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 used to lecture at a university and I hardly ever knew whose work I was marking. Everything had to be 1st and 2nd marked. Marking was shared around between different lecturers teaching on the courses. On some of the courses I only gave one or two lectures in my specialist area. I didn’t really know the students well enough to be biased in this way.

@Lemonadeand "Cambridge have been doing that for years. Lower offers to some state school candidates goes back to at least 2010."

They have, and no doubt with justification on a case by case basis, but this is different in two respects. Firstly, it is systematic, secondly they are admitting a cohort that year by year progressively underperforms as it increases in size.

You said Cambridge academics did a multivariate analysis which showed school type was a highly significant factor in the underperformance of state educated students.

Which variables?

My point was that admissions should be able to see past any superficial private school shine and know who the best candidates are. Whether they then chose the best candidates rather than carry out social engineering is another matter.

I understand Imperial has overtaken Cambridge in world rankings. Although Cambridge is still one of the best universities in the world.

You are forgetting that many areas have state secondaries that are so awful … not all are created equal and many can’t provide educational environment required no matter student IQ and motivation.

Do you know what I'd do, OP?

I'd send my children to state school so that they benefit from the privilege of that, and have a better chance of Cambridge University.

What with that nasty VAT on private schools, and everything. It's clear that it's disgraceful that the privileged children of the wealthy should ever be discriminated against in any way. What with all the disadvantages they have and everything.

Far better to bring your children up on a sink estate. They will really benefit then.

For some offers it matters which subject you get the C. For some offers, must get A in maths. It’s all in print these days.

@cantreallyno "I am a left and so feel qualified to answer this....no, this isn't what I want, I would like to see the end of private schools. I think that would level the playing field more successfully and then no one needs to be 'discriminated against at point of entry."

This shows a lamentable lack of understanding of the state sector, where pupils in the top quintile of comprehensive schools are nearly twenty-five times more likely to be offered a place at Oxford or Cambridge than pupils in the bottom quintile.

And there are substantially more top quintile comprehensives than there are private schools. So how you expect this to "level the playing field" is a mystery.

OP it does sound like your argument supports abolishing private education, so that the ‘discrimated against’ get an equal chance, the poor sods. Or at the least you could remove your own kids?

Quite a lot of the students in the inner city state schools that I have taught in have had their own private tutors (not provided by the council). Certainly in London, there are a lot of affluent, ambitious parents who send their children to state schools. There are also quite a few children who move between private and state.

I went to Oxford 15 year ago so perhaps (hopefully) it’s changed but on my first day a tutor took me aside to tell me that “people like me” didn’t do well here and he didn’t expect to see me next year. Which was such a gut punch having worked really hard in a failing state school and been so excited to go to somewhere I never dreamed I could get into. He was wrong and I ended up getting my degree and it opened a lot of doors for me but I’m still angry that prejudice like that existed. It certainly felt like an extension of private school then. You were either part of that club and felt at home or you were ostracised.

Was he pissed? That sounds a strange thing to have happened.

My experience of going to Cambridge from an independent school was that the students from more academic private schools such as public schools and private grammars had been taught the subjects to a far higher level. We were expected to start at that level, so I was behind from the beginning (for example, the others in my classes had learned the languages since they were 7, in prep schools, whereas I started at 12 or 14; they'd been taught essay-writing skills and study skills I'd never heard of). I grew disheartened and gave up, got a good 2.1 without doing much studying anyway, as it's not difficult in arts subjects, but had a miserable time there.

There weren't many students I met from poorer backgrounds.

There was a huge amount of sexism and female students were subjected to sexual harassment and abuse from staff, as well as misogynistic commentary in supervisions.

My child is in a state secondary school and already I'm shocked at how lacking the education provided is, compared to my independent school, which in turn wasn't up to the starting standard of Cambridge. I'm hoping my child will do well enough despite the abysmal lack of cultural depth or breadth at his school, as he's much more intelligent than I was at that age, but I won't be encouraging him to go Oxbridge. It's much easier to go to another good university where you only have to write one essay a term instead of minimum 8.

