What has gone wrong with Maths at Westminster?

[committedparent]

Only 1 pupil applied from Westminster to do Maths at Cambridge. 13 pupils applied to Oxford for maths or computer science. There were 0 (zero) offers from Oxford maths. Staggering.
Does anyone know what went wrong this year?
I am told that overall 25% of pupils took a gap year to re-apply last year. I don't know how this group have done with their applications.

It was TalkinPeace Rose. Yes I get that completely but surely the fee issue is far more germane?

Needmoresleep, fair enough...those figures might not be correct. My simple point was that many with a string of very good grades are not Oxbridge material - the 2 things are not synonymous. Of course many with similar grades are turned down by Oxbridge, not just from W but from very many other schools too. The fact W gets so many in tells me that it is highly skilful in preparing them. I know that the children are bright and many extremely bright, but those Oxbridge successes tell me more about the school to be honest than the cleverness of the pupils. Tbh, I couldn't comment on the selectiveness or intelligence of the pupils just based on numbers applying to A Level results, because so many things beyond their natural ability (particularly the schooling they receive) is impacting on those outcomes.

In order to truly comment on how selective the school is, I guess we would need a reliable IQ test and to know the results of everyone in the country, as well as those of W. Never going to be available!

Molio
16-19 Bursary
just looked it up for my DC : You are taking utter bilge
www.gov.uk/1619-bursary-fund/eligibility
it is ONLY for those on benefits : not for all students

welcome to the real world where parents are not rich enough to play the capital game which I've always suspected about you

The fee issue is an interesting one. Because of the way Scottish students are funded for loans (please don't ask me for details but it was explained to me on here) the "fee free" education can be more expensive than you think. Also, accommodation costs are often lower at Oxbridge and degrees are 3 years not 4. Additionally, there is the potential, and unquantifiable boost in job prospects / earnings / chance of making connections, I assume.

We have told our children that a University across the border would have to be very worthwhile (Oxbridge or, say LSE for Economics etc) to trump Edinburgh, St Andrews etc - also superb universities.

Also, the additional handicap is that even Oxbridge does not fully understand Scottish Highers / Advanced Highers. One applicant I knew of applied to Chemistry at Oxford. She was studying under the Scottish system. Her interview consistent of questions about the A Level syllabus, some of which she, clearly, had no covered. A good school might have prepared her for this, or suggested she do some reading. She was at a school who did not really know that this would happen and thought her A (top grade) at Higher Chemistry was a golden ticket.

Chocolate
re that 17.5% - I misread it . My mistake - you are right. I am .

TP - that's for the Vulnerable Student bursary, for a young person who is or was looked after, or is independent of their parents and claiming benefits in their own right. The Discretionary Bursary is, well, discretionary.

We get regular emails from dd1's school about it - their info says
They can apply for a Discretionary Bursary Tier 1 if either:
? your gross annual household income does not exceed £16,190 and/or;
? they, or a brother/sister, qualifies for Free School Meals (FSM), and/or;
? you receive either an:

• Income Based Jobseekers Allowance.
• Income-related Employment and Support Allowance.
• Guaranteed element of State Pension Credit.

- Or they can apply for a Discretionary Bursary Tier 2 if either: ? your gross annual household income does not exceed £22,500 and/or; ? they, or a brother/sister, qualifies for Free School Meals (FSM), and/or; ? you receive either an:

• Income Based Jobseekers Allowance.
• Income-related Employment and Support Allowance.
• Guarantee element of State Pension Credit.

(you being the parent or carer: I copied this from a document on the school website aimed at parents/carers.)

They also say that they have some money for one-off payments or additional support for those who don't meet the eligibility criteria.

Oh, and the Vulnerable Student bursary is £1200, Discretionary Tier 1 is £500, Discretionary Tier 2 is £250.

atia
all very fluffy
but
if a parent has a gross income less than the fees I hope that HMRC will rip them to pieces
and if they DO have earnings that low disallowing "capital"

sorry love but your kids are still molly coddled
bright but cushioned

Wordfactory
How many of the applicants you "support" have discretionary bursaries ?

The details of the 16-19 Bursary Fund (including some info on eligibility) are available at www.gov.uk/1619-bursary-fund/overview.

TP, I have no idea what you are trying to say in that post, but don't fucking "sorry love" me.

TP I know exactly and precisely what I'm talking about. You've misread the guidance.

