for improving social mobility through state-independent sector partnerships. When a local sixth form was damaged by the Grenfell fire, they provided a base for those students to finish their A-levels. Half the available places for those joining at the sixth form are bursary places and this is set to rise.

I think you will find the research particularly looked at 0-5 year olds. These DC are barely in primary schools. Just long enough to be assessed as below average.

Sure Start should have been good but MC parents took over. It needed to be ring fenced. We used to fast track DC to nursery schools in my LA where a group of teachers/social workers/medics could identify SEN or another need. Another need was a chaotic family life, poor parenting etc. Sure Start was meant to help these parents but I’m not so sure it did. I think our model of bringing professionals together with recommendations worked well.

Also, before I forget: going to a university near home might be good if the local one is top class but what if it’s not and DC should have gone elsewhere? We do need much better advice and ensure parents understand the differences.

We do see huge numbers of DC with firsts from some universities. If you can get a first with CCC at A level, is that the same as a 2:1 from Oxbridge? Employers might think not.

I also take issue with the notion that a 2:1 from Oxbridge means an easy first elsewhere! Really? I also know Oxbridge likes DC to have a MFL in order to study English. There’s clearly a reason for this. DC do need to establish if courses are right for them. As my DD is a linguist I’m glad language acquisition is seen as challenging - she did Medieval French. All degrees should challenge in some way!

The independent sector is behind the grammar sector on this. They just make more noise about it for obvious reasons.

The most successful grammars tend not to be those in full grammar areas such as Kent, although a few of the Kent grammars are very good indeed. There’s a greater need to be proactive in non grammar areas, arguably.

Ethel I agree. It was my parents who were teenagers in the 1940s wo benefits from the grammar schools in Sunderland etc. My grandfather and his brothers were at King James I school in Bishop Auckland which is now an Academy. I am not sure its status in the 1930s but in the 1920s before the awful 1929 crash my grandfather was able to send the oldest boy to a boarding school for a few years - although it was a school of about 25 pupils and we have a picture of him on the whole school photo aged 4 and his cousin aged 12 - h e was the youngest in the school and forced to write with his right hand ( he was left handed) and he was sent away as he resented his baby bother - just about the worst psychology ever. Thankfully it did not last long as money for fees ran out and he went to the King James I school with my father and their other brother after which 2 of them became doctors.

I have a 1934 newspaper article about the school as my grandfather was giving some prizes out there. It says "Grammar school". I don't know if you had to pay. I do have the 1936 Durham university invoice for fees for my uncle which is allowing for inflation £9000 - which I thought was quite neat - same fees as today except today you get it all as loan.

Oxford and Cambridge know very well that they can only do a limited amount to help social mobility. And at secondary level the grammars need the primaries to do their bit - but there’s been a huge antipathy towards identifying kids who could flourish at grammar school, for the standard political reasons (and some for the sentimental idea that eleven is too young to select.....).

I couldn't agree more @goodbyestranger. I live in a Grammar school area and my DC go to different high-achieving grammars that send significant numbers of DC go on to Oxbridge, Medicine etc. every year. The demographic of the DC attending those particular schools (albeit not for all grammars in the county) is generally affluent, professional and well-connected parents and a high proportion of the DC come from well-regarded prep schools with parents layering significant 11 plus tutoring on top. Sadly, the State primaries seem to feed the myth that the 11 plus is not a big deal, it's just about finding the right school for the right child. I understand that not all parents can afford private tutoring but surely at minimum the primaries should be able to provide some sessions in how to approach the 11 plus exam. However, they seem to toe the party line that no tutoring is necessary, which plays a part in further distorting the playing field for bright, non-privately educated DC. I know DC who go to the local comp (effectively secondary modern) who are naturally brighter and more conscientious than some of the DC in my DC's schools. I find it sad that the primaries do not seem to be more engaged in playing their part to get the right type of child into a school where they will thrive irrespective of the economic situation of their family, which surely fits right back to the ethos of Grammars. I'm putting my hard hat on here but I believe that either more needs to be done to level the playing field or there needs to be a two-tier entry requirement system.

@goodbyestranger
What do you define as "successful"? Years ago we had grammars doing outreach for primary maths pupils. We had mentoring from grammars for under-priviledged young people and certain schools were targeted. Mostly those who rarely got a single DC into the grammars - county-wide grammars here.

I do think budgets and social constraints have stopped grammars going further into primaries. No state primary coaches for the 11 plus. Independent schools do. Why is that allowed? There are also primary heads who do not think their DC are grammar material. They believe in comprehensive education but work in a grammar county. Sadly. As a governor I worked with one 20 odd years ago. Dreadful woman would not support 11 plus appeals. She thought they were not the right sort of families. This never happened in the leafy lane schools where tutored DC were always supported by heads. It certainly taught me that some DC are truly up against it. I lobbied as hard as I could for grammar outreach and mentoring. I also thought DC from some schools should have had a few extra marks in the exam too!

