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.

Summerends, a cool table.

Tiffin provides a interesting comparator in that it is probably (huge catchment for the years in question, free, much higher applicant numbers, supportive and aspiring parents, and taking in additional achieving students for sixth form) more selective than Westminster. Yet "only" 130 applicants over the three years and a 33% sucess rate. Comparable figures for the girls school are 84 and 33%. (W's figures are 319 and 45%.)

I also agree with OxfordComma about the impact of only being able to apply to one of the two. Observation was that those wanting to do mathsy subjects and with a credible application, were opting for Cambridge/London/other RG. Lots ended in up in London. Other, arguably no-stronger candidates, got Oxford offers.

I also agree with earlier comments about Oxbridge being full on and having less appeal for some students. A friend's DD, at SPGS, decided she wanted to avoid Oxbridge. Having worked hard for the entrance exam, working very hard whilst at school, and envisaging a high powered professional career, she wanted a few years out of the private school/Oxbridge/City pipeline, and opted to go somewhere which ranks highly for student satisfaction. My friend thought this was a great idea, but noted that the same would not have been an option for several of her daughter's classmates.

Molio, I am not aware of DS getting that much specific prep for Oxbridge, though clearly there was a lot of experience available in terms of reviewing PSs etc. More a case that the style of education may have been closer to the University experience that might be available elsewhere.

The school really tries to to encourage students to select the right subject and the right course. If anything, it tries to promote the idea that there are a range of options, and that Oxbridge is just one of them.

Schools like Magdalen College are a bit of an anomaly because they still have a large proportion of DC's of academics.
Molio Westminster is head and shoulders above because those frequencies are from almost all applying, the others have lower proportions.
I agree that who gets offers can be unpredictable, interviewers and candidates are human and the interviews are a snapshot.

Oh, I doubt the prep is anything special or anywhere close to what the top independents can offer.

It's a mixture of identifying, encouraging and prepping, I guess. Visits to the colleges (we're nearer to Cambridge, so more likely to go there) for subject specific tasters, pointing students in direction of relevant summer schools (including paying for these by PTA or pupil premium as relevant) , being part of the local Oxbridge Conference days organised by a consortium of local schools, which has admissions tutors etc as guests, inviting former students (current Oxbridge) in to discuss tutorial system, several mock interviews per candidate with a mix of staff who attended Oxbridge, retired Oxbridge lecturers and other relevant professionals (hospital consultants etc), having a debating team, having a well stocked careers library with lots of 'How to get into Oxbridge ' type books, etc etc.

Just the stuff I'm sure all grammars and top comps do.

Hmmm, I think you may be overestimating the input from most schools. At my DCs comp the only support was one mock interview (not from a subject teacher as the subject my DD applied for (successfully) wasn't taught at school). No obvious or specific advice on Oxbridge applications or extra support although there were trips to various oxford and cambridge colleges in year 9. I think it does mean those who get in (usually 7-10 a year in a 400 a year sixth form comp) are genuinely self motivated! But it's not a level playing field with e.g. Westminster. Maybe the admissions tutors are getting better at looking past the preparation?

You live in some kind of grammar / top comp/ private bubble in London. Lots and lots of schools offer NO support. My own school, admittedly tiny, had its first (unsuccessful) candidate this year - in 25 years. We can't offer "extra" because we can only just offer the basic syllabuses. Often (see above) we don't even have competent teachers.

So, to be honest, if fewer boys from a top, selective school are not getting in, that suggests that there is nothing wrong with a department (and I am persionally uneasy with a thread that singles out a dozen or so teachers in an outstandingly good school). What has, one would hope, changed, is that widening access means tutors are seeing past the extensive preparation and finding the potential and ambition underneath.

I visit a lot of schools to whip up interest in Oxbridge and other highly selective universities and I see not only lack of support but too often bad advice and policies which will actively hold back potential candidates.

It makes me irate.

TBH, it's only Oxbridge with its intense interview process that requires specialist insider knowledge and support. Other universities give excellent explicit advice as to what they are looking for in an application: LSE gives incredibly detailed guidelines to what it expects in eg the Personal Statement and candidates don't require any support to follow them.

Out of interest, do Oxbridge provide funding for those attending interviews?
Just that the costs (in all senses of the word) for Roses child to attend are significantly greater than those of a London based child.

Wordfactory - what classes as bad advice and policies, please?

Westminster, the St Paul's', Habs, Winchester, Eton, RGS, Magdalen College etc. not many girls from that list interesting subjectivity......

Hmmm

Poor advice on GCSE options/ numbers.

Early sitting of GCSE for league table purposes.

Ditto A level choices.

Not helping applicants get their PS together or giving advice in early deadline.

Basic myth busting; I've heard everything from Oxbridge costs more to the old style entrance exams still exist.

This has made a very interesting read. Dd applied to Westminster for sixth form and didn't even get through to the interview stage, she felt she had performed as well as she possibly could in the papers but wasn't tutored and just did some extended reading/revising as prep.
She is a bright all-rounder (10A*) rather than a brilliant 'geek' and she stayed at her independent, slightly (but frankly not very) selective day school in the north. She was clearly not right/ the correct sort of bright/ well drilled enough.
Interestingly she has recently won a conditional place at Cambridge, after a similar level of self-preparation, practically no help from school (they get 5-8% of pupils in a year, around 10-15) in an arts subject.
I suppose it just shows how crazily competitive Westminster is for sixth form entry and really it's no surprise they get loads in to Oxbridge.

