Do you feel Prouder about Oxbridge because of going to the local comprehensive?

[Verysadatwork]

I confess I do feel extra proud of ds getting to Cambridge for this reason

To be fair those same people probably moan about everything, not just education and their DC.

I know quite a few Oxbridge educated parents in ordinary jobs and of course they use state schools. They do however seem to possess rather stellar intelligence genes and it wouldn’t matter where their DC are educated. They also tutor at home and their DC have every advantage. Far more than many at independent schools. A lowly independent school cannot replace intelligence.

An Oxford education seems to help enormously with grad schemes, vac schemes and pupillages etc, and that’s to do with the education not the name

This is undergoing a transformation. Our perception of the quality of an Oxbridge education has been eroded, particularly recently, due to these two universities producing an unnatural number of 'interesting individuals' idiots and screwball initiatives. This is, of course, unfortunate for the many genuinely clever and hardworking Oxbridge folk, but, it has been evident for some time that organisations and corporations (apart from in law) are changing their hiring practices.

Ericasdog with respect I would say that the six DC of mine who have graduated in recent years have been transformed by their Oxford undergrad degrees. They can all point to individual tutors who taught them to think. None are interesting individuals in the way that you mean, just genuinely clever and hardworking enough to benefit properly from Oxford.

@Ericasdog The biggest change that I have noticed in attitude towards Oxbridge is from private school parents. Once they heralded them as great institutions, now that their DC aren't getting in so easily, they seem to think that the US/ RG universities are much better anyway. Funny that.

“private school parents‘.., they seem to think..,”

What all of them? Are they a hive mind? Amazing.

I wonder what “the state school” parents think? Or “the Chinese parents?”

To be fair, there are some quite vocal ones on MN goldenembers but obviously not all private school parents everywhere. There do seem to be one or two schools where the hit on numbers seems to sting especially, but fortunately those are the parents who can afford to stump up for middling or not great unis in the US which may well suit their DC far better, so it's all good.

I don’t think there’s been a massive hit in numbers at the two schools mine are at goodbye. Maybe a few less? I’d have to check. But also I heard Oxbridge have made significantly less offers across the board in the last two years to mitigate against grade inflation. So it’s hard to tell what’s impacting what really.

I’m sure there are a proportion of entitled private school parents (of course there are) but, such is life and as you say, they will manage.

The biggest change that I have noticed in attitude towards Oxbridge is from private school parents. Once they heralded them as great institutions, now that their DC aren't getting in so easily, they seem to think that the US/ RG universities are much better anyway. Funny that

Yes, wealth has the power to rename an experience. We are seeing this in action right now.

What a horrible, braggy & snobby thread.

Lots of people support the abstract idea behind contextual offers but are less keen on it in practice when it affects their own DCs. This is totally understandable as individually every parent wants what is best for their DCs, but it is a good thing that somebody somewhere is taking the wider picture into account.

I had a DS at a single gender high-performing grammar school and a DD at a local secondary modern at the same time. The schools were similar sizes and equidistant from my house but worlds apart in terms of fundraising, resources, student support and advice, expectations and aspirations. In every aspect the differences were stark. The secondary modern, which was in special measures shortly before DD went there, was solely focused on increasing the number of pupils who got 5 x A-Cs (as they then were) in their GCSEs which was fewer than 40% at the time. When DD and a few of her friends expressed a desire to study 3 academic subjects for A level, the school had to entirely re-structure its Y11 programme to accommodate this.

Was an A grade harder for DD to attain than DS? Absolutely, 100%, without any question at all. Anyone who thinks otherwise doesn't have a scooby what such schools are like. That doesn't, of course, mean her A is worth more – an A is an A – but a university admissions department which puts that A into the context in which it was obtained should be applauded.

@goldenembers

You use the word concept of 'othering' of prep school children in your post as if it is in someway comparable to say, discrimination on grounds of race.
But the parents that use private schools, choose to 'other' their children. It is the concept of 'othering' provided by an education sector that educates 7% of children that so much appeals to them. They want their children educated away from the masses, away from those with needs that lead to disruptive behaviour, so that they can concentrate and do better in exams, perform better at sports etc.
So you cannot then blame other parents for seeing them as somehow 'other' can you, because that is exactly what their own parents were aiming for?

Not sure how the word 'word' crept in there- sorry!

They want their children educated away from the masses, away from those with needs that lead to disruptive behaviour, so that they can concentrate and do better in exams, perform better at sports etc.

These things represent hopes and dreams of parents, which is why they get up in the morning. Not all may achieve them but they are the reason for striving. Societies try to interfere with aspiration at their peril.

@Ericasdog We live in a free country and people can choose, of course. I am privately educated myself, my parents chose that path for their own reasons.
However accusing people of 'othering' their children when they are themselves choosing to 'other' their children, smacks of hypocrisy IMHO.