I've no idea what you mean by 'playing the capital game'. What on earth do you mean? I don't even know you. How extremely creepy.

I think TP is straying into very odd territory and I don't know who she's addressing but she's getting hugely personal about whoever it is.

Oh, I think I might have worked it out a bit - TP, do you mean an income less than the school fees? I'm talking about a state school.

Bless,
I find it highly amusing that some posters do not understand international school financing.
Either they are too rich to care
or do not understand their DHs finances
tee hee

Wombat. I dont think there is much disagreement. Almost all students at Westminster get good results. Almost half get Oxbridge offers. Molio seems to think this should be more, but to me this seems a pretty good ratio.

Where we may disagree is what constitutes preparation and what constitutes education. We did not get much sense that students were being prepared for Oxbridge per se. We were however aware that our son's education went beyond A level syllabi. Research-based essays for essay prizes, preparing presentations for various "societies", classroom discussion, debating etc. DS did not go to a University that interviewed, but I consider these wider skills are valuable in helping him make the most of his University education. In short, he was better prepared for University than being better prepared for a University interview. Given Oxbridge will be looking for potential I assume that this wider education is what gives Westminster students an edge.

swiftly back to Westminster

Its Oxbridge record is impressive. Quite what may / may not have gone askew with a particular subject in this current cycle remains to be seen.

However using the great link provided by Summerends for Oxford along with the data for Cambridge, overall, for 2013 at least, Westminster did not fare too badly. I know its just a single year but bear with for the time being

Looking at those schools with at least 15 applicants to both Oxford and Cambride - 15 being chosen as the Cambridge data is in pdf that can be put into excel very easily, whereas the Oxford data is not, and 107 schools seemed more than enough for manual entry :) - Westminster ranks 3rd for all UK schools in terms of overall Oxbridge success last year, with a success rate of just over 50%. Although interesting highly skewed to Oxford in terms of numbers applying.

I'm not sure if it was this thread or another but I recollect a very astute comment about my our national fixation with pecking orders, league tables etc. Therefore the top 10 for 2013 are, with an * indicating indie or not :

1. Duran Duran Rio

1. Magdalen College School* 55.7%
2. Habs Aske's Boys * 51.2%
3. Westminster * 50.3%
4. Simon Langton 50.0%
5. Altrincham Girls 50.0%
6. Hampton * 49.2%
7. Oxford HS* 48.9%
8. Kings Wimbledon* 48.6%
9. Norwich School* 48.6%

10. Tiffin Girls 48.3%

Bubbling under

18. St Pauls* 42.8% 21 Eton* 40.3% 24 QE Barnet 39.1%

My dbro has a Cambridge maths degree

He was educated at the same minor, non selective private school that I was for free on a scholarship.

The last person they had sent to Oxbridge was me 8 years before in a different subject.

You can bet that he did not have the quality of teaching that Westminster pupils have. There was no private tutoring involved either but he really has a mathematical mind just exactly as a poster up thread described they are looking for.

He does see the world in numbers. I always imagine that it's like the matrix for him. He works out equations for things in his head just for fun. Whilst we were stuck in traffic on the m25 once he was applying fluid dynamics to the traffic flow. He is a brilliant, self taught chess player and taught himself computer programming too.

I really hope that there will always be places for people with a genuine talent and passion for a subject at Oxbridge and that they are able to select these people whatever background they come from. That is the reason for interviewing everyone isn't it?

So to me it's not a huge travesty if some of the Westminster pupils don't get in. You should not be able to buy it.

I would love my own kids to go because I had a wonderful time and it has opened many doors for me but only if a) they want to and b) they get in on merit. I think it's terribly sad if children or their parents think they have failed if they don't get to Oxbridge. It was a punt for me. Worth a try but if it hadn't worked out I'm sure I would have been happy with any of my other choices. I did a few extra practice STEP papers but that was all. If I had felt that years of expenditure on private tutors was riding on it I would have been terrified.

Have things changed? Do normal kids from non-selective schools still get in these days without years of hot house tutoring?

Boys3 - interesting! Are you able to put in a link so we can see where other schools appeared in that table too please?
I guess some schools allow more of their 'borderline' people to apply than others, perhaps affecting some of the figures. That 80%ish of W students apply is astonishing in itself. I wonder how far the Oxbridge co-ordinators can predict which will make it and which won't. I guess they have a fair idea, but every year there are surprises, so fair play to them for allowing such large numbers to have a go, accepting their %success of applicants to offers might be lower as a result. In the end, these %success of applicants to offers are never going to be published by the school or by subject, so I assume their key concerns are to give most the opportunity and also the more who apply, the more generally get in, in absolute if not relative to applications terms. I remain impressed.

