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?

But that’s their choice. It’s their university and their reputation and if they want to admit students that will do less well academically, that’s up to them isn’t it?

The comprehensive system (according to Angela Raynor) is the best system in the World for all kids (including the very clever ones) and has had decades to perfect itself. Far better than the private system and great for private school kids to be transferred to. If we are to believe her, you don't need any help.

But the data bears it out that state school kids perform better. Just look at the research.

Also, anecdotally every state school kid I've seen at a top uni found it a doss - while the private school kids have to slog to keep up.

Every Oxbridge state school kid I know has got a first too, I don't actually know any state school kids who went there and haven't

The data also shows that private school students get better jobs even with worse uni grades, so they'll still get a leg up from their connections, even if they are thicker

It sounds as if it's elitist to go to a state school. Maybe they should be abolished.

Well erm yeh
No shit Sherlock
How does that support your argument against any state school quota?

Doesn't it say the opposite that the effects of having a crappy state education are not erased by 3 years at Oxbridge

No argument from me that private education is better. Why would people pay for it otherwise?

The criteria to access this better education is a) being bright- fine but b) ability to pay- not fine.

Access to top quality education (and healthcare) should not be based on ability to pay.

They’ve abandoned that though? They are looking at a new access plan which doesn’t include targets for school type.

Because of 'state schools' like Hills Road essentially gaming the system. They are apparently going to look at a wider range of factors and try to admit students from Northern comprehensives.

I find it ironic that an elite university like the LSE publishes research that directly infers the decline of the elite university sector per se.

I mean why should Oxford or LSE even exist? All unis should be the same, passing A levels should be enough. Lottery system for all!

Sounds to me like these academics are underpaid and need a book that sells and are stoking more culture wars! Everyone in the UK loves a bit of anti elitism these days, when secretly they love the Royal Family/Eton etc. - it gets the left frothing and the rest find it fun. That is about it.

Not this old chestnut again.

Sorry, OP, but I you are talking nonsense.

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.

Quite

A friend of DD's had a similiar experience. Poor background, single parent on disability benefits. Worked her socks off to get into Oxbridge and succeeded. Niche subject, over represented by public school kids. She struggled with tutors who were unsympathetic, lots of in jokes and knowledge that she just didn't have. Final straw was being expected to attend workshop/internships in London over the summer. There was absolutely no way she had the money to stay in London and she needed her summer to earn money, not spend it. She ended up with a first from a local uni.

'The comprehensive system (according to Angela Raynor) is the best system in the World for all kids (including the very clever ones) and has had decades to perfect itself. Far better than the private system and great for private school kids to be transferred to. If we are to believe her'

Well it depends on your definition of best doesn't it? I have chosen to educate my children entirely in the state system because I do think it's better. It doubtless does not have better facilities, quality of teaching may be variable but to me 'best' encompasses being educated in a real diverse community with all kinds of people rather than an elite hothouse.

Look on the bright side; according to this thread if you can no longer afford private Keir Starmer is actually increasing your DCs chances at Oxbridge

State educated pupils do not have lower entry requirements for Uni than privately educated ones.

Angela would not lie about this. They would not force parents to change schools midway through term (and in Scotland, due to the differences in year cut off, potentially straight into an exam year early) without things being perfect in the state system.

Contextual offers are given to certain schools/postcodes.

Why does it matter though?

Off the thread skippy!

The comprehensive system is great, it just needs a shit load more money throwing at it. Get rid of private and selective schools and then everyone is invested in state education. Without the option of sending your children off to a posh school, you are more likely to vote for a government that prioritises education. In fact, any party would be willing to chuck money at it. I'm sure those that choose to opt out of state education would be putting pressure on the government to improve schools for ALL children rather than having a twine on about VAT increases and the like. Some of the best education systems in the world are the best education systems in the world because they have no private or selective education.
Also it could be argued it's far better for society to have children mixed up together from a range of backgrounds.
Applying to uni and selecting students would also be far more straight forward.
Can't wait for the backlash for this post 😁

Exactly. The school. Not their individual ability.

Kev...I hate to break it to you but you are on the "Private School" topic group? I feel like that may have been intentional? Was is so you could tell us you are bored?

Talk about fishing with stale bait 🙄

Yes, think my uni will make an offer 16 ucas points below standard tariff.

The problem is that the MC parents who can't afford private (or can but evidently would rather their children 'mix' at the local (outstanding) comp) are furious as they now realise that their 'undercover' efforts to game the system by moving into an area with an outstanding school or tutoring to near death to get into grammar are being exposed!

The REAL issue are the very bright children who are living in poverty and attending poor schools. Every child needs a chance and the country needs to develop and nurture real talent.

The post about the child not really fitting in at Oxbridge sadly does not surprise me - I had a feeling this would come out. It's more than academics to fit in and cope with the environment.

Laugh! I love it. Ooooh my child got into Hills Road - news flash: with VAT on fees you're going to see a big spike in 'state' school applicants to upset the apple cart!