School given y12 a list of RG unis, by subject, to apply to!

[HecticHettie]

My friend’s DD is at a highly selective school where they are all, pretty much, highly academic. When we met for coffee today, she mentioned that she and her DD have been emailed a booklet, produced by the school, that sets out which top Russell Group unis year 12 should apply to, according to subject.
(Ofc Cambridge and Oxford are included for every subject.) Year 12 have all been advised that they MUST apply to at least one - and preferably two - of the very top RG suggestions or explain to the school their reasoning!

She showed me the booklet and it had suggestions like this (sorry if I have misremembered or mixed up)

Maths (which is what her DD wants to study): CO plus Imperial, warwick
Law: CO, UCL, KCL etc
Languages: CO, UCL, Durham, York, Warwick

i am astonished that the school are being so prescriptive - my DD’s school weren’t when she applied but she was at a normal school, not a hot house. Do others have similar experience?

This is what I’d expect from a private school and one of the reasons that bright pupils are failed by state schools and sixth form colleges. Private schools steer their pupils towards good A level subject combinations and then towards good universities. Bad advice or simply a lack of advice leaves a lot of state pupils missing a subject they need to study the subject they want at a good university.

I don't understand the problem. Most parents would've been glad to have been sent such a document, that saves them time on initial donkeywork, and is a good basis to start with. Plus any child, but if you have a bright child you want them to apply to the best. Why wouldn't you. Can grasp the uproar myself. Most dc who are interested in their subject know all about it anyway. Most invested parents know Loughborough is exceptional for sport.

DD graduated from York with a 1st in MFL - the grades required were the same as the higher rated St Andrews - DD rejected the role she received from there.

Sorry parker , I know it is good! I was just making a clumsy point that their information may not even be that accurate, in that other universities rank above York for MFL these days.

Clearly in leaving out Bath, St Andrew's, Loughborough, they are just going for the label.

I have no problem with students being encouraged to be aspirational. The RG label is the problem really. Am guessing Bath and co remain stoically unfussed.

Plus you are assuming you only get this service from private. Many state schools are superb, their pastoral care, guiding students to Oxbridge and all the other top unis. All students got help with finalising their personal statements if they wanted. All ds's friends who were applying to Oxbridge got help, support, parental meetings, interview practice. I was impressed.

I agree with Piggy. We all know Bath is brilliant, particularly at certain subjects. Plus they are undoubtably un-fussed , as their huge number of application statistics prove!

Advice on universities to consider - great. Discussing their application with them to check that they've made realistic choices, good - and if they're an able student who hasn't applied to any of the top places, that would probably involve exploring why. But they shouldn't set rules or try to push them into things - it's not their life. I'd also dispute the assumption that the higher-ranking, the better - a third from Oxbridge may serve them less well than a 2:1 from somewhere a bit less high-pressured.

I mean on the one hand at least they're giving you an idea of where to start.

On the other hand, for maths, both O and C are going to be fucking hard once you get there (possibly even to the point of not being enjoyable) and they require a lot of prep work for MAT or STEP. Imperial is going to also be very hard but you also have to live in London - which may not be everyone's cup of tea (personally I hate London, having lived there for several years), and Warwick - well also hard and you have to live quite far out in Yr 2 and Yr 3 and the buses are at times insufficient for the sheer number of students. This may be a deal breaker for some. She should decide where she wants to apply and then apply there - and you should tell the school that's what's happening.

Agree. My daughter is a Y11 at a fairly high performing comp. She has already had talks on exactly what they can provide in the way of support for those looking at architecture, medicine, oxbridge for example.

We have a handful of super selectives near us and I think they are trying to ensure they keep the high achievers and don't lose them to the grammars.

My old grammar school used to do this. Also had an Oxford and Cambridge stream starting in year 8 and then weeded out official applicants by year 11. If you weren't in the group by year 8 there was almost no chance they'd support you unless some kind of miracle occurred in your results.

My sister was one such person. They also in sixth form would basically choose Oxford or Cambridge for you as well. My sister had to go to black tie do's and the like as well as a dinner at Cambridge university organised by the school.
This was about 20 years ago! They also looked down on anyone that didn't apply to a RG university and if you didn't go to university you were the ultimate pleb.

No-one wanting to go to art college, drama school, music conservatoire?

Would they rank nursing at an RG more highly than history at Bath/St Andrews etc?

It's PR for the school to say x% get places at......... that's all they are worried about.

It's really interesting, but as a low income background child myself I went to a grammar school I had no idea when I was applying to Uni that there were some that were better than others (other than the fact I knew I didn't want to go to Oxford). Now as a Head of a Sixth form I absolutely encourage my high achievers to go to the best universities. I don't understand why one wouldn't.

I would expect better research from a selective school. Bath, Loughborough, Lancaster, St Andrews and Edinburgh are all very well regarded especially for certain subjects.

Absolutely, I would love to see the guide's entries for visual and performing arts! (Actually, I can imagine that there aren't any of those on the list...)

Exactly. And if Oxford and Cambridge are on the shortlist literally for every subject, then either it's a pretty restrictive list of subjects or the school hasn't done its homework very well?

I wonder if this the school which a poster a few years back mentioned only approved a very short list of universities to be applied to (not even all of the sainted Russell Group), and whose DD was one of (iirc) 38 from her year group staring at Exeter that autumn?

I suspect it's to stop parents asking the same questions every year. If they are predicted a *'s then fair enough but my advice to parents for what it's worth is to think about the setting that would suit your child, what additional support they may need if any, distance from your home (especially if they may need support), cost of renting in later years (not applicable for Oxford and Cambridge),

But if they are suggesting oxford and Cambridge for every subject, they must have a highly restrictive degree list and haven't been keeping up with who is best! My dd went to a "lower" rg university which was ranked 1 in the country for her subject- Oxford was 8, Cambridge 11! They also don't suit all learners, (but suit some I should add, I'm not anti oxbridge)

DS - academically and musically able - decided on a niche Conservatoire course. His (good comprehensive) school supported him brilliantly, for example sending him for a mock interview with the head of Music at a local private (so someone DS didn’t already know). Their mantra was that everyone should be stretched to aim as high as they could within their chosen field - whether that be a plumbing apprenticeship with the best provider, degree apprenticeships nationally, a performing arts qualification at conservatoire or a pure academic course at Oxbridge. 3 of his year group were successful in highly competitive Conservatoire entry processed.

DD - academically able and able in a different performing art - went to a very stringently academic school for 6th form. Nobody went to conservatoire. Nobody went into performing arts or visual arts. Nobody even considered the prestigious degree apprenticeship routes. Rigorous pressure was applied to squeeze everyone through the narrow tunnel of Oxbridge / RG admissions. This was in line - mainly- with parental expectations, but there was a very good reason why DS chose not to go there for 6th form.