Another Private/State question

[FiveHoursSleep]

If you knew of two school leavers, both of whom had the same marks and got into the same University or course, but one came from a good private school and one came from a good state school, would you consider one student to be brighter than the other?
Or would they both be equally as intelligent, since they have both ended up with the same marks and have been accepted to the same course?

If it is equally easy/difficult to get good grades at a 'sink' school as at a 'top' state or private school, then why do middle class parents go to so much effort to ensure their child doesn't end up in the 'sink' school?

Friend's DS has 6 predicted A* in all the hard subjects but was rejected after an interiew in Cambridge.

When I naively asked a current student from Cambridge how he would explain that, the answer was "I guess they just didn't like him " .. By the way the applicant is from a state school .

I'd think they were equally bright. But if one had come from a good private school and one from an ordinary state school, I might think the state school child was brighter, or had more untapped potential as she or he wouldn't have been nurtured in the same way (bigger class sizes, surrounded by pupils who don't want to learn etc.) To get that far despite unfavourable circumstances is more impressive than achievement with support.

Pianoman that student could equally have come from a Private school. If the student doesn't show passion for their subject, seems inarticulate (which is where private and some state schools score), seems lazy ( where some private pupils fall down) or seems "unpleasant". They may not get an offer. After all even though all the top students do not apply to Oxbridge, there is huge competition for places (even more so in some subjects).

Hardly lazy and inarticulate with 6 A* ..

Maybe considered boring with no outside interests? Maybe someone who suffered from a lack of expert advice from the school on getting the balance right between showing they had a life outside of school (even if it was only doing evening and weekend work, because they couldn't actually afford a life outside school that required them to spend money) and ensuring they got good enough exam results to get into a top university? If you don't have parents who can help you work out what Cambridge is looking for in a candidate and don't have a school which helps you, then obviously it will be harder to work it out for yourself on the basis of no experience and the naivety of a 17 or 18-year old. And, of course, there is intense competition for places, so you can be extremely articulate, but still not impress enough on the day.

6 A-levels doesn't really leave much room for outside interests.
Still, in the academic world I would imagine academic focus is an overwhelming interest. I told his mum she should have insisted on street dancing as well .

Anyway, he has got to a top uni anyway. I wonder if there is a certain type they are after..

Some dc seem to manage 6 A levels and have plenty of outside interests too. I'm sure that wasn't the problem with Cambridge though, more likely that it was a competitive subject he applied for and others had higher grades (in UMS rather than number of A*s) and came over better at interview.

I think it depends on the grades. If both have A stars in all subjects, then I think you simply can't tell which is the stronger candidiate. There are naturally very bright children at private schools, and i dont think you can assume the state school pupil is brighter - if there were a higher grade than A star you just cant tell which would get it (which is top 1% and which top 10%).

If there was someone with an A and 2Bs from Westminster (say) and someone with the same grades from a state school (non-grammar), then I would probably assuem the Westminster pupil was less bright given the opportunities and teaching they had had (but it might depend on the school).

Easy to be inarticulate with 6 A*s. it also depends on the course. The type of person you want for PPE would probably be very different to the one wanted for Maths. (College choice can matter too.)

Actually he wanted to read Natural Sciences.. He is a bit geeky I suppose , a bit spotty etc.(In a loving motherly way , I am sure he'll grow out of it) I can see how that would disagree with PPE but science ?

Love to hear people jumping in with comments "lots of kids get 6 A* and have time for other interests" - is his another stereotype about kids needing to be all-rounders even if they are brilliant in one particular way.

They should have seen Einstein - definitely wouldn't pass through the doors.
And wasn't exactly a particulary good speaker either..

Don't think anyone has said 'lots of kids get 6A*s', read more carefully.

You might find this report interesting. It explains the metrics they have found to be the best indicators of success for various subjects (including Nat Sci) at Cambridge, so might help explain.

It seems for Nat Sci the best predictor is the AS UMS scores in the 3 most relevant A-levels (counting maths + f. maths as one subject). That's why my guess as to why he didn't get in was that his AS scores in the most relevant subjects weren't as good as his competitors, surprising as that seems (anecdotally they look for 95%+ typically). Perhaps he spread himself too thinly with 6 subjects?

Did he request feedback though because that is the best way to find out exactly why he was rejected rather than speculating.

and no I absolutely don't think Cambridge care an iota about roundedness and extra curriculars.

Well, I dont know all details but I know he did math +further math, 3 sciences + a language .

I didn't know they do feedback? Do they really?

He does sound like an ideal candidate and I'm fairly sure you can request feedback. It probably varies from college to college/tutor to tutor how detailed the reply will be.

Well , like I said it's not about my own child and I dont want to rub it in..
Just was really surprised.

I'm not surprised you were surprised!