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?

I on't think most privsate school parents are shocked at all! Not one person ever when I went to university (not Oxbridge) had ever been to Oxbridge from my private school, never in the whole history of the school. Even in the most competitive very academically selective London day private schools like NLCS/Habs/MTS where some of myk children went at most a third get to oxbridge and everyone has always known that ie most children going there will not be going to Oxbridge and you know that full well when they join the school. No one is shocked about anything. Many paying parents pay because the child is not very bright toio as they feel those middling chidlren are the ones that can be helped perhaps even more than the brightest at private schools and no one is every going to expect those ones to get into Oxbridge. So I don't think shock in the word.

Where I am from (NE England) grammar schools were abolished in about 1970 and up there there are no Bramptons, Hills Roads or Henrietta Barnetts which is why the white working class Northern boy is probably the most deprived and with fewest life chances of anyone in the UK but he doesn't look very good on a diversity brochure.

Many 2.1 graduates from many universities go onto flourish and contribute significantly to society

I'm quite a senior professor with a record of several millions in research grants, books, research students etc etc etc, and I didn't get a First ... Neither did most of my colleagues.

@TheaBrandt - you get all sorts in top private schools too. Vaping, drinking, drugs, sex, abuse, neglect, self harm, loads of anxiety issues too and even social services referrals. I hear all of this from friends who either teach there or have kids there. And don’t even get me started on the social media Tik Tok videos etc

Essentially how a child does boils down to good old parenting, character and genes in most cases and peer group pressures/no bullying etc., no mental health issues. Many private school kids in pushy private schools are not doing great either. Just as many students do the whole Oxbridge thing, but don’t exactly enjoy it either.

However, I don’t doubt that teachers are leaving the state sector in droves. Not sure what the solution is there. People need to value and respect teachers more across society starting with pay, to trusting them etc and also people need to parent their own kids properly and make sure they do their homework and work hard. There was an interesting thread on here about how parental expectations shape academic outcome more than many other factors.

Oh I know many friends and family privately educate and dd2 socialises with the private school set they have their issues of course but their pastoral is way better (anecdotally). Staff are struggling at my girls comp to deal with all the issues. The school is just so much bigger.

Just sore about the teachers leaving as it’s just happened!

Coincidentally 4 of dds private school friends parents have recently announced they are divorcing which is tough for teens whatever your circs.

@DollyParkin 😁You've proved my point - few academics are going for All Soul's Fellowships. I've also managed a PhD, been a senior Government Non-Exec and am a Professor in Practice - all without a 1st...

My DC1 (state school educated) is at Oxford, will probably get a 2.1. though his tutor thinks they're capable of a first. They are though spending loads of time on their dissertation doing some quite complex research over the summer with a vulnerable group of people while giving back to that community. They're learning loads about ethics approvals, research methods, funding bids etc. I'm really proud of what they're doing.

But perhaps their place should have gone to someone with more potential .....

The trouble with threads like this is that they are full of lies.

Your post in particular is a little wide of the mark.

The boy in question was 17 when he left Eton - by which time he'd won Henley and already represented GB at rowing. He's now at Harvard and I'm certain his father never regretted his decision to send him to Eton.

I attach "the very funny story on the ETON website" that you refer to.

The increase in places to grammar school kids may be an indication that finally, instead of tutors seeing grammars as a bastion of middle class privilege, they're recognising the huge efforts that (at least the top) grammars have been making in terms of outreach. What's been going on at (these) grammars for at least a decade mimics the outreach programmes at Oxbridge, although of course the grammars - with a miniscule fraction of the resources of Oxbridge - are limited by what they can afford. Changes in admissions policies cost nothing and have been implemented but freeing up teachers on a budget to go out to primaries and funding transport to school etc obviously costs money which is a stretched resource. Certainly at our grammar there's been no shortage of political will, and that's translated into action, although I'm sure the HT would say that with more funding further progress would be possible still. I doubt that the recent increase in offers is wholly disassociated with these initiatives which of course take time to bear fruit, just as the Oxbridge initiatives have done.

Grammar school kids have for years had all the issues associated with lack of funding, no different from non selectives. So on a purely educational front: large classes, difficulty recruiting and retaining good teachers - these aren't the preserve of non selectives and are the context in which grammar school kids have to achieve. However for as long as I can remember they've been judged pretty much on a par with top independent school kids in terms of Oxbridge entry. In some respects that was almost fair, some years ago, but hopefully now as a collective they're being given a little more slack.

But @MidLifeCrisis007 - that exceptional boy would have just stayed at the grammar and then made it to Oxford or Cambridge anyway and rowed there. The fact he is off to Harvard instead, why is that? Hopefully just personal choice.
How many team GB rowers come out of Oxford and Cambridge?

Impressive MidLifeCrisis007, thanks for the link. All credit.

