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?

You're over simplifying again.

Meritocracy considers a person's actual ability. Not their genetic potential.

The genetic study shows a correlation between parental SES and child IQ, which you should bear in mind when drawing conclusions about the higher than expected proportion of Cambridge students who went to private school.

It's interesting because it cuts through some of the things which could be used to argue against it like a) IQ heritabilty being a probability not an absolute and b) ability coming from an interplay of genetics and environment.

The study shows that there's still a correlation, despite those uncertainties. And by doing it at a genetic level, it gets around some of the difficulties in gathering clear data.

The study isn't a call to action, just an insight to improve understanding (although clearer understanding might inform policy choices... we hope)

If children were admitted to private vs state schools randomly from the population, then you might conclude that a higher than expected proportion of Cambridge students coming from private school showed bias against state schools.

When you recognise that it isn't random: that there's a correlation to parental income, and a correlation between parental income and parental ability, and a correlation between parental ability and child ability (because "parents and their offspring are genetically related") then you may reach a different conclusion.

Or at least you should recognise that you need more information in order to understand what's really happening. Which is where the OP's figures for difference in outcomes comes in. They show that there isn't a bias against state schools (the opposite in fact) so that isn't the cause of the disparity. Which should inform the admissions policy, if their aim is to be meritocratic.

It's about distributions, not comparing individual children.

They do it for Maths as well, STEP exam. It's not IQ test as such but more focused on abilities in math.

I can't find the link now, but when I looked a couple of years ago I was "surprised" to see that kids from state schools get offers with lower (sometime significantly) scores in STEP than private ones. Which proves OPs point. But given that I can't find the link to prove I accept that my post can be ignored.

It seems quite fair to me - a flat ability test to ascertain if your intellect is suited to that particular profession. As it’s a test you can’t revise or prepare for but a pure test of your ability presumably the type of school you attend or where you live is irrelevant. It’s like modelling which dd2 is doing - if you are not 5 foot 8 forget it.

Why would there be any contextual marking related to your school for that sort of test? That makes zero sense. It’s the raw material they are looking for which school you attend is irrelevant.

That was exactly what I found so difficult to accept.

Because although these policies theoretically seek equality of opportunity (which is positive), what is actually politically required is equality of outcome. Which isn't really possible. Hence this thread.

I'm never sure how much is cynical choice, and how much people are fooling themselves.

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it."

It’s expensive to train doctors I guess the state want to weed out those who are going to be a waste of resources- harsh as that may sound.

Don’t you find it rather dodgy though to use genetic insight - in only in part - to create hierarchies of human beings in terms of intelligence? Also, might that genetic ‘superiority’ be the product of privilege?

Also broadly some people.use their intelligence to make money so they can afford private school - but many don’t.

Part of my job is explaining quite a complex legal concept to the general public. I find it interesting how frequently successful upper middle class couples struggle with it and I need to explain it to them over and over again in different ways. Yet frequently working class older ladies are whip smart and get it immediately. Their social circumstances do not reflect it but the latter clients are clearly more intelligent.

It's not creating hierarchies.

Do you understand what a probability distribution is?

If you actually want to understand what I'm saying, that would be a good place to start.

It's a correlation.

That means there's a link, a relationship - not a certainty.

It says nothing about individuals, only about probabilities.

So eg, Swedish people are on average taller than Italian people: the average height for a Swedish man is 179cm and for an Italian man is 175cm.

That doesn't imply any particular height 'destiny' for any individual. An individual Italian man might be taller than an individual Swedish man. You couldn't say whether someone is Italian or Swedish based on height. It's certainly not implying a height 'hierarchy'.

BUT, imagine there was a profession which had a fairly hard-to-reach minimum height requirement. (but both Italians and Swedes apply for).

If you said that because there are 10 million Swedes and 60 million Italians, then only 15% of successful candidates should be Swedish then you're ignoring that height requirement and the different height distribution of those nationalities.

Maybe 10% of Swedes meet the height requirement (1 million) and 5% of Italians meet it (3 million). Then all else being equal, you'd actually expect 25% of successful candidates to be Swedish.

If you ignore that and impose a 20% target, then you'll have to lower the bar for Italians. Even though it still looks like there aren't enough Italians, based on the population size - but ignoring the height distribution.

@TheaBrandt
I'm now quite curious what the complex legal concept is!

