State school oxbridge bias

[confusedmommy]

Hi, come March 1st, we are very likely to be in the fortunate position to be able pick between a top independent boys school in london ( KCS or St.Paul’s ) and a grammar school ( Tiffin or Wilson ) for my DS. The choice will be a difficult one for us. We can afford the fees but not without some sacrifices. Meanwhile I’m hearing that oxbridge is beginning to favour state school applications more so in recent years. Is this really true ? And if yes, is this only true in Oxford or is this trend seen in other top Russell group universities too. Given grammar is a realistic option for us, I am wondering even more if independent is the right choice for my DS ( who doesn’t really have a strong point of view personally )

Sorry my original 'that' was @Lopilo .

damm.. many of which are independent, should say ; 'Many of which are interdependent'..

How about actually having faith in your child, and believing that they can get into a good university on their own merit, without having to be quite so strategic in your choice of schools?

Privately educated children are not at a disadvantage when applying for universities. They are merely at less of an advantage than they used to be, as they should be. And state schools are not treated as one homogeneous mass by universities either - high performing schools like the ones you mention will not attract any special treatment. The point is not about state or private. The point is about looking at contextual factors and recognising when a young person is an outlier amongst their immediate peers.

Instead of trying to game the system, why not just focus on your own child and supporting him to be the best he can be? Instill a strong work ethic, help him explore his interests in more depth. If he goes to Oxbridge or another good university, let it be because he deserves the place and not because you found the best way of playing the system.

@snaffoo my post was meant to highlight that anyone who was really determined could maximise their opportunities but that it would be a fairly ridiculous thing to do.

In that case yes, I agree. I find the whole focus on school education simply as a means of getting to whatever comes next incredibly depressing.

The obsession with Oxbridge stats is a bit mad, it should not be the goal of education.

There are simply more candidates than places with more state applicants every year, and all of them have the required grade to get in, so more people are going to lose out.

There is also a significant number of overseas students in private schools who are not included in the statistics. A quick check shows that 21% of undergrad at Oxford are international students, some of those would have come from private schools in the UK. (I don't have the stats on that)

A lot of private schools are also encouraging students to apply to overseas universities and some have American Uni application advisors. Private schools students are over represented at music colleges (I recall reading at Royal College of Music it was over 50%) which are not included in the Russell group.

@Lopilo
Actually I think statistically the best chance of getting into Oxbridge is private school education up to GCSE and then state for sixth form.
There was a thread a while back with a survey showing that these students had a 1 in 3 chance of an Oxbridge place versus 1 in 4 for applicants whose entire education was state.
Although Oxbridge tutors are aware of whether GCSEs were taken in a private school, if A-levels are from a state school, they still get to tick the ‘state school’ box for that student.
Possibly the most effective way to game the system? I know parents who have already done this (and it worked for quite a few of them) and a few more currently planning it (not me I hasten to add!)

www.varsity.co.uk/news/19783

This is the survey I mentioned in the previous post. Quite interesting I think

@Lopilo you can't really game Oxford admissions process in the way you've suggested. You need to get the same grades regardless of the school you attended unless you are actually disadvantaged and qualify for a foundation course (i.e. you've been in care, were a refugee etc).

@ChateauMargaux adjusting the denominator matters. Without A-levels you aren't getting into Oxbridge. The rate of admissions needs to be assessed against the potential admissions pool. Also, it also a numerator impact as a reasonably number of state school pupils join Independent school 6th forms.

@LondonMum81 I wasn’t actually being serious. I was just summarising some of the rather dubious advice and information provided by previous posters. I love the school my DC go to and I am not worried about their university options.

Tiffin is like going to a private school really as they go way back in terms of getting kids into Oxbridge

@LondonMum81 .. the numbers do not support your assertion that many students join for 6th form. The total number of student privately educated age 18/ 19 is not significantly different from those in private education at age 16/17.

And while the majority of students who attend university have A levels, it is not the only route of entry.

The major difference between the use of the 7% figure and the attempt to use other basis of comparison are the first is comparing the entite population aged 18 with those who have been privately educated while the use of 'those studying A levels' and 'those getting AAA+ at A level is an attempt to undermine the narrative that on a population level, a private education gives you more chance of getting into the top universities.

Whether you are of the opinion that all peole deserve fair and equal access to top universities or you believe that it is fair to buy your way into this advantage, informs how you read this narrative.

@ChateauMargaux The major difference between the use of the 7% figure and the attempt to use other basis of comparison are the first is comparing the entite population aged 18 with those who have been privately educated while the use of 'those studying A levels' and 'those getting AAA+ at A level is an attempt to undermine the narrative that on a population level, a private education gives you more chance of getting into the top universities.

But isn't it a valid point that the true narrative is "IF you have the good fortune to be selected for a private education, then you have a much higher probability of getting A A A at A-level, which in turn puts you into the pool for top universities"

University admissions people are not responsible for who makes it into the selection pool they can choose from. Statistically you can only claim bias if there's a significant difference between the profile of the total selection pool and the profile of the group selected.

