Top private schools losing their grip on Oxbridge article

[Nevermakeit]

on.ft.com/3hnt4iG
Interesting article from the FT today . I don't understand why there never seems to be any nuance separating the top private schools which are incredibly hard to get into, and therefore select very bright children, and the more mediocre ones where the main discriminator is the ability to pay the fees...
If I were head of one of the top schools (and not just a parent!), this is what I would be arguing, that the children are not simply hothoused (though of course they undoubtedly are), but they were exceptional to begin with!! Yet, they never seem to put this across (either in the media or to the Oxbridge colleges themselves, where they supposedly have such great relationships), and agree to be lumped together with all the other private schools.
I just don't understand it, especially as then they could get their kids in more 'under the radar' , as at the national level, the state school intake would still be looking good....
What do others think?

@oneglassandpuzzled

I think it’s true that many of the children going to top private schools are high-performing, with IQs and exams to show it and there’s no reason to discriminate against them.

Neither of my children applied to Oxbridge so I don’t have a personal stake in this game.

Oxbridge’s loss is other universities’ gain.

But the point is if you can still get the same top results coming from an under-resourced state school with large classes, behavioural distractions and a disadvantaged home situation then you're probably a much better potential Oxbridge student in terms of brain power and study stamina than someone who has had every educational, cultural and financial advantage thrown at them since the age of 11 (or before).

Yes I agree @dillydot which is what I said about improving social diversity.

A girl at dds private school got a scholarship and presumably large bursary there in year 9. Was state educated up to then. Really very clever. 4 x A*s, 11 9s at GCSE, bits and pieces published, Latin, Greek etc. Got rejected. Parents convinced she would have got in had she stayed at the state school. I felt really sorry for her.

@goodbyestranger

In my experience parents of pupils at the top independents frequently seriously overestimate just how bright their children are.

Agreed. I work in education and can attest to this. There are many parents who assume that money buys everything, including ability!

IMO it's not so much the GCSE grades and A level predictions which matter (although of course they need to be high ) but more the entrance tests and interview. There was another thread on here recently which was discussing 'Oxbridge interview tutoring' type companies - which cost a fortune - but I think Oxbridge try to weed out candidates who are over tutored.

Yes I can believe kids who aren't very bright to start with going to schools with a more flexible entrance policy have parents who get bolshy that Miles didn't get 4 x A*s.

It is exactly the same at grammar schools tbf ime. Kids tuturoed heavily to get in then crash and burn at GCSE = very cross parents. And yet grammars make up the lion's share of state Oxbridge entries and no one's bothered about that!

But the point is if you can still get the same top results coming from an under-resourced state school with large classes, behavioural distractions and a disadvantaged home situation then you're probably a much better potential Oxbridge student in terms of brain power and study stamina than someone who has had every educational, cultural and financial advantage thrown at them since the age of 11 (or before).

Exactly. This is why we have contextual admissions.

grammars make up the lion's share of state Oxbridge entries and no one's bothered about that!

…and the highly selective sixth form colleges are fast catching up. Selection at 16 rather than 11.

Any student with a string of high grades at 16 is already doing really well in life. If we are serious about boosting social mobility we need to focus on those children whose educational chances are in jeopardy before they start school and are completely lost by the age of 11.

It is exactly the same at grammar schools tbf ime. Kids tuturoed heavily to get in then crash and burn at GCSE = very cross parents. And yet grammars make up the lion's share of state Oxbridge entries and no one's bothered about that!

Plenty of pupils at our grammar have not been tutored, don't come from well off backgrounds and excel at GCSEs. The drive for diversity exactly mirrors that at Oxbridge.

@goodbyestranger

It is exactly the same at grammar schools tbf ime. Kids tuturoed heavily to get in then crash and burn at GCSE = very cross parents. And yet grammars make up the lion's share of state Oxbridge entries and no one's bothered about that!

Plenty of pupils at our grammar have not been tutored, don't come from well off backgrounds and excel at GCSEs. The drive for diversity exactly mirrors that at Oxbridge.

Really? My SIL said that tutoring for entrance exams was absolutely commonplace. Most of her dcs grammar friends went to prep schools as well.

Tutoring is the invisible privilege. Doesn’t have to be declared anywhere.

It will all come out in the wash. If you are good you tend to do okay even if Oxbridge rejected you because your stupid single mother chose to pay school fees (not that the 5 privately educated children of this single mother tried Oxbridge...) and you are bright you will make it through. The other universities are good too.

If Oxbridge starts making up for disadvantage which shows even by age 3 years in vocabulary at age 18 and goes too far then employers will move to recruiting from wherever the best candidates are.