There was widespread non taking up of grammar school places years ago too. My DM and DF went to grammars but lots of their contempories did not. They could not afford to. Even in my day, the uniform was 3 times my DF's weekly pay. Just astonishing. No second-hand shop either. Specially finished coat and kit - like a private school! Those barriers are gone but others remain.

@PresentingPercy

Who is responsible for telling students that 'all firsts are equal but some are more equal than others?

I agree with your sentiment but certainly newer universities won't tell you the degrees have less merit (debate in itself). Newer universities market heavily in their localities.

Therefore it is up to parents or teachers to give an honest scope of higher education and in some schools/areas I don't know if this is done. I think teachers could be involved in outreach as 6th form teachers should have an understanding of the HE landscape in the UK.

With regard to sure start I agree that in retrospect funding could have been more targeted but I think the idea of MC and WC families mixing was a good one. Early parenthood is a great bonding experience between people of all backgrounds.

In a non grammar area we are a comp that is getting an increasing number to Oxbridge each year. 22 this year (out of 31 applicants), 17 medical and 5 vets.
Comps can work, but so many people believe the myths that they are full of disruptive, non achieving students. We have those, but we have ambitious, hard working ones too. More state school students are now getting in because Oxbridge have reached out and said we want you. So more now apply and more get in.
Off to work but did want to stick up for the majority of students (who do go to comprehensive schools). Ours is far from leafy - more concrete monstrosity that leaks in lots of places. But staffed by people who care.

Yes, but there are comps and comps. Our catchment secondary had 93% FSM for at least two decades. (I have not checked recent figures.) For them getting kids to aspire to and into RG is a significant achievement. It is recognised as a good school, yet its major success is providing a safe and secure environment in which learning is possible.

How many of your 50 or so Oxbridge/Medic/Vet applicants were FSM?

I am not sure I really understand this obsession with state/private as a measure of deprivation. If we lived elsewhere our kids would have gone to state schools. Or if we had been prepared to gain religion, tutor heavily or rent in a different catchment. (Lots did the last and then tried to claim a moral high-ground!) Certainly we know many people with kids at state schools whose parents are far better off, and more than willing to spend to supplement their education.

Unfortunately not all comprehensive schools - probably not even the majority- are staffed by teachers who have real aspiration for the kids they teach. There’s a huge poverty of aspiration out there. I’ve been genuinely shocked over the years by just how lacking in aspiration many of the teachers I’ve interviewed are, and at the same time how little far too many of them are at spotting intellectual outliers. Plenty just don’t see education as an engine of social mobility, they just get drearily on with teaching the syllabus and keeping kids under control. I think one has to be very cautious about generalising from schools such as yours mumsneedwine, or one would become very complacent.

Cross post with Nms.

Well it’s for exactly this reason the primary schools should screen those that are behind at 5 and we should do something about it. Making school choices at 11 totally obscures need and social mobility ideals.

I think there have been plenty of adults in education that have told students that a first from x local university is just as good as a first from a top university. Indeed you can get a first easily at Bristol when compared to Cambridge apparently. For an easy life, why not go local? Be near friends and family.

I’ve heard many teachers say university doesn’t matter. It’s all about choosing the course that suits you. Students are told to look at the teachers and their teaching career as an example that x university doesn’t hold you back. Clearly there are grad jobs where it doesn’t matter but the assumption it doesn’t matter for poorer children, despite what their ambition could be, is utterly wrong and false. In fact, it’s of no help at all. These DC should be introduced to the widest possible choice and the best advice. Some people are not best placed to give it but they are listened to.

What are the explanations for DC not trying for the elite universities from vast areas in the North and Midlands? Surely poor advice is part of it.

@goodbyestranger
Same sentiments. I agree.

@mumsneedwine 22 this year (out of 31 applicants), 17 medical and 5 vets.

Wow I'm totally amazed at a comp achieving these stats... Well done to your school... That's more DC to med school than I think KCS or Perse achieved. I actually thought you may teach at my nieces Surrey school but they don't get anywhere near those numbers.. 5 last year into Oxford on the back of very inflated CAGs (A* went from 5.9% to 16.7%).

I do hope that schools that inflated CAGs last year are looked at more closely this year. I know a lot of schools didn't publish the stats but my nieces school is effectively bragging how good their results were last year.... Ekkk.

mumsneedwine you’ve previously said that your school is very large and referred to 900 in some subjects (but perhaps you were referring to the colossus’s such as Peter Symonds rather than your own). I may well have this wrong but did you say the school roll was 2000? What numbers are in each year group in the sixth form? Is it around 300?