“What would your advice be to lower socio- economic folk where such things like ‘State Grammar Schools’ - super selective or not- don’t exist in their region?
Also, those where there are no ‘Outstanding Comps’ ?”

Depends on where you live. In London, there are good transport links and buses and at Sixth Form, all talented kids can reapply - Sixth Forms in all schools can be selective. So for disadvantaged lower socio-economic folk with gifted kids - they need to get them to GCSEs mentally in tact and use free resources, join Mensa, ask the school for help, visit museums etc. One good thing that has come out of the pandemic is more free online resources. I said at the time I wish the Government would make sure all curriculum for all subjects is taught online with online resources for all boards so that disadvantaged kids stand a chance. Obviously for things like MFL it is slightly trickier but not impossible for Sciences, Maths etc - even without the practicals, watching it carried out how it should be carried out is better than nothing.
Lots of poor people who rent do move for schools. It is only those stuck in council houses who cannot do it.

Not disagreeing the lad could have made it to Oxford or Cambridge from a grammar school but it is very hard to make it to the Oxford Blues Boat from a non rowing school / state school with amateur rowing led by an enthusiastic teacher. My DC1 was in the Blues Dev Squad and Pre Season training and was at a major disadvantage compared with those from elite Public Schools. He hadn't had the benefit of all those ++ that they provide .

The article @MidLifeCrisis007 posted shows 'Simon' benefited enormously from Olympic coaches at Eton, physios, diet management, let alone its own Olympic rowing lake. The field is far from even.

Public School to Ivy League for undergrad then to Oxford / Cambridge for post grad and Blues rowing is a well worn path from reading the bios of Blues Rowers.

Public transport isn't completely free past 16. Once you're going out of borough, you need trains.

Mensa costs money in joining and events.

Travelling to museums costs money.

Online access and equipment costs money.

Moving house costs money and in the case of private renting, requires a much larger income and secure employment.

The poorest families are not going to be able to pick up the financial slack from a decimated education system. It may be manageable for a lower middleclass family, but the ones these schemes are meant for would still be excluded practically, even before you look at emotional/disengagement/just trying to survive types of barriers.

Grammar school kids have for years had all the issues associated with lack of funding, no different from non selectives. So on a purely educational front: large classes, difficulty recruiting and retaining good teachers - these aren't the preserve of non selectives and are the context in which grammar school kids have to achieve.

I've not looked at the stats for a few years, but its not unusual for grammars to receive lower per capita funding than non selective, even beyond the effects of pupil premiums. Which is probably as it should be in a world of finite resources.

The university with most GB Rowers is currently Oxford Brookes. Then the US universities.

@JustanothermagicMonday1
Apologies!
It’s this post I ought to have lifted to ask about advice for the folk of lower socio-economic status looking to move from State Primary schools to State Secondary schools.
That said, would your advice be the same or different from what you gave for moving from secondary to 6th form?

@ProggyMAt - in London at least, there are always options for the in the know parent even if they are poorer. For example, several music trusts still offer free music lessons and hire on rare instruments out at primary level and teach lessons for free too.
A number of the well known comps that are too expensive to live in now have music scholarship places. There are lottery places etc. too. I cannot comment on the rest of the country. The point is to trawl the websites on 11 plus forums, Mumsnet, and start finding out about all the various options for good education that may be available. There are a lot of soft markers in all comps - for example, really rigid discipline methods are typically only used in certain schools that parents buy in to. Some have too expensive blazers but often donations/help is available. The poor but motivated parent needs to get themselves well informed on the very complex educational landscape. There is also always church as a back up in many parts of the country.
It is not “gaming” the system. The system is inherently flawed. What drives kids forward primarily is a good peer group backed by great parents which then leads to excellent results. Being supportive of the school the child ends up in is also very important.
There is a selective state school system except it does not kick in until 16 mainly in most parts of the country. There is also the back door selection via church etc and catchment. And there are private schools. What I would like schools like Eton to do rather than focus on a few poster kids is to keep outreach as wide and far as possible and lend out their teachers and resources to local schools (I think they may already be doing that) to reach the widest pool possible.

@goodbyestranger
The increase in places to grammar school kids may be an indication that finally, instead of tutors seeing grammars as a bastion of middle class privilege, they're recognising the huge efforts that (at least the top) grammars have been making in terms of outreach. What's been going on at (these) grammars for at least a decade mimics the outreach programmes at Oxbridge, although of course the grammars - with a miniscule fraction of the resources of Oxbridge - are limited by what they can afford. Changes in admissions policies cost nothing and have been implemented but freeing up teachers on a budget to go out to primaries and funding transport to school etc obviously costs money which is a stretched resource. Certainly at our grammar there's been no shortage of political will, and that's translated into action, although I'm sure the HT would say that with more funding further progress would be possible still. I doubt that the recent increase in offers is wholly disassociated with these initiatives which of course take time to bear fruit, just as the Oxbridge initiatives have done.