Hmmm,
I am not an expert nor anything to do with Oxford admissions , but Uilen's link some pages back , in the 2013 admissions section , has a comment that in 2010 17.5% of state school pupils applied for a course Oxford doesn't actually offer. Which I find . Firstly , that a school wouldn't at least help check that , but also , if I am honest that a candidate who purported to have the commitment to a subject to apply wouldn't check it for themselves. (Does that sound harsh? )
That isn't a state versus independent comment by the way , it only makes the comment about state schools , unless I have missed something. I can only imagine it could be from candidates who are "giving it a shot" and are really targeting other universities and the Oxford flavour of that subject is actually a little different.

Oh, ok, thanks. All the stuff I knew was 'wrong' - and that the schools I consider locally to be 'good' schools would never do.

It's really interesting that many educated/aspirational people don't, though. And it can feed into making really odd school choices (eg looking at GCSE average points per students rather than average points per entry, i.e.thinking 18 grade Cs is better than 8 grade As - thinking all subjects are of equal value, early entry and loads of retakes are good, etc etc).

Yeah, I agree AgnesGrey. Stuff like that I thought was pretty basic. I just wondered whether Wordfactory might say that even the schools like the grammar I'm referring to are, actually, getting it wrong and their information and prepping was out of date. Pleased to see that it's not.

Word in Inner London state schools you have to add in another factor, one of the biggest challenges the mentoring charity I am involved with face is that pupils from other cultural backgrounds often believe that if you are clever and ambitious you aim to read medicine at Oxbridge / UCL, so that many very bright applicants are in danger of not succeeding merely because they aim for the highest fence possible, ditto Cambridge Maths, LSE Economics. The widening access sessions at Oxbridge are a powerful tool in widening not just access but horizons as well. Obviously that is one issue that won't arise at the top private schools with extensive and in depth careers mentoring right from Year 9. As Needmore highlighted they aim to counteract some of the ingrained attitudes amongst some parents

CathyandClaire it is known in the London girls' schools that the Westminster admissions process can be a bit hard to predict, almost certainly because they are managing subject cohorts, no obvious other explanation. Many very bright girls who you would expect to be successful don't get offered places, I don't think it is down to any sort of magic bullet in terms of preparation. I am sure with 10 A*s and a Cambridge acceptance there was the potential to have been accepted and some confluence of performance on the day, the popularity of the subjects she wished to study etc was the reason she wasn't successful. However yes the ones who do get in are very bright.

Hmmm some schools if course give their students all the help and good advice they need .

Also, some schools are very open to advice and change.

But sadly not all...

Word - I agree with all those issues but there are plenty of sources of information beyond schools/teachers that provide good advice on them and be cross-referenced and validated. TBH anybody wanting a place on a course requiring AAB or above at A-level ought damn well to be seeking information to check and validate word of mouth advice from school.

And that goes for top schools too, who don't always put their pupils' interests ahead of their own.

Poisonwoodlife I wrote 'the St Paul's''. That clearly includes SPGS. And Westminster takes girls into the sixth form too. You can take the 'etc.' to include Wycombe Abbey and Oxford High too if you like, it really wasn't a gender thing. I have an equal number of girls and boys myself and an equal number who've now gained a place at Oxford. There was no gender offence intended, I just don't look at things in a genderfied way.

I agree with all the posters who think Comma may hugely overestimate what the vast majority of state schools do in terms of helping students for Oxbridge. Also with the point that not all advice seems to be well informed, from what I've heard anecdotally.

Comma you referred to the lottery factor in Oxbridge admissions. I'd tend to say there was an element of luck involved but I wouldn't put as high as a lottery. And you say that in your school, with its good track record for offers, there are always surprises. So do you think Oxford and Cambridge lack judgment in those cases, or that the school does? Obviously I'm not implying that this is the case at your school because I couldn't have a clue, but I detect a tendency for some teachers to think that the responsible, prefect type of student especially those with very high grades across the board at GCSE, are 'dead certs', and sometimes a lack of imagination about the wilder kids who are excellent at one subject but perhaps weren't so great all round at GCSE.

No TP they don't pay transport costs but they do offer accommodation and all meals free of charge.

I never said "most" schools prep that well, I said many grammars and "top" comprehensives.

I don't know the answer to your question, Molio.

I think there is an element of both. One particular student who was considered a cert for Oxbridge (one of the most bankable in years) got NO offers from any university one year. She took a year out and got a full set the following year, including Cambridge, which she accepted.

There is an argument that some teaching staff (maybe even those who went to Oxbridge) are more rigid in whom they perceive as good candidates, ie looking for students who remind them the most of themselves at 17. There was a male student whom the Head and his academic tutor were surprised to see a Cambridge offer for, but I wasn't. I spoke to him a lot (extra curricular related) and considered him extraordinarily articulate, passionate and intelligent, just in a narrow (arts) field.

And an argument that admissions tutors can get it wrong sometimes.

And that oftentimes it's the luck of the draw.

A bit of all three.

molio
No TP they don't pay transport costs but they do offer accommodation and all meals free of charge.
So for a Londoner, the kid hops on the train for a £30 return fare and its done.

For somebody from Cumbria or even the Scottish Highlands, either its a train fare in the £200 range or a parent has to take two+ days off work to get them there and back.

Other universities take applicants without demanding attendance at interviews beforehand.

The geographic distribution of Oxbridge applicants starts to make more sense.

No transport costs would not be an issue for us as I have a good job (teacher). But, for many of my very, very able pupils, it is a huge bar. Also, the late notification of exact interview dates means that people cannot take advantage on booking trains / planes etc far in advance. However, my own experience suggests that an able applicant for whom this was a bar might get a sympathetic hearing from a college. Not sure. I had one pupil, years ago, who got offered an interview for Cambridge and turned it down because "My Mum will want me home in weekends and she didn't realise I had applied".