Cambridge University discriminates against children from private schools.

[Marchesman]

MN threads persist in claiming that Oxford and Cambridge Universities do not discriminate against private schools. Now two "academics" have written a half-baked book that argues for further reductions in the number of Oxbridge students from private schools (to 10% of the intake).

In 2023 at Cambridge 19.9% of students from comprehensive schools obtained first class degrees (23.5% from grammar schools) compared with 28.6% from private schools - evidence of unequivocal discrimination against the latter at the point of entry.

Cambridge's own analysis shows that British state-educated students already significantly underperform relative to foreign and privately educated British students. If more of the latter are excluded, the inevitable outcome will be that at these universities the best students are foreign, while the best British pupils decamp to US universities.

Is this really what the Left wants? If so why?

Of course you do.

It's just that some would feel uncomfortable about having others pay for their children's education when they could well afford it themselves - particularly if it involved grabbing a place in a good comprehensive school with a high catchment area house price premium.

@Marchesman

Here are several highly regarded books that explore the impact of private education on academic outcomes, social mobility, and inequality, with evidence showing that private education does confer advantages:

"Engines of Privilege: Britain's Private School Problem" by Francis Green and David Kynaston (2019)

Overview: This book delves into the historical and current role of private schools in perpetuating social inequality in the UK. It combines detailed research with first-hand accounts to illustrate how private schooling maintains a system of privilege that continues to influence university admissions, career progression, and access to elite professions.

Key Themes: Social stratification, university access, elite networks.
Why It’s Relevant: Green and Kynaston show how private education creates long-term advantages in professional and social realms, maintaining inequality across generations.

"Social Mobility and Education in Britain: Research, Politics and Policy" by Erzsébet Bukodi and John H. Goldthorpe (2018)

Overview: This book provides an in-depth analysis of the relationship between education and social mobility in Britain, with a focus on how private education can limit social mobility for the broader population. It uses empirical data to explore how educational outcomes are influenced by social class.

Key Themes: Education inequality, social mobility, policy impacts.
Why It’s Relevant: The authors show how private schools provide distinct advantages in terms of both academic achievement and access to prestigious universities, limiting the ability of state-educated individuals to compete.

"Elites: A General Model" by Murray Milner Jr. (2015)

Overview: This sociological text explores how elites maintain their status across different societies and sectors. Though not focused solely on private education, the book includes sections on the role of education, particularly elite schools, in the reproduction of social elites.

Key Themes: Elite reproduction, cultural capital, status maintenance.
Why It’s Relevant: It explores the ways in which private education, particularly in elite institutions, provides a pathway to maintain and reproduce social elites across generations.

"The Privileged Poor: How Elite Colleges Are Failing Disadvantaged Students" by Anthony Abraham Jack (2019)

Overview: Focusing on the U.S. system, Jack's research examines the experiences of low-income students at elite colleges and contrasts them with those of wealthier, privately educated peers. He shows how private schooling gives certain students cultural capital that helps them succeed in elite academic environments.

Key Themes: Cultural capital, inequality within elite institutions, the role of education in social mobility.
Why It’s Relevant: The book highlights how students from private schools are better prepared for the social and academic expectations of elite universities, which continues to confer advantages even after they enter higher education.

"The Class Ceiling: Why it Pays to Be Privileged" by Sam Friedman and Daniel Laurison (2020)

Overview: This book focuses on the career outcomes of individuals from different social backgrounds, examining how those who attend private schools tend to dominate high-status professions. The authors argue that the advantage begins early in the private education system and extends into professional life through elite networks and cultural capital.

Key Themes: Career progression, social class, education and professional outcomes.
Why It’s Relevant: It illustrates how private education provides advantages not only in terms of university access but also in shaping long-term career trajectories in elite fields like law, finance, and politics.

"Chavs: The Demonization of the Working Class" by Owen Jones (2012)

Overview: Though primarily a critique of the class divide in the UK, Owen Jones discusses how private education contributes to the widening gap between the working class and the elite. He argues that the privileged are able to use private education as a stepping stone to top universities and elite careers.

Key Themes: Class divide, education inequality, societal perceptions.
Why It’s Relevant: Jones critiques how private schooling helps create an elite that remains detached from the experiences of the working class, contributing to social stratification.

@MrsBennetsPoorNerves
"Perhaps they are confident that their kids will thrive and succeed in any environment?"

And perhaps they live in the catchment area of a socially selective and therefore top performing comprehensive school?

Depends on your view of the value. If you attach price tag to grades/uni/salary than you're correct, PS are poor value because these kids will achieve the same outcome anyway. Or, actually, back to the OP, it's even negative value given that unis will always chose state candidate over private one given other criteria equal.