Chocalata - you seem hell bent on over-simplifying everything. I’m getting a bit tired of stating the obvious, but private schools vary massively and parents use them for a whole host of reasons. A London super-selective is miles away from a country boarding school. A tiny school with a focus on SEN is a world away from a large sporty school that goes on about the ‘rounded individual’ or something like that. Nobody actively wants to put their child in a poor / dangerous school to prove a point, do they? Not if they have any choice in the matter. In some areas the state schools are great, in others not so much. It’s a postcode lottery. Some people use grammars. some people do allsorts to qualify for faith schools. Some people move house to get into catchments. If that school Brampton Academy has a catchment area, watch the house prices rocket around there! Other people use tutors and all sorts outside of school. Its very area specific. I’m not going to get into our reasons for using independent schools but basically, it was because we moved to this area of London when it eldest was 4 and certain schools were literally there, staring us in the face. Neither DH or I were privately educated and we’re not even British so had no idea about schools or catchment areas etc in London. If we lived somewhere else, we probably wouldn’t have thought of using independent schools as we had no knowledge or experience if them. By the way, parents don’t choose the schools around here. No such thing as pay your money and come on in! The kids still have to get through competitive exams and selection processes and the odds range from 1in 4 to 1 in 15. Most very able kids won’t get in and that’s the reality of it. Also everything is contextualised, just as it is at uni level. The truth is, some independent schools are worth the money and some are money for old rope. But people will always do what they can for their kids education. Just like nobody is going to choose to live in poor accommodation if they have a choice in the matter. People will always look at the options available to them and do what they can. If your child has the chance at Oxbridge and is financially able to go, do you stand there going “oh dear, I fear we are othering ourselves from the masses?” Really? No. You think you are bloody lucky and encourage your child to take that opportunity and run with it. It’s the same with entry to schools like St Paul’s or Westminster - if your child is lucky enough to get an offer and you are able to fund it, well, take it and make the most of it. This is human nature. I can’t speak for boarding schools ad this is a lifestyle choice and not one we would make personally. But I do know that even if private schools and grammars disappeared tomorrow, some children would be more advantaged than others. The school is only part of it and the parents attitude / engagement is just as important, if not more so.

I agree with most of what you are saying.
But don't then complain as you did that people are 'othering' your child as if it is somehow akin to racial discrimination.
You choose to other your child, then they will be othered - most likely not in a horrible way, just in a way that means they are seen as having had an 'other' experience to another child or wearing a different kind of uniform.

I did not complain that people are othering my child I said there are always threads on the Secondary Education board where mums are sneering about “the prep school children” they see at interview days. Yet there they are, trying to get their own children into the exact same schools! What difference is there in the wider scheme of life whether your child starts in the independent sector at 4, or 7 or 11 or 13. They all end up in the same environment doing the same GCSEs. Ten minutes into year 7, how would anyone know which children came from a state primary and who came from a private primary? It’s a nonsense. Just like once you are at uni, nobody actually cares where you came from.

@goldenembers Couldn't agree more. Mine have gone state all the way - I don't sneer at those who chose to pay for private, indeed I went private myself, but with children the age mine are I am very much aware that in our area, the middle class kids with engaged parents all end up at the same Uni's whichever school they went to - we have a mix of comps, grammars in the next county, and privates. I HAVE seen some differences in mental health outcomes but that is a whole other thread.
Maybe just don't use the word 'othering' again as it is triggering to those who have been subject to severe other incidents based on race or other characteristics. Thanks.

As I said, one of our son’s is in a state sixth form because the independent school he managed to get into at 11 plus (one if the less selective ones) was so bad, I can’t even tell you. Unfortunately a fellow student of the same ethnicity as him was fatally stabbed on the college premises and this has been a whole other level of worry. Too often, there are no easy solutions.

To be fair @goodbyestranger, I think they go hand in hand. Oxbridge has earned its reputation through excellent education. In turn its brand signals to employers that a candidate has benefited from this education. Thus the candidate has less to prove when trying to get an opportunity.

OP I think you should be very proud. It’s a fantastic achievement.

But I don’t think you can claim extra virtue. Now that Oxbridge put candidates in “swim lanes” according to the educational sector they come from, I think the odds have been evened out.

@goldenembers

You listed about 5 things the oxbridge advisor did… until your post I didn’t even know some
Schools had one.

It depends on the state, we maybe get 1 kids every 3 years in, that is a bigger achievement than most (privileged) would ever realise

@Empressofthemundane
I don’t agree that Oxbridge students have less to prove to employers. That suggests employers set them easier tests and give them the benefit of the doubt at interviews and at initial selection. That’s simply not the case. The vast majority of employers are fair.

In fact some wouldn’t see Oxbridge as an advantage in their fields and don’t often see an Oxbridge grad applying. Most engineering roles for a start fall into that category and Architecture.

If you are saying Oxbridge grads might pass employment tests with higher marks, that might well be true, but the tests are not made easier. Some applicants will just be better at them. Their cv of work experience, where that matters, is not necessarily better either. The idea that these universities automatically give a step up is wrong but overall they do at the moment.

However I’m interested to see if more comprehensive educated pupils (at non selective schools) will mean elite paying firms recruit from a broader pool of universities. Although will that mean a broader pool of employee backgrounds? Not sure.

@TizerorFizz, no I don’t mean that they will be simply waived through. I agree they will go through the same selection process once they are selected for the process as other candidates.

What I do mean is that the Oxbridge brand may help open doors to even be given the opportunity to go through a selection process at all. Most candidates never even get the chance to sit the aptitude test, attend the interview, etc. When employers are trying to whittle down a large number of short cvs without much specific work experience given how young the candidates are, I should think an elite university is a powerful differentiator.