Of course it's unfair that some kids get a better education than others but the blame in my book goes to the chronic underfunding of state schools who are failing to get the kids who would have been capable of A A A to reach that level. I don't blame the schools, they are doing the best they can on less than half the funding per-pupil that typical private schools get. Doubling the state education budget would be the first step towards making it fair but the group mind of "the taxpayer" doesn't want to fund that.

@ChateauMargaux about 11,000 state school pupils join independent school for 6th forms. I never said it was huge but its part of the impact.

www.isc.co.uk/media/8421/isc_census_2022_final-v2.pdf

I also didn't say university requires A-levels I said Oxbridge does which is true. The discussion is around admission bias regarding independent schools for Oxbridge.

It's illogical to suggest that independent school students who make up circa 18% of A-level students should only in a make up 7% of Oxbridge admissions for there to be no admission bias. Blind random selection picking names out of a hat for all A-level students would statistically result in 18% independent students admitted.

That's obviously before you actually take grades into account...

Now why independent students make up a larger share of A-level students is a socio-political question but its nothing to do with Oxbridge bias in admissions.

@FaazoHuyzeoSix ....

'if you have the good fortune to be selected by private for a private education'....
hmm ...

'the group mind of "the taxpayer" - we already know that the halls of power and decision makers as well as those most influencial in the media are largely drawn from that group who has had a the 'good fortune'... to be able to choose this route.

Guy Shrubshole writing in his book ' Who owns England' has some interesting perspectives on the tax structures, parliamentary decision making, land ownership and power.

But perhaps this is not the thread to discuss how this privilege comes about and whether the perpetuation of this privilege is desirable in our wider society.

@LondonMum81 These are the data from the report you linked...

Age on 31st August 2021. Total
0-2. 12,023
3 16,151
4 20,651
5 21,952
6 23,221
7 26,026
8 28,509
9 31,733
10 34,634
11 44,532
12 45,162
13 49,102
14 50,114
15 49,766
16 44,317
17 41,690
18 4,050
19 683
Total 544,316

Based on this alone - there are not significantly more students in private school in sixth form than at GCSE age.

Over on the Higher Education board there’s a long running Oxbridge Rejects Thread to offer support for the very bright kids that didn’t get in. The margins seem small especially since some reapply the year after and get in. The point being everyone ends up somewhere regardless of school or college.

Durham, St Andrews, Bristol and the London Unis seem the posh parent Unis of choice. But equally all of those have a majority of state school kids. So choice of private school really doesn’t matter as much as you think.

@ChateauMargaux - you can't look at the data like that as cohort sizes vary for a number of reasons. On the following page you'll see the in year movement for each grade level which for 6th form is 11,000 as I said in my previous post.

Anyway, the point is that 18% is the figure to use when discussing admission bias for the reasons already stated. It captures the changes in the numerator and the denominator associated with potential Oxbridge applicant pool before adjusting for grades.

The rejection email my son got from Cambridge last year said that applicants who got offers tended to be mentioned by teachers as standing out as best in cohort at a subject. I would have thought that would be harder achieve at a super selective than a private school in that private school=bright+20k a year to spare, whereas super selective s =just bright.

The truth is that the number of applicants has more than doubled, the number of places has not changed. It may look like it’s unfair, it’s simply the bar is much much higher for our children than it was for the previous generation:

Oxford 1990 10k applicants 3.1k admitted
Oxford 2022 24k applying, 3.2k admitted

The rejection email my son got from Cambridge last year said that applicants who got offers tended to be mentioned by teachers as standing out as best in cohort at a subject.

It's very much subject-dependent. Because of assessed grades, I know that my child was ranked about 9th in cohort, but that was for MFL. Engineering would be a very different matter.

The increase in applications is primarily more state school students with the grades to get in are applying so the competition has gone up considerably for private school pupils.

Even when taking into account independent schools' disproportionate share of the top grades, private school pupils are still somewhat overrepresented.

I can't see that there is any negative bias against private school pupils; just more competition from qualified state applicants.

It’s always been a lottery remember my dad tearing his hair out about the amazing A level candidates of his that were turned down. Honestly other universities are available!

A family member who is a personal tutor at one of the Oxford colleges every year has a small group that in her opinion would have been far happier elsewhere.

Instead of trying to game the system, why not just focus on your own child and supporting him to be the best he can be

When does supporting your child end and gaming the system start? Extracurricular activities; work experience opportunities through friends and family; tutoring (either by family member or externally); buying workbooks to support learning done in school; watching and discussing documentaries; buying in catchment before child is born or after they are born; SAHPs, part-time parents & FT parents who make their choices in the best interests of their child and family; save school fees for tutoring etc.
Every parent who cares tries to support their child in some way to do well and is effectively creating an advantage for I them over another who didn’t have support in that particular area. It maybe intentional or others but it’s naive to think that it’s only the “7%” who are gaming the system.

@365sleepstogo none of the things you said are gaming the system. Private school isn't gaming the system either.

Gaming the system is sending your child to a terrible school outside you neighbourhood to in a misguided attempt to improve their odds at university admissions.

All the things you mentioned are actually of intrinsic benefit (enrichment, enhanced education outcomes etc).

Fair enough - I have seen that phrase used many times about parents moving into catchment areas, paying for private schools, getting their child baptised etc