Why on earth would anyone reject SPGS??

[newsibling123]

I've been reading through many threads with mums wondering between SPGS and G&L.

While G&L is a great school, why on Earth would there be a conflict in choosing SPGS, they applied in the first place, its not like they got cold called by the school and their DD offered a place!

If we applied to SPGS, we'd put G&L as back up, but if we had two offers there's no question we'd choose SPGS. The only way I can imagine conflict is if G&L offered a scholarship, or DD really didn't want to go SPGS, even then we would try and show her what a brilliant opportunity it was.

I know one chooses the best school for the DC, etc etc, but I can't imagine any scenario, all things being equal, how G&L would be 'better'. If DD was heavily tutored and parent was worried she'd struggle at SPGS now they have offer in hand, then G&L doesn't come to mind as an alternative to that! One of the less intense GDST schools or somewhere with broader selection, less high academic like Portland or More House maybe?

Don't mean to offend anyone here, choosing school is tough, but I just don't get this at all...It's like getting a place at Oxford and choosing Durham

I would reject a lot of things if we had a property empire. Sadly, we don't.

No because you still have to reach a certain academic standard and the worst school in the country probably won't get you to that standard.
there's a whole thread running somewhere right now (maybe Higher Education) regarding standards and getting into oxford/cambridge.

What about staying independent for GCSEs, then switching over? I had no idea Oxbridge was just about the relative performance, I always thought they wanted the smartest students. Interesting, thanks for this.

Me too 😭😭😭

Many kids actually do this! They try to game the system by switching in 6th form and getting lower conditional offers for Oxbridge. You'd be surprised that some of the most desirable leafy grammar schools also get preferential lower conditional offers. I think each uni has a list of schools they give lower offers to.

It shouldn't work, because they can see where you did our GCSEs.
I suspect there is a lot of misinformation about this just as there is for schools admission.
'Neighbours very bright lad at Eton didn't get in they are biased against independent schools' whereas he was nothing special, didn't do well in the extra entrance tests, or was very formulaic at interview.
The thread I referred to is in AIBU right now.

Ultimately even AAB from St Cuthberts school for troublesome children probably shows far more potential than A A A from Winchester / Wycombe Abbey.

He would reject the offer? She has no say in the matter then...So much for happiness ,

Yes I think that's right @TeenDivided. DD2 went to a low-performing secondary modern, I'm not sure they've ever sent a pupil to Oxbridge, certainly DD2's A level results wouldn't have put her anywhere near being able to apply, even with a contextual offer. The teachers, by and large, would not have been equipped to get pupils to the standard required. However wind forward a few years and she now has a first-class Masters from a university ranked higher than Cambridge for her particular field of STEM study.

So intellectually speaking it would appear that she isn't as far off that standard as her A level results would indicate.

Don't forget the property empire! LOL

Contextual offers are based on where you did your GCSEs not A-levels. Private school students get in proportionally to Oxbridge based on their share of top grades. There isn't any obvious bias. There are just more state school students applying via outreach with good enough grades to get in. That statistics make this clear.

Oxbridge contextual offers take into account your whole background,

Its not being the best of your peers in a failing school, its producing 3 A's in a underperforming school with parents who never went to University and a family where you qualify for free school meals...have the child been in the care system, Exactly how it should be, and I say this as a parent with a DC at private school.

Wealthy parents who moan about discrimination against private schools from universities need a fair amount of education themselves ....

Just out of genuine curiosity, but how does Oxbridge actually verify some of this stuff? For example, you mention parents who never went to university. How does Oxbridge confirm the true academic history of parents?

I am absolutely for contextual offers! A child who manages to get 3 A's or even AAB in a failing comp in a rough area of course deserves their Oxbridge place over someone who has been privately educated since birth.

However, I think I saw a list of schools that Bristol give contextual offers to and it included schools like Fortismere and DAO in North London. Those schools are some of the leafiest most desirable schools in London with very wealthy or upper middle class parents.

Bristol Uni aspiring state school list:

www.bristol.ac.uk/media-library/sites/study/documents/Aspiring%20State%20Schools%20and%20Colleges%20for%202022%20cycle%20England%20and%20Wales.pdf

Must have been a different uni but I remember the list posted on Mumsnet and it definitely included Fortismere and I think DAO and Camden Girls. I even commented on it. It was a thread posted last year I believe

I had no idea Oxbridge was just about the relative performance, I always thought they wanted the smartest students.

They use the context of a student's performance to find the smartest students. Finding the smart ones is the whole point of contextualisation. They are trying to catch the super talented people that they used to miss out on.

Well the student's referee would have to collaborate with the lie for starters.

Secondly I don't think that one thing would make or break an application. It's the whole package.

Non-grad parents, Dad owns a succesful car mechanic business and mum works as succseful estate agent, own their own large home and are comfortable. Parents never went to university, but overall would hardly qualify as overcoming adversity.

Some of the wealthies people I know are Uni drop outs, so I don't think it has as much impact as your parents occupation and schooling on UCAS forms.

@bjmin
it doesn’t work that way!

At Oxford all applicants regardless of background have to meet the minimum grades for a conditional offer for the courses which is typically a minimum AAA though often much higher.

If you are from a disadvantaged background you will be prioritised for interview amongst the thousands of other applicants that get AAA.
The criteria for this is not just where you went to school though. That wouldn’t be enough to get the priority interview short list. Also interview doesn’t guarantee a place. See the link below:

www.ox.ac.uk/admissions/undergraduate/applying-to-oxford/decisions/contextual-data

The only exception to the AAA minimum requirement is for a couple new foundation courses which require BBB as a minimum.
However, those are only open to children with significant disadvantage - live in a poor area, have attended a poor school (and never having attended fee paying school) AND having been in care/ homeless/ missed lots of schools due to medical illness, being a refugee, getting pregnant in secondary school etc.

There isn’t anyway for middle class parents to game their way onto a foundation course.

Looking at Bristol's list, the colleges listed local to me are all ones that do mainly BTECs rather than A levels.

Leafy or not, the class sizes in expensive private schools would still make it harder for a person at comp - in a level maybe it is 12 vs 20? so contextual offers wouldn’t be that unreasonable.

but not all state schools should be treated same (eg superselecfive vs comp poor overall grades). Not all private schools should be treated same - expensive, selective, league-table topper vs non-academic, small, private school with average grades.

I have a gifted DD who was Grade 8 on 3 instruments and very academic in late primary. No way would I have chosen SPGS for her. Always co-ed over “all very bright girls together” for her. She would have constantly pushed herself way too hard and probably burnt out by GCSE level. She would have been too perfectionist and want to stay at the top.
However, I would have not applied to SPGS for her for that reason. Ironically, the type of girl that fits the school is going to thrive in any other school anyway and probably more so.
Also, not sure she will be applying to Oxbridge. She wants to be a neuroscientist. She will want to do a PhD. She can go there later. There is a real downside to an 8 week term and the intensity of that.

What's the downside to an 8-week term? I'm not an expert on neuroscience, but do Oxford and Cambridge have weak neuroscience programs?

What's the downside to an 8-week term?
Fast paced.
No 'reading week' mid term to catch up if you start to get behind / lost.

What a strange list from Bristol. It certainly wasn’t checked thoroughly….