There are always individual differences of course. But sadly it is not possible to be picked up by a political act of context offering.

However, one can take some comfort that studies also show that genuinely smart people can and do outperform in life. School is just preparation for life anyway.

I’d offer a couple of observations as a former private school parent of recent times. My DC went to one of the schools known for gaining a large number of Oxbridge offers. My own DC avoided applying to C because the offer would’ve been significantly higher than O (and higher than a state school pupil would’ve been expected to attain which is fair enough and their prerogative but places enormous pressure on producing perfection in 4 A levels). O is more consistent in making a standard offer all round and uses objective measures to ensure a standard is met by all offer-holders. However it is the case that not all of those Oxbridge places were accepted - especially if ICL or MIT was in the mix for STEM. A significant number took places around the world - Ivy League schools, European universities - including my own DC. No regrets here, there is VFM elsewhere in the world beyond Oxbridge and there was concern about a situation arising where a degree might not be marked because of strikes etc which would have a knock-on effect post degree (as had happened to a former pupil who had to leave their master’s programme because their degree had not been officially classified in time).

By the end of the first semester DC was the only student who had attended all tutorials and all lectures for their degree. It might be interesting to see data which correlates attendance and the awarding of a first?

Absolutely. Also great wealth can be a de motivator as a lovely mum friend of mine currently tearing her hair out over her year 12 sons lack of effort at a top public school will attest. They are internationally billionaire standard rich so I can see his point.

DH was so hungry to escape his background he worked like a demon to get to Cambridge.

Best explanation of this phenomenon I’ve ever heard. 👏

Shame most students of social sciences cannot grasp this, and those who know better, cravenly ignore it. I suspect we’d all be healthier, wealthier and happier if we faced facts.

Agreed - totally.

Unfortunately it is worse than that. I think they can grasp. But they just chose to ignore, this idea of take from others because they have more runs too deep. Instead of actually focusing on researching how to reward people that are less fortunate, they spend time on how to take away the few lucky ones.

To succeed in Medicine (as opposed to merely do well at medical school) you have to like puzzles and be good at solving them. There is one puzzle that tests diagnostic processing better than any other.

After it was invented it was trialled on medical undergraduates, and as I recall they could all do it; in a similar sized cohort of lawyers no one could - although afterwards one argued at length about why it could not be done. The fastest completion took a couple of minutes, and that person said that anyone who failed to do it should not be a doctor. In an oversubscribed field where every admission test is imperfect there is something to be said for that.

"In front of you are 4 designs: black diamond, white diamond, black circle and white circle. (If the image is not completely reproduced, and you want to try this, you will need to draw them yourself)

You are to assume that I have written down one of the colours (black or white) and one of the shapes (diamond or circle.)

Now read the following rule carefully: “If, and only if, any of the designs includes either the colour I have written down, or the shape I have written down, but not both, then it is called a THOG”.

I will tell you that the black diamond is a THOG.

Classify each of the designs into one of the following categories: a) definitely is a THOG, b) insufficient information to decide, c) definitely is not a THOG.

I have come to the conclusion over the course of this thread that the academics who take this position unequivocally do know.

The frequency with which they exercise selection in their output and the variety of ways in which this is detectable - referencing, data selection, analysis, phraseology - really allows no other interpretation.

@Marchesman agree completely about being selective with outputs. Which is a real shame.
And thank you for the puzzle! (damn, chosen wrong career 😂)

Shane Frederick wrote of study design: "Characterizing performance differences on cognitive tasks requires terms (“IQ” and “aptitudes” and such) that many object to because of their association with discriminatory policies".

It is (just) possible to get away with subject specific aptitude tests for university entrance. Tests of general intelligence would be one step way too far.

Everytime I see puzzles like that I feel slightly sick ! Have relied upon my social and empathetic skills to succeed - am glad others brains work in this clever way as mine does not!

Oxbridge has various entry exams across courses. There are practice books & a student can increase score by preparing. Though clearly not everyone can get a high score.
It is yet another hurdle … the student that does the research and knows there is an entry exam and buys the book and spends considerable time revising and learning how to solve questions can increase their chances.
You would be surprised that many don’t take the time to revise and prepare.

The website “what do they know” has FOI data available, across colleges, courses, listing grades, entry exam grades, by country, gender, degree etc if you want to find it, or if you have questions you want to pose to the Unis.

Looks as though many try to find the secret to admissions through foi data.