When I was there, a bit longer ago but not much longer, it was common for tutors to tell female students they weren't welcome there!

@palegazelle "I would find it exceptionally hard to believe that private vs state school was variable independent of other factors like household income, use of emergency loans and hardship funds, size of parental home, parental attitude to learning, parental financial support during studies, student financial pressure during studies, place student can go back to during the holidays, I could go on...

Your evidence does not unequivocally support your supposition and if it helps convince you, I studied physics at Cambridge so not totally statistically illiterate."

I am sure you could go on, and no the fact that you "studied physics at Cambridge" does not help to convince me. A well structured argument would suffice.

Those factors are not a targeted part of the Cambridge admission process, school type is.

UCAS doesn’t ask where u were educated grades 9-11.
And it cuts both ways-
The private A level schools (Eton & cohorts - they are charities after all) take state school kids(bursary). On UCAS they are from Eton. There are other indicators (Polar codes etc & perhaps school recommendation mentions their disadvantage ….. but can’t guarantee)
Or the Eton boy whose savage parents put him in a state school hoping he gets advantage to Oxbridge. UCAS isn’t getting Eton as school for GCSE level unless it’s mentioned elsewhere.

Yes, the 'best' British students must be privately educated ones!!

Bollocks.

Maybe the universities see it as closing the gap?

Why are you so angered by state kids getting a leg up?

I would also point out that not all private schools are selective (we live near a World famous boarding school that absolutely takes average kids so long as Daddy's pockets are deep enough) AND that there are no stats for how children who have had a private education would have performed at state school, in much larger class sizes with TA's teaching subjects they're not qualified to teach.

My point is, it is not the case that privately educated kids are 'the best' and I for one am happy to see state kids who've worked incredibly hard in much worse conditions but flourished anyway be able to attend the best universities in the country and not have to stand aside for other kids on the basis of their parents having more money.

Ucas toolkit says you must put down all schools attended.

Anyone wishing to see admissions statistics can do a deep dive on “What do they know” website. There are endless admissions questions put to Cambridge covering, state v private, uk v overseas, a level grades, admissions exam scores, disability, acceptances. Rejections, don’t meet the offer, how many from China etc etc etc
Mostly results are provided on spreadsheets.
Or you can ask your own question.

Simple solution for those of you who believe that your kids are being disadvantaged aa a result of going to private schools... send them to state, and apparently they will have many more opportunities.

@Scandiviews1 "Whether they then chose the best candidates rather than carry out social engineering is another matter."

The evidence shows that they are prioritising the latter over the former, and some academics (and MN posters) would go further. This seems to me, and I have no skin in the game, not a good idea.

YABU
The stats, when looked at from a back and white view, indicate that more privately educated young adults achieve top grades compared to state school educated.
However, the same state school educated children likely started UNI at a point of disadvantage and continued to do so (think along lines of, no money for extra tuition when they struggle in a particular area, no expert coaching from friends and family already in the oxbridge system), they might not have all the gadgets and books that would help them, they probably have to take jobs to pay their fees (even if this is against Oxbridge rules).
So many privately educated young adults are coached for oxbridge entry…they are not “better” or more intelligent that state school applicants…they just had a leg up.
We need people from all backgrounds to have the chance to be brilliant and our future innovators for change.
Yes, privately educated young adults are discriminated against in some circles, in recognition of all the advantages that they have had, and will always have. It is the same as employers having accelerated career programmes for ..BAME, refugees, and underprivileged. All efforts to level up. Absolutely necessary otherwise the gap between the have and have nots just grows bigger and that is very bad news for society (health, economy etc).
I am delighted to see 1:5 state school scholars getting top grades.

@StaunchMomma

Which gap?

Apologies. I see that, my child said they didn’t ask for GCSE school name (3 yrs ago)

However, if student went private GCSE & state A level …. Am certain they consider this student “state” because you can only be ONE. Oxbridge publish admissions stats on What do they know … they indicate state or private and it must be a-level.