Epsom College Failing at Oxbridge?

[HedgehogFan]

I have a young DS at EC and have seen a considerable decline of Oxbridge offers compared to other similar Independent Schools. Does anyone know why?

@AlexaShutUp I think we are talking about quite different scenarios here. Bog standard comp - fine. Seriously failing comp with knives in classes - not fine. Bullying wouldn't have been a concern for me either in a bog standard comp but it certainly would have been in that type of school. It's all about circumstances and there is a different set of circumstances behind each education decision. That's why I don't judge either.

I am sure most parents pick what they feel is the best school for their child when they have any choices at all. I scanned my parents' school certificates recently from the 1940s (state grammars schools) and it was interesting seeing their subjects taken etc in those days in NE England and to think about what has changed and what has not.

My own view is that most reasonable fee paying schools remain for those parents who choose them a good choice and are unlikely actively to hinder university entrance for most teenagers.

“unlikely to actively hinder university entrance for most teenagers” - but the thread is specifically about Oxbridge, not just university in general. The fact is as Oxbridge places remain constant, if state applicants are increasing in admission, fee passing school entrants are decreasing.

paying not passing

@CrimePodcast

“unlikely to actively hinder university entrance for most teenagers” - but the thread is specifically about Oxbridge, not just university in general. The fact is as Oxbridge places remain constant, if state applicants are increasing in admission, fee passing school entrants are decreasing.

But I'd be pretty sure the point still stands - going to a reasonable private school won't actually hinder the student. The proportion of oxbridge students who were educated at private schools is still very significantly above the private/state ratio. Given selectivity and other factors, an equitable proportion may be somewhat above that ratio but I don't think it's there yet.

But that’s assuming all parents and children are equal. I would say most highly educated parents have good jobs. Some choose other careers but most don’t send DC to the worst schools because they simply don’t live in these areas. So the state pupils at Oxbridge are largely from grammars and leafy lane comps. It’s inevitable some areas will be greatly under represented. Brains are not spread equally throughout the uk.

People who can afford top independent schools are frequently well educated and high achievers themselves. I would still expect a lot of these parents to want Oxbridge and there are large numbers of them. I would expect grammar parents to be similar but comps are inevitably a mixed bag. Some DC wouldn’t go near Oxbridge and are conditioned against it by uninformed parents and unambitious teachers. The “it’s not for the likes of us” is still widespread. Or teachers say they went to X university and they’ve done ok. The DC involved then think that’s good enough for them. Decision made and ambition stifled. However I’ve yet to see any stats that tell us all areas have DC with equal talent and ambitions.

@CrimePodcast

“unlikely to actively hinder university entrance for most teenagers” - but the thread is specifically about Oxbridge, not just university in general. The fact is as Oxbridge places remain constant, if state applicants are increasing in admission, fee passing school entrants are decreasing.

That doesn't mean that the chances of the privately educated dc getting into Oxbridge are hindered though.

Merely that the advantages that they used to enjoy are no longer there to the same extent.

It's interesting how many people seem to get confused between the gradual erosion of historic privilege and actual disadvantage.

@TizerorFizz

But that’s assuming all parents and children are equal. I would say most highly educated parents have good jobs. Some choose other careers but most don’t send DC to the worst schools because they simply don’t live in these areas. So the state pupils at Oxbridge are largely from grammars and leafy lane comps. It’s inevitable some areas will be greatly under represented. Brains are not spread equally throughout the uk.

People who can afford top independent schools are frequently well educated and high achievers themselves. I would still expect a lot of these parents to want Oxbridge and there are large numbers of them. I would expect grammar parents to be similar but comps are inevitably a mixed bag. Some DC wouldn’t go near Oxbridge and are conditioned against it by uninformed parents and unambitious teachers. The “it’s not for the likes of us” is still widespread. Or teachers say they went to X university and they’ve done ok. The DC involved then think that’s good enough for them. Decision made and ambition stifled. However I’ve yet to see any stats that tell us all areas have DC with equal talent and ambitions.

It is attitudes like this that propel some of us to choose state education for our kids.

It is not really just attitudes though is it? IQ is determined by genetics as to 50 -60 per cent all other factors being equal, in a society with free health care and free education the genetics will play a bigger part than in a society with unequal opportunities. By all means there is a difference in educational
opportunity in the U.K. but it isn’t to the same extent as in most developing countries. The educational opportunity of a well fed and well loved child of a teacher and doctor parent attending a leafy comp in Cambridge isn’t really that far removed from a child of city lawyers attending a private school in London, we all know that. Even if the marketing machine of the private school would like the parents to believe otherwise.

@Adastraperaspera

It is not really just attitudes though is it? IQ is determined by genetics as to 50 -60 per cent all other factors being equal, in a society with free health care and free education the genetics will play a bigger part than in a society with unequal opportunities. By all means there is a difference in educational opportunity in the U.K. but it isn’t to the same extent as in most developing countries. The educational opportunity of a well fed and well loved child of a teacher and doctor parent attending a leafy comp in Cambridge isn’t really that far removed from a child of city lawyers attending a private school in London, we all know that. Even if the marketing machine of the private school would like the parents to believe otherwise.

I quite agree, I'm not in the least concerned about the teacher/doctor couple's well loved child in the comp. They will do just fine, and probably every bit as well as the privately educated lawyers' child.