If you consider education as a journey which allows a child to be safe from bullying, from low (or high) level disruptive behaviour, SEN well supported, wide range of extra curriculum, etc etc - for most PS parents this is exactly USP of private education.

If you go to a top quintile comprehensive school you are 23 times more likely to go to Oxbridge than if you go to a bottom quintile comprehensive school.

3 times or 23 times? Where do you think the problem lies?

And to help with the answer - there are more pupils in top quintile comprehensives than there are in private schools.

Two years ago I completed an MA as a mature student at a top five university (at least according to QS). Around half the cohort were early-20s and privately schooled, some having attended famous public schools.

Obvs just anecdotal, but I noticed the students from the public schools immediately buddied up, chose similar essay topics and swapped notes. None were among the best in tutorials or seemed especially passionate about the subject, but there was a quasi-old boy dynamic in play possibly to the extent that could be deemed cheating.

That is blatant discrimination. Places should be awarded on merit and ability regardless of secondary education.

When I applied to uni in the early 80s the places were awarded on my course according to the percentage of applicants by sex. So if 70% of the applicants were male 70% of places were awarded to men. Of the 30% of women applying only the top 30% were awarded places. So if there were 300 applicants for 100 places, even if all 90 female applicants scored higher entrance grades than all the male applicant only 30 of them were awarded places.

Since our A level grades were posted within the dept it was very uncomfortable to see how much higher the women’s grades were compared to the men’s. So many women missed out on university places as a result.

This would be the same if you award places according to the percentages. Look at the percentage of private students that are awarded university places across the board, it is well above 7%. Many private schools are academically selective and provide grammar style education in areas where there are no state grammar schools. Many professional parents pay private fees because they prioritise education. Not everywhere has choice or brilliant state schools.

We shouldn’t return to the policies used historically to favour some groups. If you are clever then you will perform well in modern A levels regardless of school, and your school shouldn’t be a factor in University admissions.

@HeavyMetalMaiden

Obvs just anecdotal, but I noticed the students from the public schools immediately buddied up, chose similar essay topics and swapped notes. None were among the best in tutorials or seemed especially passionate about the subject, but there was a quasi-old boy dynamic in play possibly to the extent that could be deemed cheating.

Have you noticed some threads here on MN when posters complain that majority of kids in class speak different language and excluded their kids from friendships groups? Do you believe many e.g. train drivers have friendships with ballerinas? People form relationships within the same social groups and with the same interests. Interestingly enough cultural capital plays much more important roles in forming relationships than "country of origin".

My DC frequently share notes/homework with their classmates - never occurred to me it's cheating.

The Henderson paper has alarming deficiencies. It is difficult to understand how it got published, I can only surmise that the journal's editor/editorial team rightly concluded that it would garner citations.

The authors say:

"Despite not finding a statistically significant private school advantage for attending an elite university, we do find evidence of a private school advantage of progressing to undergraduate study at any university over and above A level attainment, prior attainment and family background of six percentile points. This suggests that a private school advantage remains, net of these observed characteristics and therefore may be a source of inequality in university access."

They use "elite university" as a synonym for Russell Group University. So no private school advantage demonstrated for RGs. They turn that into a positive finding by lumping RGs with every other university to get their bottom line. But the university sector is heterogeneous, with a good number of doubtful value, so now it is not clear if private schools provided any "advantage".

@Angrymum22

Just to add - this infamous 7% is incorrect when it's used in context of unis admissions. At six form about 20% are in private, means anything less than 20% of uni places going to PS kids is direct discrimination

Any thoughts on the other studies / books mentioned by a previous poster a page or so ago?

Just to add, I have no vested interest. DS has chosen a very niche course that only a couple of 2nd tier unis ( ex polys) offer at undergraduate level. He had a place at a RG to do business but after a year out, realised that he wanted to do something he is passionate about. He can do an MSc in the Business if he wants after graduating. He has also been offered an apprenticeship in the construction industry that would lead to a management roll, so when he graduates he has a backup. The construction job would pay £24 an hour after 12/18 months which is a lot more than he would earn if he pursues his passion. He's a bright kid, who, if he actually applies himself will do well in the subject he’s chosen. Having worked in the construction industry during his gap year, he has surprised us with a reemergence of his pre pandemic work ethic. He may have been Oxbridge material if the pandemic hadn’t happened, but he totally lost his way after the GCSEs were cancelled. He got his act together about six weeks before he took his A levels so significantly raised his grades from his mocks and was probably the only one of his group of friends who achieved his predicted grades made in lower sixth. Most of his year at school and across the country didn’t.

Nonetheless, students from private schools at Cambridge are 1.4 times more likely to achieve firsts than students from comprehensive schools, and slightly less likely but still significantly more than students from grammar schools. State schooled students also achieve lower percentages in degree exams.