It can be a blunt measure eg no one had ever been to Oxbridge from my private school in the NE when I suggested it to our Head who rejected the idea. Yet local comprehensives sent some children there., Not all private schools are the same and some are not selective in entry in terms of IQ - indeed some specialise in children who are not very bright (and those ones do not go to Oxbridge - they read land economy at an ex poly or something)

Really? Even if they've passed the entrance exam and got a string of 9s at GCSE (normal for top independents)? I'd assume my child was quite bright as well. Only on Mumsnet do people have this absurd attitude that somehow 10 x 9/8 GCSEs and 3 or 4 A at A level is masking the fact that the student is somehow an academic interloper who will be found out by Oxbridge!*

Dh opened his a level results on local radio that shows how excited the head of his comp was at him getting into Cambridge 😁

@MsTSwift

Dh opened his a level results on local radio that shows how excited the head of his comp was at him getting into Cambridge 😁

The pressure!!!

@Bryonyshcmyony

Really? Even if they've passed the entrance exam and got a string of 9s at GCSE (normal for top independents)?

Yes completely really. Even Westminster (probably the top of the top schools) doesn't like to disclose how many pupils got straight 9s at GCSE. This is as far as Westminster will go for the last cohort to actually sit GCSEs: 76 pupils gained ten or more A or equivalent grades, of whom 58 gained entirely A, 8 or 9. I mean, all credit, stunning results, but even at Westminster not quite all the pupils are emerging with all 9s. I would argue - given how over the top people here are about the alleged difficulty of the admissions process, coupled with the exceptional privilege of the pupils and the legendary competitiveness of the parents - that all pupils, or virtually all pupils, should indeed emerge with all 9s.

Also, as a side note, all the independents (except Brighton College as far as I know) initially ducked the much more challenging reformed GCSEs until their hand was forced, so some of their A are frankly weak relative to those in the state sector. Not all A and their equivalents are equal.

I didn't say All 9s! I don't think many did that in 2019! I said a string of 9s.

@DPLMom if you need high scores to get into Eton how on earth did Prince Harry get in???

@SalsaLove

This might surprise you but not every course in Oxbridge colleges is keen on the Eton and Harrow pupils. They’re not inherently brighter, just inherently richer.

This!

And basically everyone at 'Oxbridge' has got A/A* across the board. It's harder to achieve that in a state school in class sizes of 20, mixed ability, than it is at a selective private with sometimes as few as 2 or 3 in the class.

This means the state school student is likely to be more determined, independent learner, etc, which puts them in a great place to manage the degree course. This is very attractive to research-intensive universities, who do not want to hand-hold undergraduates through their courses if they can avoid it.

This is borne out by research, which shows that like-for-like on entry A Level grades, state school students graduate with higher marks in their degrees.

Totally agree. Also - not everyone who attends private schools is moneyed. iChat about the v bright kids who’ve attended top public schools through bursaries? Where the parents are in low incomes but the children have proven themselves to be so academically able that the top schools have wanted them?

What about the parents who made huge sacrifices themselves, to give their children the education they couldn’t have?

This system penalises and demeans that sacrifice.

[quote whiteroseredrose]@DPLMom if you need high scores to get into Eton how on earth did Prince Harry get in??? [/quote]
Prince Harry is now 37. So he was admitted about 24 years ago.

I think there was the security aspect with Harry and William.

Oops sorry for typos in my post!

I know someone a bit like the person @Bryonyshcmyony mentions. Won a v generous bursary to a top public school on basis of exceptional academic performance. Parents came from poor/immigrant backgrounds, made all sorts of sacrifices to give their kids an education they didn’t have themselves. Top notch student all these way through, interviewed at Oxbridge, but places went to state school applicants.

It wasn’t just 1 student, either. I’ve known 3 or 4 kids this has happened to.

[quote whiteroseredrose]@DPLMom if you need high scores to get into Eton how on earth did Prince Harry get in??? [/quote]
I am talking about the current situation rather than the admissions policy 25 years ago. ISEB test scores as a mode of entry is quite recent (and pretty blind to how much money you have).

Children who attend top schools through bursaries usually have parent(s) who were aware that option was open to them and were able to navigate it.

@peonyjam

Children who attend top schools through bursaries usually have parent(s) who were aware that option was open to them and were able to navigate it.

Not always.

Sorry - posted too quickly in error.
Not always - but even if the parents are aware of a bursary system, and navigate that, it’s irrespective of the financial sacrifice that some parents make to give their child then gift of an education that was not afforded to themselves.

Why should Oxbridge penalise for that?

Maybe these kids need to mention at interview that they were able to attend their schools through bursary and parental sacrifice.