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?

Well employers are certainly not going to increase their own institution's diversity by recruiting more from the unis where those rejected from Oxford and Cambridge tend to go (Durham, Bristol, UCL etc).

Marred because state school kids hadn't read as much as her indeed. Presumably she was a little less full of herself by the end of her degree?

@MinervaMcGonagall45 that could be the one - is it in Gothic script? My friend, who had studied German at A level in the 80s was most impressed. I also did two language A levels & history & I know I’d have been picking my jaw up off the floor. Mind you I didn’t go to university at all.

@LizziesTwin

It was Reflections on World History by Burckhardt a nineteenth century Swiss historian so probably will exist in Gothic script!

@MinervaMcGonagall45

A friend’s son is reading history. He had to read a book before he started in the October and his tutor suggested he read one in one of the languages he’d done at sixth form

I seem to remember that back in the day of first term History Prelims you had to read books in two foreign languages which was massively challenging for all - particularly those who had only done one MFL at school. The French one (Toqueville) had some really good Engish translations but there was no translation of the German one (Burkhardt) in print which caused a lot of headaches.

I had to do something similar at my Uni way back. My father did a STEM subject at a red brick uni even more way back and was expected to pick up enough Russian and German to at least skim read the latest papers from those countries. People assume greater academic demands at Oxbridge but it isn't always so.

@AlexaShutUp

Trying to give everyone an equal chance is not penalising anyone.

This. Sadly, when any form of historic privilege is challenged, it's very common for the privileged classes to feel that they are being unfairly treated, when actually, it's simply the case that their unfair advantage is being removed. Their sense of entitlement is so deeply embedded in their view of the world that they aren't able to see the inherent injustice in the system, but their lack of awareness doesn't mean that the injustice isn't there.

This is so true. I had a bizarre moment recently where a parent of a boy (who has been privately educated all his life and is just about to enter a private 6th form - they are v wealthy) started ranting about how her precious boy's Oxbridge chances were being eroded by the way state school students were being given more opportunities. She actually said the words "it's so unfair". . This boy - nice though he is - is the embodiment of white privilege and she honestly thinks it's "unfair".

Well, it could be seen as unfair to use his upbringing against him if he's genuinely clever enough to go to Oxbridge, but yes, perhaps he'll be less disadvantaged by not being given a place.

My anecdote is not data and just third hand as I said!. The quality of debate in groups matter, though, if no one else is prepared to speak and has no views and has not done the reading that has an impact on the others. However plenty of state schoolers including those from state school Henrietta B and many others will be fine at debating and will have read all the books and others. I want entrance systems to be fair. Teenagers don't pick their school nor colour nor sex or anything like that so we just have to make sure the balance is right. As none of my 5 thought they had a chance from private school at Oxbridge anyway I have no skin in the game.

They will be competing with state schooler Oxbridge people for jobs year after year over their lives and I didn't got o Oxbridge and did fine and I am sure they will including their brother who drives groceries for a living.

@Bryonyshcmyony

Well, it could be seen as unfair to use his upbringing against him if he's genuinely clever enough to go to Oxbridge, but yes, perhaps he'll be less disadvantaged by not being given a place.

Not sure this could be described as using his upbringing against him, as he wouldn't be rejected just for being privately educated. There are still plenty of privately educated people getting into Oxbridge, after all. The reason it's not as easy for private school students these days is because more state school students are applying and - shock horror - some of them are actually clever and exactly the sort of people that Oxbridge want. 😱😱 If he doesn't get in, it's because the places have been taken by people who are better than him.

If he doesn't get in, it's because the places have been taken by people who are better than him

Not necessarily even the selection panel have no idea if that's true or not. Noone does until they finshr their degree.

And there are loads of people every year who are "clever enough" but don't get in, because places are limited. Admissions tutors have to pick the ones they think are the best fit.

There are more students 'clever enough ' to go to Oxbridge than there are places. That's always been the case and is more so as more people apply. A process doesn't become unfair just because it's become more competitive. There's no evidence that I've read, on this thread or anywhere else, that people's backgrounds are 'used against them'. That this nonsense keeps being repeated just reflects the mind-boggling sense of entitlement of some students - or, as in @KaptainKaveman's example, their parents. Ultimately some people just can't seem to get their heads round the idea that there are lots of very bright students in the state sector and they might even - shock, horror - be every bit as clever as their privately educated offspring.

There's no evidence that I've read, on this thread or anywhere else, that people's backgrounds are 'used against them'.

Well, to be fair, we also hear a lot about kids from failing schools who get AAA must be brighter and more self motivated than kids at cushy private schools who get AAA. I'm presuming that's true although my personal opinion is that the private school kids are expected to do far more "other stuff" during their A levels so it evens out a bit in the end

Not necessarily even the selection panel have no idea if that's true or not. Noone does until they finshr their degree.

Of course - no one ever knows, do they, because it's impossible to know how a rejected student would have done. Perhaps I should have said the places have been taken by those the admissions team think are best, or the ones who have performed the best in the selection process.

