Oxbridge: Blatant social engineering - not admission according to potential.

[Marchesman]

Despite resistance from some tutors, Cambridge University’s Access and Participation Plan 2020-21 to 2024-25 includes a target to increase the proportion of UK state sector students that is entirely separate and independent of aims for POLAR4 quintiles 1 and 2. Formulating admissions targets for the University of Cambridge’s Access and Participation Plan (2020-21 to 2024-25) | Cambridge Admissions Office

The university's own research in 2011 had "found no statistically significant differences in performance by school type, and there was no evidence of the phenomenon observed at other UK universities of state sector students outperforming their privately educated peers" https://www.cao.cam.ac.uk/sites/www.cao.cam.ac.uk/files/ar_gp_school_performance.pdf Subsequent data shows that students from independent schools performed better in examinations than students from state schools by 2015/16, at a level that is highly statistically significant: https://www.informationhub.admin.cam.ac.uk/university-profile/ug-examination-results/archive

Therefore, APP 2020-21 to 2024-25 makes no attempt to justify the state school target on the basis of student performance. In fact the only justification given is: "We recognise that school type is not a characteristic used by the OfS or contained within its Access and Participation dataset; we recognise too that the state versus independent binary masks a range of educational experiences…[however] each of the under-represented groups identified within this Plan appear in far greater numbers in state maintained schools, as do students from low income households who are not identified by any of the measures currently available to us."

The result of this can be seen in https://www.cao.cam.ac.uk/files/attainment_outcomes.pdf

In final degree examinations: "The per cent mark remained lower for the three secondary school types: • Comprehensive (estimate = -0.70, SE = 0.19, t = -3.63, p< 0.001); • State grammar (estimate = -0.98, SE = 0.19, t = -5.22, p< 0.001); • State other (estimate = -0.87, SE = 0.20, t = -4.32, p< 0.001)" To put this into context, these are the figures for students with "cognitive or learning difficulties (estimate = -0.88, SE = 0.33, t = -2.67, p< 0.01)"

Regarding the acquisition of a First: "The probability of the outcome remained lower for the three secondary school types: • Comprehensive (coefficient = -0.20, SE = 0.06, z = -3.13, p< 0.01); • State grammar (coefficient = -0.30, SE = 0.06, z = -4.81, p< 0.001); • State other (coefficient = -0.24, SE = 0.07, z = -3.57, p< 0.001)"

Selection according to potential? Really?

How many times do pp have to point out that Oxford does not give out contextual offers? If you read the board regularly you can see many parents, teachers and universities staff have shown statistics provided via FoI and the average of the best GCSEs is very high. Cambridge doesn't even look at your GCSEs. Some people are fantastic at sciences but bad at art/music/sports and English.

But yes, I agree that CS is particularly insane and realistic applicants will need all A stars for that (plus FM where available).

I believe more A stars are given out for STEM A-levels because the marking is less subjective than for humanities / social sciences? This filters into uni entry grade requirements.

I would think that unless you had done exceptionally well in the HAT you wouldn't be selected for interview because of being very average or even less than average in your cohort. Doing brilliantly in the HAT would still get you an interview though.

The OP clearly just believes that private school pupils are inherently cleverer than their state school counterparts, based on no evidence whatsoever.

And Oxford normally interviews before they make an offer, so they can tell if an applicant can converse with them, has done the reading and other extra studying so we can very clearly tell what all this "unfairness" drama is about.

However, let's make it clear that there are many students, from state schools with perfect grades who don't get offers from other top universities either. On the student room you can see whole threads running over multiple pages each with 4 A star predictions, work experience, reading and not an offer by their top choice. The problem is not unique to Oxbridge applicants, or even private school applicants. People don't want to understand that there will be very few contextual offers from underprivileged backgrounds. However, there will be many foreign students because they pay higher fees. There are many talented students who won't get their first or second choice because there are not enough places.

Although those exams do seem very useful in selecting the best for interviews I am wondering how many Y11/Y12 are even aware of the fact that they might have to sit those extra exams on time so they can study?

A good school makes a very big difference. Some parents had told us that sending children to grammar school was like a private but without having to pay fees. Our experience has been different. They don't have the finances to recruit staff to keep enquiring how their personal development and extracurriculars are going. Bother to enter them for Maths or CS competitions. They can't even retain good teachers! And if we forget about universities for a moment, I thought they would be quick to point out they are struggling at a subject, or next year they will put X students in sets for Y subject depending on exam taking place on Z date but even their parents evenings were always pushed towards the end of the year.

@BramleyBear
Oxbridge offers are standard so DC have to achieve top grades in A-Levels to take up their place.
@BramleyBear
Oxbridge do not make contextual offers. So a candidate from a state school will need to meet the same A Level grade requirements as a candidate from an independent school. Conversely, other universities like Bristol make offers with adjusted A level grade requirements for contextual students.
@chocorabbit
How many times do pp have to point out that Oxford does not give out contextual offers

Oxford offers are made on contextual grounds. The fact that the offers themselves do not differ does not change that. Most offers are AAA and around 30,000 domestic pupils per year met that standard even before post-Covid grade inflation, it is a pretty meaningless requirement. Receiving an offer is difficult, achieving it is not.

Independent school applicants who receive offers average 8.78 A*s as opposed to 7.45 for those from comprehensive schools.

There has definitely been a better time. It used to be free.