Needmoresleep - I think you are right that perhaps what I think of as 'preparation' is in fact just seen as 'education' at some schools such as W. In the very good independent school I know, which achieves very good A Level results and sends far in excess to RG Unis than their 11+/13+ entry points would suggest there is education, which is fairly broad and enriching, but still involves a fair amount of spoon-feeding, and then there is extra preparation for the 30+ who apply to Oxbridge each year - it is mostly separate from the main scale teaching in lessons. I suspect this explains much of W's success compared to other schools - the broadening/enriching/teaching independent thought etc etc...whatever you want to call it, is so ingrained in the whole experience of education there, that it is extremely effective in raising many boys who would simply be bright and achieve a string of As elsewhere, to Oxbridge standard.
Other places continue to be bothered by league tables, fears of low A Level performance and so spoon feed and teach to the test to ensure A Level success. It is partly to do with the quality of the intake and partly to do with the culture of the school. It seems to me that W has a great intake (although there are others schools with as good an intake and less impressive Oxbridge records) and the right culture. Boys who go there are very lucky. We must recognise that. Yes they are clever, but the school itself is 'adding value' both in measurable terms of Oxbridge success, but also beyond that in terms of truly useful skills for any university and life. This is what people are paying for....and it is a privilege to receive it.

To raise 40% to that standard strikes me as fantastic. If they could do it for all of them or almost all of them, it would suggest there was little room for innate, unchanneled and raw talent at Oxbridge. And I'm glad that there is scope for both W to do its amazing thing and raise some boys from bright to OxbRidge standard, but still scope for those who haven't had those privileges to get in too. Of course in a fair world.......

Completely agree, as I've already said, that the Westminster record is fabulous. If my DC had taken and passed the exam and I'd been in a geographical and financial position to pay the fees, I would have been completely thrilled for them to go there. A few gender issues before the sixth form, but that aside. My query at the outset was simply why, given the resources and the sort of teaching and opportunities that the school provides (described by Needmoresleep), doesn't the school get in more than it does? Other schools with far less resources but still putting in significant numbers get a very fair percentage in. Not quite at the same level but less far off than I'd imagine, given the difference in context. That's all. It's at least prompted an interesting discussion and the tables of applications/ offers were hugely interesting too.

boys3 to develop your table further, I think offer / application percentage should also include percentage of pupils in that school applying. Similarly selective schools state or private should have a similar percentage applying or encouraged to apply. Tiffin's looks good in your table but only relatively small number of the school year apply to Oxbridge.

It is not so much tutoring mama but an education which goes off syllabus which provides an advantage (I think). However interviewers being human would probably favour somebody like Roseforme's DS if there wasn't a major difference between him and say a Westminster applicant.

My query at the outset was simply why ... doesn't the school get in more than it does?

I don't know the answer but if I was an admissions tutor I think that I would make damn sure that no school looked too much like a shoo-in. It wouldn't be very politic.

Mamadoc, if a child is genuinely interested in the subject and motivated to look at stuff beyond the curriculum independently, there is genuine open doors at Oxbridge. ds1 has just received an offer from Oxford (science) having been at non-selective state schools for his entire education. His school lessons have been primarily curriculum-focused, but he has done lots of independent reading of books and periodicals, also attended public lectures at the Ri, gone to University masterclasses, found relevant work experience, etc.

roisin that self motivation is key but it is a much more exciting process if you have other classmates that you can exchange ideas and have debates with and teachers who facilitate that. After all that is what a good university education is about.

Ideally a student should n't be doing extra work and reading specifically with to prepare for Oxbridge but because they are genuinely interested in their subject(s) and would do it regardless.

Perhaps it was really my family culture that helped my sibs and I then.
Whilst we never had any formal extra tuition discussion, debate and finding out about anything and everything were normal to us
I recall being really surprised to find that some friends found our family meal times intimidating. They were not used to being asked for an opinion and having to defend it!
My mum is still doing this for her grandkids. If I let her know what topic they are studying she will send books, articles, web links and suggest days out. It's the librarian in her I think