Worst forms of selection in schools: Views of M'snetters

[thankgodimretired]

Interviews?
Questions concerning parental income?
Academic selection?
Previous school reports?
Decisions made by committee about whether to exclude certain individuals from attending?

Having just recently retired from the teaching profession, I am struck by how little things have changed over the course of my working life. There are certainly less overtly selective schools in the state sector than when I started out teaching in South London in the late 1970's. But the independents, grammars and faith schools appear to be more socially exclusive than at any time.

TheOriginalSteamingNit

'mansplaining' - please define this. I don't know what it means or why it is irritating.

LaVolcan

That's good to know. I stumbled on this website which said this about the 1944 reforms and Education Act.

"This was another area where hopes for the Act ran high. The 1944 Fleming Committee had examined how the independent schools might be integrated into the state system, but it was not to be. The Act did nothing about the private schools, other than to require them to be registered. "

www.educationengland.org.uk/history/chapter05.html

Of course the ultimate irony is that many private schools were founded to be exactly the opposite of what they are today - teaching children that had no access to tutors and family wealth.

Reading through this thread, has made me wonder if there perhaps is a place to discuss why most people aspire to Oxbridge. Now the answer might be obvious, such as the brand and quality of education, opportunities for research. But, is not possible for other universities to raise their standards to that of Oxbridge to improve access to this 'brand' and 'quality'?

This may be a silly idea and probably loads of reasons why it will never happen but just wondered about people's opinions on.

To Mansplain:
*To explain in a patronizing manner, assuming total ignorance on the part of those listening. The mansplainer is often shocked and hurt when their mansplanation is not taken as absolute fact, criticized or even rejected altogether.

Named for a behavior commonly exhibited by male newbies on internet forums frequented primarily by women. Often leads to a flounce. Either sex can be guilty of mansplaining.
The members of the equestrian community were unimpressed when Bob posted an essay that mansplained a solution to a horsy problem they were all well-acquainted with*

I'm sure you can see why it's irritating! Especially when concluded with confrontational capitals!

Bold-fail! Sorry!

TheOriginalSteamingNit

I don't think I have expressed any discontent with people disagreeing with my opinions nor have I made any presumptions about people's knowledge.

I think the tone of my posts is civil and respectful of others' views.

However, I do think your gender based comment is offensive, but it doesn't upset me and won't have any effect on my future posts.

Gunz this may be treason, but I think there are universities with the same brand.

LSE. Imperial. UCL. Especially in their brand subjects. Interestgly, these universities are very but as selective as Oxbridge, have similar problems with their private/selective/comp intakes, yet get almost no stick.

I would also say that there are a tranche of universities that perhaps don't have the same brand, but not far off. Again they all have issues around widening access to comprehensives.

Then there are universities that aren't considered top tier instituitions yet have superb reputations for a particular subject, particularly within industry. I really couldn't say if these particular courses have access issues, but wouldn't be remotely surprised.

Do most people aspire to Oxbridge? Or is it just a significant number of rather pushy schools? I can think of plenty of students who have said, 'no thanks', who had good enough A levels to try, but preferred somewhere like Manchester or Birmingham.

Gunznroses

I've heard Oxbridge described as a "ticket to the good life". I think this is driven by employers that favour Oxbridge and Russell Group universities for they new recruits.

Perhaps it is seen as a lower risk way of getting (supposedly) more capable staff than making more effort to look at non-RG university graduates and apprenticeships?

If employers were willing to take more time and take a little more risk it would help to increase social mobility and reduce the Oxbridge obsession.

lavolcan Oxbridge is certainly not for everyone.

The short terms, the high intensity of work, the one-to-one tutorials are not everyone's cuppa.

Indeed so, WordFactory I have heard students complaining that their highly pressured school is pushing them to apply for Oxbridge when they want something like Marine Biology at Bangor, and although Bangor has an excellent reputation for the subject, it's not on the school's radar.

Word - Yes you're correct. There are universities who specialise in certain courses and are well known for that both in academia and in industry. However, I was having an argument discussion with DH some months ago, and DH was adamant that regardless, the brand of 'Oxbridge' covered any course of study in a way that other unis couldn't match. So for instance, Southampton is known for its engineering courses, but you went to Cambridge instead, no one will say 'ah! If only you'd gone to Southampton! (That may not be the best example)I don't know if this is actually true, we agreed to disagree.

But I think my initial question based on what you said would perhaps apply more to those universities that seem well below par with other universities.
Can they raise their standards or are they destined to always be considered third rate?

Lavolcan - well I think Oxbridge is definitely seen as the holy grail of education (in the UK) even if people don't aspire to it for a variety of reasons ( and those reasons are sometimes very complex, but not because they think they wont get a good education!) but people know worldwide, that if you are product of Oxbridge they are getting perhaps the best quality there is.