Well you might think that. However, the reality is that in the last 5 years Cambridge has admitted on average per year only 24 Polar4 quintile 1 pupils from grammar schools (compared with 16.6 Polar4 quintile 1 pupils from private schools each year).

One is drawn to the conclusion that had they put their effort into private schools they might have done better.

No idea what you mean OP, not for the first time. I don’t think the deficiency is on my side.

Our grammar has seen a huge hike in offers in the past two cycles. Primarily Oxford I grant you. But then historically Oxford has always been the preference at our school. In part I’m sure because of the even worse journey to Cambridge.

@DollyParkin
Sounds like @Marchesman should actually just try to get a refund for their DCs' school fees!

If the school counts success in terms of Oxbridge entry as you appear to, or in degree performance, or indeed in subsequent career trajectory, that will be problematic.

The report also interestingly says that one reason state school undergrads get lower marks in Tripos is that a higher percentage take NatSci which has a lower proportion of 1st. So perhaps correlation as much as causation??
As said in a PP that is is a misinterpretation of the conclusion of this study. Course type was adjusted for in the multivariable analyses, school type remains an independent predictor. The conclusion on courses relates to ‘normalisation’ of marks for degree class ie variation by marks between courses does not result in significant differences for degree class.

@goodbyestranger
No idea what you mean OP, not for the first time.

Polar4 quintile 1, it is a proxy for low socioeconomic status. You know - poor people? Not many in grammar schools I will grant you, but you must be familiar with the concept.

Honestly, when they are at Cambridge, nobody is going around making a big hoopla about who went to this school or that school. The vast majority went to some type of state school. For the ones who make loud proclamations in the first term about having been to a state school etc etc etc (a certain college is known for this apparently), these nearly always turn out to be from grammars or fairly wealthy families in rural / suburban England - hardly poverty. The ones who are from more disadvantaged backgrounds just get on with it. The differences between the average private school and the average comp largely fade into insignificance anyway because there are obviously students there from all over the world - from totally different education systems and different work ethics (to put it mildly).

WP initiatives are not only happening at the university level - many independents around here (London) are doing exactly the same thing. There are outreach programmes which go into some of the most deprived schools in the area and encourage the most able children in those schools to sit the 11 plus. They attend free Saturday school from Year 5 onwards and their performance in exams and interview is contextualised. In the London Day School mine were at, 25% receive some form of bursary and all trips, music tuition, extras, uniform etc is free to those pupils. At 6th Form there are at least 30 full bursary places (joining a cohort of about 180) and these are not young people with education-savvy parents at all (as someone suggested above). In fact, the vast majority in DC year seemed to be Muslim girls from a Muslim school where there were massive issues with girls being sent on 'holiday' to their home countries and never returning (married off). Their parents barely speak English, let alone have a clue about competitive school / uni entry.

These days, many (probably most) in the London super-selectives have at least one non-British parent. I don't think I can bring to mind a single friend of my kids with two British parents. This is a major driver of the increase in US / overseas applications from these schools as parents tend to encourage children in the way they know and many of them were educated overseas. They are aware of Oxbridge, but for them, it doesn't have the 'hold' it seems to have in the British psyche. Anyway, they are so focused on SATs and extra-curriculars and writing the essay submissions for US unis (a very different process with different hoops to jump through) they don't really have space to even think about U.K. uni applications. That's something we observed anyway.

How it breaks down in an independent school that achieves 95% 9-7 at GCSE and 80% A star / A at A-level, is that probably about 20-25 (out of about 200) will go to Oxbridge. But at least that number again will go overseas to equally competitive unis. The majority of others will go to Imperial, LSE, UCL, Durham, St As, Edinburgh or Bristol. Students on full bursaries do very well indeed - no different to anyone else. Many achieve full scholarships to Ivy League. It is true that they need perfect grades for top institutions these days, but many students do have these grades so they can give it a go if they want (or not). An Oxbridge place is not regarded as the be-all-and-end -all. Everyone knows it's very course-dependent and, for instance, it's harder to get on say, a medicine degree at a good uni than many courses at Oxbridge.

Obviously I know what the Polar measures are about although I wouldn't tend to use such a patronising or insulting shorthand.

The difficulty I'm having is penetrating your written English.

So I haven't got the foggiest what you mean in your last sentence, which you seem to think you signed off with in a brilliant flourish. Lost on me I'm afraid.

@sendsummer Sorry if I wasn't clear I was referring to the actual report; table 2: results for univariate regression analysis on page 5 under type of secondary school - not my interpretation:

"There is likely to be an interaction with the results for the course of study factor, as science courses with lower probability of obtaining good honours have a higher proportion of students from state schools."