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.

skylark the results are still spectacular. Schools across the country took a hit in 2014. At Oxford there were far more offer holders that didn't meet their grades than ever before - there are all sorts of political things going on with the marking of exams at the moment so 81% A*/A is completely fantastic.

Bonsoir your selection of papers (known right-wing) providing informative reading about the process illustrates my point of mainly a certain French moneyed class considering UCAS application.

Molio you are right but as well as the relative arbitrariness of the interview process, superselection at schools like Westminster includes academic attainement and therefore not necessarily the other qualities that tutors might be looking for.

I think you've missed my point. Yes, those results are completely fantastic. No, they're not at the level where you'd expect every pupil to get into Oxbridge.

There aren't any schools in the country which have results at a level that you'd expect them all to get in. DS's school gets similar results and has plenty of students who don't get into Oxbridge. I don't know what their actual acceptance rate is.

The prep school I used to work at sent a number of boys to Westminster who, while bright, were not anything approaching Oxbridge standard. It's an academically selective school, without a doubt, but it doesn't just educate geniuses!

alma are you seriously saying that you could categorically tell which 10/11/12 year old boys were Oxbridge contenders?!?

Speaking from recent experience of very selective but not as selective as Westminster and St Paul's, London schools, I would say the pupils increasingly see Oxbridge as a lottery and therefore do focus their sights on other top universities, and the USA. The numbers applying to US universities, especially the sporty who are courted for scholarships, rose considerably in the last five years.

The admissions process has always thrown up surprises but year after year they see the brightest not getting in, and some strange choices who do (though that may be related to courses, college etc. as much as the idiosyncrasies of the process). So a culture of seeing Oxbridge as a punt has grown up and the schools are finding it harder to persuade pupils to apply, why put yourself through the stress and extra work, when if, with A* predictions, offers for other very good universities are going to just land on your mat (though probably in April if it is Durham ). Especially if the Oxbridge ethos doesn't appeal, and it isn't for everyone. Or alternatively you may have the exciting prospect of going to the U.S. and the attractive choices of generalist courses there. In DDs year, who left last year, very few of the brightest even applied, and numbers getting in were down again. There is also an increasing tendancy to focus on STEM subjects and more vocational courses such as Engineering and Law and those of course are the most competitive, as well as there being very good courses other than Oxbridge.

That is a good thing though, isn't it? In terms of widening access. You do only want the most determined to apply, and to take up that automatic path from very selective indies to Oxbridge. The pupils don't really have a problem with it, they get great experiences in London and other good universities / the U.S.. It is just the Oxbridge focused parents like OP that struggle with a changed environment.

Sorry bad syntax there, I mean dismantle that automatic track.....

poison I think there are two schools of thought as to whether it's a good thing.

School one; you can't increase the number of state schooled students without losing some if the private schooled ones. It's the price to pay for widening access and so what? There are more than enough great candidates in the state sector.

School two; universities live and die on the quality of their student body. It will lead to dilution if standards if a sector of applicants ( where we know we can find good candidates ) start looking elsewhere. It will also allow the competition to raise their game.

I don't think it's just that the ethos of Oxbridge doesn't appeal or the risk of getting in seems not worth it, but that students can be very savvy about finding exactly the right course for them, wherever that is.

I know a whole crop of 16-19 year olds at great schools with fabulous Oxbridge-worthy grades, who have researched and decided that the best courses for them are at UCL and Imperial and LSE and Newcastle and Birmingham and so on. These are medics, physicists, mathmos, historians and more. It's the parents and the schools which want Oxbridge, not necessarily the students these days.

I think it's great they're looking at course content and not just kudos.

skylark I haven't in any way missed your point. The reason I used the 81 A/A figure and said it was a fantastic result was because that felicitously pretty much mirrors the numbers applying to Oxbridge from Westminster. About 18% don't seem to. Also, by no means all Oxford and Cambridge offer holders get multiple As, especially in the arts and humanities and especially in the current climate of wacky marking. Cambridge gets far more, no doubt partly because of their insistence on very high ums at AS, partly because of their high offers. IME quite a few students relax after their Oxford offer rolls in and are reasonably chilled for A2s.

Love this stuff about the US. It's just not in any way financially viable for most kids even of fairly pedestrian Oxbridge standard from non super rich homes. Only a tiny percentage of offer holders would get funding for the US institutions which are properly comparable to Oxford and Cambridge.

Yes hmm there is definitely a greater focus on finding the right course, and being more savvy about differences in content and approach, research ranking etc.

Poisonwoodlife there are quite a lot of general statements in your post, which appear to be derived from experience of a particular school.

HmmAOC I agree that current students seem very savvy, but one manifestation of that includes the financial consideration that if they're paying £9000 a year in fees, they want the best return on their money. On that score, Oxford and Cambridge provide excellent value and generally an excellent return. There was a record number of applications to Oxford this year (over 18,000), so it's not exactly going out of fashion. Cambridge admittedly was slightly down, but presumably that was because of its raising of the standard offer to two A* in the sciences rather than anything else.

Re the increase in applications to the U.S. I think families have started to do the research and even less well off families have found affordable routes, they were always there for the very academically gifted, but a lot of the increase is amongst those with sporting talent. I used to percieve it was just for national squad rowers but now it is apparent that US universities do court even just strong first team players, and they can get multiple scholarship offers, plus equipment and fantastic training.