Word - yes, I think your views on selection are pretty consistent too, just differently consistent from mine!

It's interesting that views on the right % of ex-comprehensive pupils at Oxbridge still seem so subjective. I guess it comes down to the question, as you say, of whether you're looking for people who have already demonstrated they can hit the ground running, or people who have the aptitude to perform as well if not better, but have had obstacles in the way of their ability to prove that.

I'm still not convinced, though, by your sweeping statement about the 'deficiencies' of the comprehensive system (and surely Oxbridge isn't either, otherwise it should make contextualised offers to all students from comprehensives, which it quite rightly doesn't).

I said 'no thanks' to Oxbridge, in favour of a redbrick university. In retrospect I think Oxbridge would actually have suited me better, but at 18 I didn't think it was what I wanted from my university experience.

TheWordFactory have similar problems with their private/selective/comp intakes Do the top universities in other countries display a similar mix i.e. private/selective/comp? Not sure if this is a silly question as I have no knowledge of education outside of this country (not too informed on the education system in this country either for that matter).

amber I think contextualised offers are a recognition by universities (not just Oxbridge of course) that some young people have faced large barriers to academic achievement.

These barriers don't just concern the school they attended, though sometimes their school will be part and parcel of those barriers.

Occasionally, the contextualised offers will be low to reflect both the high level of those barriers and the high level of potential in a candidate.

But more often than not they won't be that low.

What Oxbridge and the other most selective universities say consistently is they will not make carte blanche lower offers that are little more than a formal acceptance that comprehensives don't offer an education that can compete. For one thing, for many comprehensives, that might not be true!

Similarly, except on rare occasions, universisties have consistently said that they will not accept certain inappropriate subject choices at GCSE and A level. The defficiency as I see it, is wholly in the poor advice given by the schools. It is not for universities to rectify that after the fact.

Similarly, if pupils take far too many GCSEs and dilute their results, that too is a failing in schools that we cannot be expected to make good.

mum I don't know the answer to that.
France certainly have a disproportionate amount of privately schooled pupils at their Grandes Ecoles.

That said, private schools in France are not the same as here in the UK. The fees are low and the social mix within them far greater.

I suppose in many ways, here in the UK, universities are the vitims of their own success.

People from all around the world want to study here. The squeeze on places gets worse and worse.

TheWordFactory People from all around the world want to study here. The squeeze on places gets worse and worse. Then perhaps they should operation a catchment system like many primary/secondary schools. I.e. priority to UK residents (locals), if places left over then anyone else. Of course that would never happen as it may affect their position in the league tables.

mum I think (though I'm prepared to be told otherwise) that it's European law, that applications from within the union have to be given exactly the same prority as UK nationals.

Overseas applicants are different. Most universities have a quota.

TheWordFactory Overseas applicants are different. Most universities have a quota. If universities are focused on tapping into the local academic potential why are they offering any places to overseas applicants (unless you are saying that they are legally required to have the quota)?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying they are wrong to do so. My questions are based solely on the comment you made - "The squeeze on places gets worse and worse".

I'm more inclined to say the Universities are not victims, the applicants are the victims. The Universities get the same number of students no matter where they come from. However, the odds of an applicant getting a place at the University reduces in line with the increase in popularity of the University.

*TheWordFactory nit or perhaps mum (apologies) you aksed me yesterday why Oxbridge didn't base its offers on the aptitude tests, rather than grades, interview etc.

Well, I guess, we could say that about any university really.*

Fair enough, I didn't realise that many other Universities did aptitude tests prior to admission.

mum as usual it's a balance.

You want the international talent, but ultimately you want to remain, where possible, somewhere that UK young people can come.

Also, there's the thorny question of cash. Overseas students pay top dollar for the places.

At Oxbridge, we get so many overseas applications that we can still afford to keep academic standards high and take the dosh. But at many other establishments, the overseas money is all that keeps them going and they will pretty much take anyone!

As for aptitude tests, yes, they are becoming more and more wide spread.

TheWordFactory
A genuine question that got rather lost in yesterday's posts
( and you are one of the most likely people in the country to have the data set )
Applicants to Oxbridge etc from Comps ....
is there a difference between comps that are within the sphere of influence of state only super selectives and those that are not?

Just that I wondered whether some of the problems you rightly identify when you visit schools could be down to :

• the top ten pupils knowing that the real top ten pupils are at another school
• the teachers knowing that their real "star pupils" are actually at another school
• the careers department knowing that the kids who are probable Top200 university candidates are not at their school
• the community being aware that there will never be a headline in the local paper about kid from our school goes to Oxford because all those kids have been creamed off to the SS school

Yes, the actual numbers extracted from any "comp" are small, but they are the "Aspirational" pupils.

Do you collect such information?
If not, would it be informative to do so?