Oxford contextualise GCSE's but for a lot of subjects they also have entrance tests. An upper limit and a lower limit is applied. Below the lower limit interviewing is not recommended - above the higher limit - strongly recommended. For those in between contextualisation and any other flags raised due to inequality / wider participation are used to decide who to interview.

Independent school applicants who receive offers average 8.78 As as opposed to 7.45 for those from comprehensive schools.*

I give up trying to explain this to you. I have tried in the simplest of terms. It is astounding to come across posters so blinded by their own prejudices. What part of the words "context" and "outliers" do you not understand?

This is a summary of Maths Admissions for 2021/22 at Oxford.

www.maths.ox.ac.uk/system/files/attachments/Feedback%202021.pdf

Demonstrable unfairness is spending four times more on the education of one child than another and then claiming the child who has benefited from all the extra funding has more potential than the other, and the other child should know their place and stay in it

Our local LA has a spend per pupil of £5705.60 (significantly up from when my own DC were at school). Winchester day fees (boarding element stripped out) are £36,369. Westminster day fees are £31,464. The spend is currently around six times as much rather than four.

Independent school applicants who receive offers average 8.78 As as opposed to 7.45 for those from comprehensive schools*

Shocking that the independent kids can't raise the game more than that, given that they have had six times as much spent on them.

Messed up the bolding there but the gist is clear.

But she does have a mother who cares for her and her education very much, which is in fact a very valuable privilege.

”the setup of good independent schools particularly boarding prep and senior schools is conducive to instilling desirable social qualities such as tolerance, kindness, respect, politeness etc because of the length of time pupils spend together. Competitive daily sports teach resilience, coping with success and failure, bravery, persistence and the virtues of training. Pupils learn to be responsible from an early age and to exercise good judgement. A good mix of positive male role models is on hand, often with military backgrounds, unlike in the state sector where most teachers are female. Even relative maniacs turn into well adjusted human beings. Kipling's "If" sets the tone.”

Putting something into context is generally considered desirable. Just like @Marchesman would like us to put into context the superior beings who have attended English public boarding schools. Because, obviously, lots of wholesome, competitive sport and experiencing a bit of military discipline makes you a better human being with more potential than a weedy, malnourished little squirt whose idea of sport is 20 minutes of an old Joe Wicks workout on YouTube. We only have to look around to see how incredibly well adjusted, kind, tolerant, polite, respectful, persistent and brave the alumni of our great establishments are. Wealth and power may corrupt, but not if you have had this tendency educated out of you at Eton for £46,000 a year. 😉

Thank you. She's the first kid in our family to even complete a college course or A levels never mind get to university. So everyone is very proud of her. She did have a contextual offer from Durham of AAB compared to AAA but didn't need it in the end as got AAA.

She also had offers from every place she for, all contextual but also completed summer schools in y12 at Durham, Sheffield, Edinburgh and somewhere else which I think helped with her applications and also Edinburgh sent her a brand new laptop with no conditions she had to even apply, as she was using my old one.

So anyone with DCs in that age group encourage them to do the summer schools, dds were online due to covid but are usually in person I think.

Well done to your dd highland!

Totally agree

@drawingmaps

Thank you for your refreshingly measured response and the information.

This link covers the state of play quite well.

https://cucd.blogs.sas.ac.uk/files/2021/02/Holmes-Henderson-and-Hunt-Classics-Poverty.docx.pdf

@TheaBrandt
"single sex high performing state comp"

Moi, hoarding privilege? Never.

This is a recent study outlining the lack of access to Classical subjects, in particular languages. I’m not clear what it indicates about inequity in Oxbridge admissions?

Any student without access to any Classical language at school can apply to Cambridge or Oxford for the ab initio course and students are expected to reach A level standard in either Latin or Greek between October and June of their first year. Inevitably, this course is overwhelmingly state school students. The independent school students apply to a separate course. At Oxford, all students are judged on the same basis in Mods, in the second term of the second year, with no favours extended to the an initio students.

As it happens, my youngest DD is at a very central, old and extremely popular college in her third year of the ab initio course. Her peers seems extremely bright and it’s hard to see that they were given a leg up at interview. Indeed some tutors at some colleges have a reputation for not wanting to take on an initio students. DD comes from a state grammar which was one of the most poorly funded schools in the country until recently (when the funding formula changed). She’s never got less than a top grade and got an almost perfect row of firsts in her Mods, on equal terms with her independent peers. She’s not obviously exceptional so it grates a little to have any implication cast that these bright and motivated state school students are there for reasons of positive bias.

One also can’t generalise from the Classics particular. No other subject is in the same position.

It’s still a comp and takes all sorts. There are even fights! And no contextual offers available- like I said earlier actually the mid level comps have the worst of both worlds - no contextual offers (fair enough) but minus the privilege of private schools (teacher retention an issue /more kids from troubled backgrounds / can’t pick and choose your cohort or boot out trouble makers as a private school can).

Winter, I don't agree that when there were no fees it was a better time because (a) only 15% of people went when I went therefore 85% of people did not go and did not get free fees (b) today you only pay the loan back if you earn over a certain amount so in many cases it a gift from hard working tax payers plenty of whom never had a chance to go to university and (c) Labour regards it as one of their greatest triumphs - the new system where those from very badly off homes get a decent maintenance loan and the loan for fees as being a way to ensure those from poverty have a better chance than before with about 50% of 18 year olds going. Also the loan is only a 9% of salary over the threshold payment for those earning well. it is not like a normal loan.