Oh, of course, financial implications are the best 'name' to put on your cv is certainly a consideration (again, particularly for parents). Maybe I just know a whole load of especially geeky kids who are more interested in studying for studying's sake than in future earnings!

There were two lads at my school who both went to university in the States on soccer scholarships - this is almost 25 yrs ago now, and from a very ordinary, provincial comprehensive. I didn't realise that it was probably unusual for its time.

Definitely not just one school, my DDs were at seperate schools and have peers at a range of London private schools that are in the league below Westminster and the St Paul's but have been experiencing this environment for a few years now. It is a definite change in culture, hardening even between my DDs cohorts.

Oh and the kids from ds's school who go to RCM, RCA and Rada every year definitely aren't applying with an eye on future earnings

But yes, my comments are limited to just London private schools but then the thread is about one London private School, I am merely highlighting that as Needmore wrote the different culture beginning to prevail there is one already prevailing in the other London selectives. However it is a unique environment with much higher proportions of pupils in private schools (over half of secondary school pupils in our outer London borough) and the selective ones able to be very selective, and have a tradition of sending very high numbers of pupils to Oxbridge. As wordfactory highlights with widening access something has to give. I see no change in our local comps and sixth forms ambitions to increase the numbers they get into Oxbridge. If they are having increasing success the corollary is that the private schools will have less.

Some random comments:

1. I agree with almapudden. Westminster is selective, but there are limits. First, you need to be able to pay the fees. Second, part of the cohort is selected aged 6. I doubt very much if you can spot an Oxbridge candidate at that point. Third, pupils need to want to study in Central London, which for many means a rush hour commute. Four, you probably need to be in a school that preps for Westminster. Plus independent schools do seem to look for a fit rather than top slice the top scorers in any test. We know pupils who were rejected by Alleyns, Latymer and in DS' case, Tiffin. 11+ is also a lottery.

1. Teaching at Westminster has a certain style and encourages engagement and a level of self-motivation. I won't be telling tales out of school if I were to suggest that one or two, including DS' all-time favourite teacher, are not that organised. This is fine given the culture and the type of student, but might not work elsewhere. It is not a crammer.

1. Pupils are teenagers. You can lead a horse to water etc. There will always be a few who don't get the results they are capable of because they don't put the work in. (Particuarly dangerous is an assumption from a minority of students/parents that because they are at Westminster an Oxbridge place should be assured.) And as someone suggested above, Westminster, like other schools state or private, is not immune to some odd marking and results.

1. My impression is that there are three sorts of candidates. The ones who really ought to get a place (though some then won't) perhaps with average AS UMS in the high 90s. Some like my son who are encouraged to "have a go". Essentially he was told that he was good enough but was applying for a very competitive course, and so he might, or might not get a place. And a third group who are warned that they are unlikely to gain a place, though some still try and some end up with an offer. Given around 40% seem to gain Oxbridge places I guess there is about a 50% acceptance rate. I actually think this is terrific.

1. If anything the school tries to downplay Oxbridge as a destination. Pupils were encouraged to study what was available at different Universities across the UK and focus on the courses they were most interested in. A few, including some very bright students, applied for more esoteric courses, but lots applied for the most competitive (medicine, PPE, Economics and management, engineering etc). I am not aware of anyone aiming for Norse Studies or Land Economy simply to get to Oxbridge.

At the end of the day almost all of DSs friends have ended up doing the courses they want at good Universities, and all seem to be having a great time. Like Oxbridge, Westminster educates. Its students are very lucky. An Oxbridge place might be the cherry on the cake for some, but all should have the skills to make the most of their higher education.

And indeed with the Sutton Trust highlighting that these London boroughs account for disproportionate numbers who get places at Oxbridge then the same effect is going to follow from schools outside London improving their success rates.

I would suggest that the only families seriously considering the top USA universities / colleges as a realistic option of gaining a place and paying for it, are the very wealthy or exceptionally talented or those who are rather naive. I am sure that schools like Westminster have a fair proportion of the first two in my list but traditionally the UK pupils there have been more inclined to Oxbridge and other UK universities.

summerends - perhaps but the thread is about competition for places at top universities and we all know that the wealthy and privileged are well-represented in that competition.

summerends - I'm guessing that you don't realise that French people (parents or students-via-loans) are completely used to paying for HE? Just as private school in France is very cheap compared to the UK, a lot of HE has been much more expensive than in the UK, until recently when the UK caught up with the £9,000 annual fee.

Bonsoir since my family close and extended plus friends have / are going through that system yes I have an inkling of the normal French process for a range of incomes. I think your acquaintances and knowledge perhaps are based on a more narrow strata of French society than you realise. For the bright in France of lower income there are sorts of financial aids including for accommodation (for those not living at home) reducing what is already a much cheaper HE. That is why most normal income French families without a strong reason such international connections, would not contemplate the cost of university in the UK. Possibly a lesson for access of education in the UK.

I would also observe that the word is out (rightly or wrongly) that the academic atmosphere at Oxbridge is stressful compared to other universities.

Some bright, "Oxbridge-viable" kids are self-aware enough to know that they are going to university to get the requisite 2:1 - not because they particularly want to spend three more years in libraries. The Bristol, Durham, Exeter etc vibe is more appealing than the perceived Oxbridge hothouse atmosphere.

This may be nonsense but I've heard kids talking about it.