I thin most people know that the 80% at age 18 who go to state schools have loads of bright people. Most parents can do the comparison like the one I did above between private North London Collegiate and state grammars like Henrietta Barnett. We can all see how many sit per place at 11+ in the private and state grammars and do the sums. My parents went to university from state grammars (or teacher training college in my mother's case).

We just need to keep a check on ensuring it all remains reasonably fair and indeed if so many more good people are getting in who might never have tried the standards ought to rise and certainly not fall. We shall see.

Also many private school parents know there are loads of private schools for not very bright children and that even in the top ones like NLCS only about a quarter get to Oxbridge so there is hardly a private school parent in the land that thinks there is something special about all private school pupils. Plenty are grateful if the child scrapes fairly low A level grades.

@Bryonyshcmyony

There's no evidence that I've read, on this thread or anywhere else, that people's backgrounds are 'used against them'.

Well, to be fair, we also hear a lot about kids from failing schools who get AAA must be brighter and more self motivated than kids at cushy private schools who get AAA. I'm presuming that's true although my personal opinion is that the private school kids are expected to do far more "other stuff" during their A levels so it evens out a bit in the end

Interesting, I've not heard that one before. What other stuff do they do at private school that they don't do at state school, that balances out the relative difficulties of state education compared to private?

@Bovrilly

Not necessarily even the selection panel have no idea if that's true or not. Noone does until they finshr their degree.

Of course - no one ever knows, do they, because it's impossible to know how a rejected student would have done. Perhaps I should have said the places have been taken by those the admissions team think are best, or the ones who have performed the best in the selection process.

Yes absolutely of course going to private school is no guarantee of a place at Oxbridge. Two of mine didn't want the stress of applying and the randomness of selection put them off, they preferred the straightforward 3 x AAAs and you get an offer of the top rg unis (not always the case but was for them) whereas the one who applied got rejected after interview and was fairly sanguine about it and has accepted a place at a traditional Oxbridge reject uni and will also be fine.

@Xenia, if 'keeping a check', as you put it, on the Oxbridge admissions processes, involves repeating anecdotes about someone knowing someone whose daughter didn't like being taught alongside the dim state school students (as you did upthread), I don't think it's going to tell us anything useful about standards.

@Bryonyshcmyony, so your reasoning is that if people on a mumsnet thread comment on the extra motivation needed by students at failing schools, or if teachers at top private schools encourage their students to do super curricular stuff to enhance their Oxbridge applications, that means people's backgrounds are being used against them when they apply? Sorry, don't follow the logic at all.

I do notice, on these threads, that the people alleging unfairness always end up resorting to anecdotes and can never substantiate their claims with evidence. Someone more patient than me has already given the data upthread showing that the increase in state school students being admitted to Oxbridge is very much in line with the increase in state school students applying. The process has become more competitive. Some people don't like it. The ones with a sense of entitlement allege unfairness. That's all I ever take away from these threads.

I have absolutely no evidence and no idea if it's fair or unfair nor do Oxbridge of course they just choose whoever they think will be a good fit. There will never Be evidence one way or another so anecdotal data is all anyone has.

Hey @Bryonyshcmyony what stuff do they do at private school sixth form that they don't do at state school, that evens out the relative difficulties of state education compared to private?

In what way are the detailed statistics that Oxford provides about applications and admissions not evidence? How is the fact that percentages of state and private school admissions remain roughly in line with applications not evidence? There's also evidence about which students get top A level grades and how that is, or isn't, reflected in Oxbridge admissions - I think that's produced by the Sutton Trust. Plenty of evidence for anyone genuinely interested and looking in good faith, and of rather better quality than anecdotes from disgruntled parents.

my personal opinion is that the private school kids are expected to do far more "other stuff" during their A levels so it evens out a bit in the end

Private school parents seem woefully ignorant about what the other half do. This statement illustrates that (and suggests a certain gullibility for the expensive marketing by indies).

Private school parents seem woefully ignorant about what the other half do. This statement illustrates that (and suggests a certain gullibility for the expensive marketing by indies).

Yes I'm looking forward to finding out from @Bryonyshcmyony what all this other stuff is that privately educated sixth formers do.

Especially the ones banged up at boarding schools who can't do Saturday or evening jobs for money.

When I was looking at Oxford entrance statistics ( as LoonvnBoom says, there is very detailed breakdown available) one of the things that was interesting was the breakdowns between state and private for different subjects and also the proportions of applicants from different UK regions. So Classics has a very low proportion of state educated admissions at 35% whilst Mathematics and Maths and with Computer Science have 78% and 83% respectively with most other subjects hovering between 55 and 70%. That all looks pretty obvious - very few state schools offer Classics at A level so entry proportions are going to be skewed and for Maths talent will out in the end - fwiw my ds scored in the top 10% of all MAT candidates from a non grammar ordinary state school.
I hate the rhetoric of 'dumbing down, easier for state school students to get into Oxbridge' that comes up on MN regularly, and just as much I hate the 'all private school parents/children have their noses out of joint because Oxbridge is now discriminating against them'. In my world most parents are sensible, chose the education that is right for their child and are mostly realistic about their chances.