It's the assumption that the poorer parents and children are just not clever enough.

Posted too soon. It's the assumption that poorer families are probably poor because they're not very clever. So their kids probably don't deserve to go to Oxbridge anyway and it's to be expected that the privately educated kids will be over represented.

Yes, it's getting back to this mysterious air of superiority that too many privately educating parents exude. I think that only increases my satisfaction at the shift towards equality of access to Oxbridge, even if the central reason wasn't sufficient, which of course it is. I've also in real life come across the complaints of unfair bias in relation to expensively educated offspring. It really is quite hard not to enjoy it.

Cross post with yours AlexaShutUp. I find the theories of the causes of poverty on MN quite instructive.

It's just astonishingly ignorant to assume that intelligent children will have intelligent parents who couldn't possibly be poor. I would hate to have so little awareness.

I’ve yet to see any stats that tell us all areas have DC with equal talent and ambitions.

Ooh, go on then, tell us which areas are the thick ones where people have no ambition.

@goodbyestranger

Cross post with yours AlexaShutUp. I find the theories of the causes of poverty on MN quite instructive.

Instructive is one word. I can think of others that might not be quite so polite!

Perhaps some kids have no ambition because they're written off from birth as poor and thick!

I do find myself wondering if some private schools are actively teaching this awful sense of superiority and entitlement. I would be horrified if my dc grew up with those attitudes.

And surely if you're talking about differences in educational opportunity in the UK, adastra, you might want to look a bit further than comparing a teacher / doctor family at a leafy comp in Cambridge with a city lawyer family and private school in London?

Do you really think that tackling inequality in education is about improving the chances of a middle class child in Cambridge?

@AlexaShutUp

Perhaps some kids have no ambition because they're written off from birth as poor and thick!

I do find myself wondering if some private schools are actively teaching this awful sense of superiority and entitlement. I would be horrified if my dc grew up with those attitudes.

This is precisely why I chose to send my children to state school - so they wouldn't mix with, or worse, grow up like some of the awful people I was at private school with.

This is precisely why I chose to send my children to state school - so they wouldn't mix with, or worse, grow up like some of the awful people I was at private school with.

Same here, @hopperrock, though in my case, it was the people I was at university with.

@AlexaShutUp

Oh come on! You seriously would not have wanted the roughest of schools! You didn’t want your kids mixing with the really deprived and criminal classes but you seem to think they have the ability to get to Oxbridge!

Can you not see that, by and large, people do jobs commensurate with ability and education. Many years ago I would say this wasn’t the case. Certainly pre universal grammar schools, people didn’t have opportunities. Several generations of people attending mostly decent schools, and the expansion of uni education, the deprived super bright child is not so easy to find.

Parents who were poor 50 years ago, but were bright, got decent jobs. Even if they didn’t go to university. My parents, nor my DHs parents never got near one. They didn’t need to. They were successful at work and became middle class with middle class aspirations. Their DC did go to uni. We’ve moved up the work and education ladder. People then moved out of poor areas and became middle class with aspirations. If all DC were the same in terms of distribution there would be no difference at all between Cambridge comps and Dewsbury comps! But there is. So there’s not equal distribution. There’s a reason for that. It might also explain who goes to Oxbridge and where they are from.

No doubt unpopular but I bet no one posting here has been near a deprived area school and when there is one, they have run in the other direction.

I would add that my dd does actually mix with a lot of privately educated kids too, mainly through extracurricular stuff. Some are absolutely delightful and not at all entitled, so I am absolutely not suggesting that they all have the unpleasant attitudes expressed on this thread. Indeed, some of my closest friends were privately educated, they are lovely and humble and I love them dearly. I think it is perhaps particular schools that produce a particular kind of entitled attitude. I can think of one locally which is especially guilty of this.

I think widening participation has revealed that we have many talented young people vying for relatively few Oxbridge places. Grade inflation will not help in this picture and the private sector are going to have push their children harder to establish any advantage.

As pointed upthread it isn't career suicide to go to an established older non Oxbridge university but we need to think how the more elite end of higher education can be perceived differently.

The issue with non oxbridge universities is that their courses need to cater for a wider range of ability as Oxbridge, from near miss Oxbridge rejects to candidates from clearing. Non Oxbridge universities also act as HEIs for vocation based careers such as nursing which Oxbridge is unwilling to do. (Many RG universities support local communities by supporting degrees that match a local economic need). RG universities are therefore meant to supply an 'elite' education for some in a broad spectrum of possible degrees.

I think we have to somehow decide the nature of an elite degree and which portion of the school population can benefit from this as it appears our historical system is creaking at the seems.

I also feel a little aggrieved that Oxbridge accept foreign students from presumably elite institutions yet social mobility is only the focus for home students (not that I am against social mobility but it should be a factor for all students). The bright home students displaced by foreign students rarely can afford US options and thus does to my mind seem unfair

What a superior post. Nice privately educated people without 2 heads? Why is humble good? Humble is not being confident and playing down your attributes. Not always good and often disingenuous. Anyway, you can sneer at me all you like. So what does that make you? Even with wider participation at Oxbridge, what schools are benefitting most!!

Certainly pre universal grammar schools, people didn’t have opportunities

And since the abolition of universal grammar schools, have 'people' had opportunities?