So there is no escaping the fact that there should be more privately educated students at Cambridge and fewer from state schools - if the university aims to present itself as meritocratic.

As I’ve commented previously, I disagree.

• Why is the attainment of a first the most important metric in setting goals around admissions? You state your case suggesting it is self evident, but it is not, it’s a choice you have made.
• What evidence is there that attending private school does not confer advantage specifically in getting Oxbridge and then getting a first? The paper you poo-poo says nothing about this.

Yes, indeed, I'm sure that's true for some.

And others will simply have faith in their kids' ability to thrive and succeed in an average school with an average cohort.

Yes, indeed, I'm sure that's true for some.

And others will simply have faith in their kids' ability to thrive and succeed in an average school with an average cohort.

do you not think there might be any other factors in private school pupils being more likely to get a first?

Just off the top of my head...private school background = more likely to have family wealth = less likely to need to work throughout the holidays = more time to spend revising, writing essays, engaging in subject-relevant activities, etc.

Don't have to worry about budgets so eating 3 full meals and snacks in college a day, whereas students from poorer families are limiting themselves to one meal in college and pot noodles the rest of the day.

More likely to be able to afford just to buy relevant textbooks/articles rather than go on the waiting list for the university library's few copies, that all the other students on your course have requested at the same time.

How about having more confidence to speak and engage in tutorials and take advantage of extra-curricular opportunities, because they've been encouraged to do so, and told their opinion is worth hearing, for their entire education rather than being one of 38 in a class and bullied for being a swot, or expected to help teach/used as behaviour management for their classmates?

But I don't really see the issue anyway - if parents with children in private school are only doing so because of the likelihood of getting into Oxbridge and don't care about any of the other benefits, then there's an easy solution - take them out and stick them in the nearest comp. You're still in a privileged position because you are able to do that if you wish, whereas it doesn't work the other way.

It is probably reasonable to assume that the university sets and marks examinations at the end of the period of study to test what has been digested and rank students according to their performance, fail a few, pass the majority with good degrees, and recognise excellence.

If the university doesn't think that there is a worthwhile difference, then why bother? And what if attending a private school encourages positive study habits? Should a student's hard work not be rewarded?

If you don't like the attainment of firsts, there are significant differences in percentage marks by school type. How do you justify prioritising the admission of students who will predictably achieve lower marks?

And how do you go on doing this when all the time you pretend not to?

www.cao.cam.ac.uk/admissions-research/school-background

Let’s see the link to the detailed research which supports your contention. Actual research, not a singje year result from an FOI request.

Is this really what the Left wants? If so why?

Votes.

None good - for the ones with which I am familiar.

I gave a single year but I have FOI data going back to 2017 - when the university ceased to put this information into the public domain. However, the year I gave is enough to be significant - Fisher exact test < 0.00001 (p < .05).

For "actual" research see:

Analysis of student characteristics and attainment outcomes at the University of Cambridge

https://www.cao.cam.ac.uk/admissions-research/app-research-papers-2020

Enjoy.

@Marchesman

You have no chance of winning this debate no matter how strong your evidences are.

To agree with you one needs to agree that

• PS kids make statistically higher calibre students, either because of innate abilities and effort or thanks to being trained how to learn or both
• These kids rise to the top because of their characteristics and not their advantage in life.

British public will never ever accept this view because the immediate consequence of such view is acceptance that statistically people are where they are in life because of their skills, abilities and effort, not just advantage or disadvantage. Basically, look in the mirror and don't blame anyone. It's very uncomfortable and politically incorrect and you'll get buried under anecdata if you say so. Of course there are harrowing examples of life circumstances as well as some lucky ones, but on average it's down to own choices.

Life and society have changed dramatically in the last 50-70 years, what was possibly correct when current 50-60 years olds where students is very far from modern reality.

I shared on another thread that I grew up in abject poverty, state educated, every penny I have I earned in employment and that I educate my DC privately. I was told I'm still priviledged.

@nearlylovemyusername
“I shared on another thread that I grew up in abject poverty, state educated, every penny I have I earned in employment and that I educate my DC privately. I was told I'm still privileged. “

well I don’t think you are and I think you deserve a massive pat on the back. You should also be able to spend your money however you see fit. Honestly as I have said before, the money does not disappear. If it isn’t spent on education the children get a cheque for their house deposit. That is far far worse for social mobility (and society) than private school.

@nearlylovemyusername if you were able to afford to send your kids to private school then yes of course you are extremely privileged. Privilege isn’t defined by a snapshot in your childhood. You weren’t privileged as a child but now you are. Well done.

And the idea that people get where they are in life in this country because of innate ability is the biggest load of rubbish I have ever heard. Do you really believe that Boris Johnson for example would have become prime minister if he’d been born on a council estate?