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?

I think that top private school talent going to US universities is a trend that has already started a while ago and is probably a marker of being comfortably rich rather than rich enough for private school but not very rich. UK universities are attracting top international talent already so I don’t see why it’s important that UK talent stays in the UK.
Why shouldn’t top UK talent pick Ivy League schools instead? 🤷‍♀️ What’s wrong with the other many internationally rated unis in the UK? Someone who say went to Imperial rather than Cambridge is still an academic high flyer.

Actually I turned them down… it wasn’t really the best place for my subject IMO, I was just egged on by eager parents and teachers to go to the interview.

I got top marks at my state school but had no idea how to apply to Cambridge (and nobody in my family had even been to uni). When I went to the interview I discovered that those from private schools had been coached for months! I do not think that quotas are the answer though, rather state schools should give more assistance to pupils who want to apply. (Also I am aware that there is more information out there these days - this was all pre-internet as I am old! It was actually quite hard to get decent information about the process then).

But there’s too many other variables for you to be able to say it proves discrimination at the point of entry. 🤷‍♀️

Why do you care OP? Got skin in the game by any chance? Oxbridge really isn't the be all and end all you know. Why not put your kids in state school and thus prevent them being 'discriminated' against. Ah not so keen now?

Theres a saying I heard that went something along the lines of ‘when you’re used to privilege, equality feels like oppression’

I’m confused as to the OPs comment “Is this really what the Left wants? If so why?”

what has Starmer or the left got to do with admissions policies of private universities

This - you've nailed here!

The sooner that personal statements are abolished, the better. Admissions shouid be based on a blind lottery of all students who meet the A-level requirements.

All Cambridge are doing is levelling the playing field. Kids from comprehensives (me) just don't, on the whole, have the same resources available to them in multiple areas as kids who go to Marlborough or somewhere.

This couldn't be more obvious. It's hard to have sympathy for private school parents who are upset because the advantage they tried to buy for their kids can no longer be taken for granted.

State schools clearly need to sort themselves out re admissions and getting their bright kids up to the same level as private school kids. We hear all the time that state schools are perfect for all children (including kids that have to leave private school as parents can no longer afford the fees) so that surely must include any potential Oxbridge applicants. They've had decades to sort themselves out.

Is it discrimination? Or is it actually a more equitable approach to application/admission standards.

Ultimately the focus on Oxford and Cambridge and who they let in is a red herring. If state school education in the UK was up to scratch we wouldn't be having this conversation. The state education system is failing to support thousands of students to reach their full potential, and instead of thinking about how to improve that, commentators from all sides just sit around gurning about admissions stats from universities that most people won't go to anyway.

Or do you think it could perhaps reflect marking bias? For a very long time these institutions openly favoured privately educated students and some inherent bias may well remain in marking.
How many Cambridge academics were privately educated themselves and may favour a certain style when it comes to submitted work...?

I don’t know where you got your figures, but the opposite is true.

www.cambridgeassessment.org.uk/news/state-school-pupils-do-better-at-university-cambridge-assessment-research-confirms/

I thought Imperial had overtaken Cambridge in the international league tables anyway.

What if there are 50 places and there’s 100 applicants with the same high exam results?

Then it would go into a hat and 50% would be unlucky. Honestly this is actually the best way but would only work if students had their results before they apply.

Personal statement are largely ignored now by admissions at university - I speak as someone involved in this, as we know how many are written for students by other people. Some parents even pay someone to write their child's personal statement. Really they are pointless. Lots of other factors are looked at, in particular the reference from the school and predicted grades.

Personally I feel the system is faulty and needs further reform - but that is difficult. Getting rid of statements in favour of questions, which is what is happening is much better.

My state school educated Dd did not get into Cambridge for a Masters. She has a 1st class degree, loads of super curricular stuff. She got an interview and was told by the lead interviewer that he thought she was the most fascinating person he’d spoken to. She felt the interview went well, she’s articulate and passionate.

She didn’t get a place and her feedback was that she has no research experience.

Which personally i think is an odd requirement for someone who is 21yo and just finished an UG degree. What new graduate has done research, very few. Plus I’d suggest those that have managed to get involved in research are probably people with the right connections. So again an occasion where a private school education may well be an advantage. And potentially unfair for state school pupils. 🤷‍♀️

Shes taken a year out and has got involved in some research at the local uni on top of her full time job and is applying again. Someone from a privileged background might get supported by bank of mum and dad and be able to do unpaid research full time for a year.

It not necessarily accurate anyway. For example, most privately educated students in Cambridge go to a state sixth form (Hills Road) because a) it’s one of the best in the country (presumably because it’s full of privately educated students) and b) it’s easier to get into Cambridge.

The admissions process in general, (and especially at Oxbridge) is by definition one of discrimination..It is up to an individual institution to decide by which measures they discriminate. It is not as binary as state Vs independent, the board wants to create and promote a.specific culture and balance.of background and outlook, irrespective of £. It may also be worth considering that staff will want to choose people they actively want to teach. Of course academic achievement and final degree grades are important, so is the process by which you come by your degree, and the experience you help to create as a student.

Must depend on the course. As a programme lead I ignore qualifications and go on personal statements. Any application which gets as far as me meets the predicted grades for the course. And on A level results day they’ll either have the ucas points or they won’t. I don’t really care if someone has 128 (our tariff) or 138 ucas points.

oh and I don’t even read the school reference. It’s not going to be negative is it?

Boo hoo, can’t buy your way in anymore , cry me a river

Yet in 2014 Higher Education Funding Council which analyses the achievement of 132,000 students over three years, says state school pupils are more likely to gain a 2:1 or first-class degree than independent school peers with the same A-level results.

State school pupils also achieved higher degree scores than their private school counterparts with the same GCSE grades, according to the report, titled Differences in degree outcomes, published on 28 March.

Also a study in 2015 by University of Cambridge’s examinations arm found independent school-leavers at Russell Group institutions are a third less likely to get a good degree than state school students with similar A-level results.

Now that may have changed, as the gap between State and A level attainment has widened, but these are consistently the findings of almost all research and of the experience of most of us in Higher Education.

If we want the best people in the top professions, everything from medicine, law, economics to the arts then we absolutely have to get rid of the privilege that a private education pays for. We'd have avoided Boris, Sunak, Rees-Mogg and Braverman for starters.

@DadJoke that research is 9 years old!