More children got three As at A-level in the country’s fee-paying schools than in the entire population of children at comprehensives."

[AubergineKenobi]

Says Toby Young in today's Telegraph:

Article

Does anyone know what percent of A-levels are taken by children in fee-paying schools?

Surely it's all about expectation in many of the most academically selcetive independent school there is almost an assumption now that a child will get A's in all their GCSEs and A levels or their equivilant. The school are expecting it the pupils are expecting it, as are the parents who are paying a substantial amount expecting these kinds of grades and of course the associated entrance into top universities. From moment they walk in the door at 11 or 13 they very quickly realise that this is the "norm" and tht they are expected to work hard and get As.

To answer the original question: "what percent of A-levels are taken by children in fee-paying schools?"

the answer is 16.4% in 2008, down slightly from 17.4% in 2002. (my calculation using data from above).

However, this doesn't give the answer on the number of students - in the independent sector, on average, students do a higher number of A-levels each!

It strikes me that children at fee paying schools get more resources devoted to them - smaller classes, more trips, more books and study materials; so I would expect that to have an effect. One of my children is in year 11 at a super selective state grammar and she informs me that many classmates go to tutoring each Saturday because they are ambitious to go to good universities to study medicine etc and their supportive affluent parents have the means to pay for it - I imagine this is the same at independent secondaries.

HG - Yes, expectations are everything. A good answer to my Question 1.

The teacher in the link that the OP gave clearly wasn't saying the right thing to the student.

Talkinpeace,

I don't actually care about the percentage of students in independent schools, and have no reason to be skeptical about the data provided by one of the interested parties.

Do you think the % is higher or lower than ~18% declared by ISC?

lower nowadays - because more kids are staying on at state sixth form
the increase from KS4 to KS5 is not because people are choosing fee paying, but because kids drop out of state

I thought private schools selected pupils on wealth/ ability and then 'counselled out' those who might be less able/ challenging.

Frankly private schools should be getting stellar results based on their intake - it would have to be supremely shit school to do anything else!

And I hate Toby Young's constant appeal to classical education as some dirt of gold standard. Latin FFS.

Based on their intake, Norma?

Did you realise that there are also non-selective independent schools that take anyone, as long as they can pay the fees?

Everyone deserves an education, not just the already clever.

You probably find that in independent schools, there are some that only offer A-levels, even to those who struggle academically or have learning difficulties. They will have target grades of E. There are not the breadth of vocational courses that you will find in a large state sixth form.

I work in a private school and most of them do science A levels. The parents pressurise the students to do well and only As are good enough. Alot of them don't have much of a life and doing your best doesn't seem to cut it.

Also smalller classes, more resources etc.

Also from my LAs league tables, in the less selective independent schools a smaller percentage of students get As than at my DCs comp. Admittedly even this is unfair as some students transfer from those and other independents to the Comps sixth form; and students who transfer in are chosen on ability, it is much easier to get into the sixth form from the comp than from another school.

'as long as they can pay the fees' and that's non selective?

It's not academically selective, for sure.

Trix I agree re evaluation of potential and to be fair, I think they do try. The percentage of Undergrads from state schools at Oxbridge is higher than the percentage of state school applicants. However, they also have to question whether the less prepared pupil will be able to cope, especially in conceptual subjects where universities increasingly complain of a gap between A-levels and the first year of undergrad.

If the conclusion is "they won't be able to" because they will hit their first term without the groundwork to grasp what's being taught, then that raises the question of whether the University should seek to close the gap itself, or whether it should just offer the place to another candidate.

i.e is better access to top universities the responsibility of the schools (to produce candidates with the right level of education) or the University's.

I've never heard that state school applicants are not adequately prepared for the rigours of the first year at a 'top university.' is that a recognised problem? I thought the received wisdom was that state educated undergraduates got on average better degree classification.

I know many of my state educated peers were not well prepared for interview/ exam for Oxbridge and did not get in.

CustardCake the more selective the intake, the harder it is to 'add value', obviously.

Norman a couple of weeks ago The Telegraph got hold of some comments made by examiners at Oxford and quoted some fairly damning ones about the inadequacies of contemporary examinees. On closer inspection these were all from the bottom rung of the exam pile, but I think the article purported to make the point that only the most academic independent schools prepared students adequately for Oxbridge, other schools merely teaching to the A Level test.

As a teacher in a state comprehensive school, confident that I am about to see some of my students of to Oxbridge I am offended at the accusation that all I do is teach to the exam. We also have a team of ex Oxbridge staff who work quite intensively with our Oxbridge applicants. I am not saying it does not happen but it is not always the case. Could we do more, well yes, but there is always more that we could do..

MollyBroom, that's really encouraging.

Molly I disagreed wholly with the silly article - and said so in The Telegraph I think.

Of course state schools could do more if they had similar class sizes to independents and the same resources.

That's why I used the word 'purported'.

It is similar to the support that I was offered in a state some some 30 years ago. So it is not a new thing. Of course it does not happen in all state schools . For starters an Oxbridge graduate who is also a skilled teacher will have their pick of schools. For that reason many of them will end up in what is already a very good state school.

Sorry I missed the word purported .

I do think many state schools need to do more and to allocate staff and funding. At our school the support relies on the goodwill of staff to give up lunch times, after school, mark extra work, run seminars and extra classes . If that goodwill was not there or if we were pushed any more and were not we to give the time it would disappear. I have seen job adverts for Oxbridge tutors for state schools, so things are happening on a more formal basis.

One of this year's Oxford Law graduates told me that the extraordinary support offered by the Ho6 at his not-so-good comp extended to driving all the students' additional work to Oxford during the postal strike of 2008 to hand it all in personally to ensure it met the deadline, rather than doing what so many (closer) schools did, which was merely to ring up to say it would inevitably be late.