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 )

@Cosyblankethottea

Are you OK with Oxbridge places going to the DC of rich Chinese, Middle Eastern and Indian parents?

I don't have a problem with overseas students, they got their places through a rigorous process. Having very bright young people from all over the world coming to Oxbridge is a good thing, that is how our universities stay competitive on a global scale. Oxbridge are successful because they attract the brightest people.

And why single out those nationalities? So Americans are ok? Americans make up the largest number at Oxford. Why the assumption that those foreign students simply buy their places with dodgy money? Many of those students are top students from their own country, and are on scholarships or government funded, they are intelligent and hardworking.

British students also study at universities around the world, I don't see any outcry for that.

What's next? UK universities for UK students? UK lecturers for UK universities?

Exactly. Some very racist language here.

@Sigma33 if it can be done in a way that makes sense then yes. Parents with resources whether in state or private have an advantage so it’s not just about sector but socio-economics more broadly.

Its really about coming up with a way to take the entire picture into account and assess true potential.

Oxbridge has a way to go on this. Until they remove the underperformance of privately educated students they are falling short.

Your state school sounds terrific and most medics I imagine went to state school. I’m talking about gifted children not bright. There will of course be some state schools that are better or equal to some private schools but UCL research has shown controlling for all other factors including background and GCSE grades, independent schools produce higher A-level grades than state schools. on average independent schools are better academically and can have more resources for differentiation for the most able.

@LondonGirl83 how patronising! You imply that our state schools are good enough for my merely bright children but not good enough to challenge all those "gifted" children in the private sector 😂. My DS scored 140 and my daughter 141 in CATS. My DS also scored in the top 2% nationally in his clinical entrance exam and my daughter has just scored in the top 1%. My son achieved all A stars at A level and my daughter is predicted and on track for the same. They have been on "gifted" registers but I detest that term. However, I think it is safe to say that they are more able than most in the private sector and they have been happy and challenged in their state schools - without a tutor in sight.

And as for your comment that you imagine most doctors come from state schools 🙄 'Imagine' is an apt description. I thought it was common knowledge that the medical profession has generally been the domain of the privately educated. Thankfully things are changing but there is still some way to go.

And when you say 'differentiation for the most able', I think you really mean differentiation for the most wealthy.

Exactly.

@opoponax bring offended if you want to but I’ve never said any such thing.

I said that state schools turning out medics doesn’t mean they have the financial resources the challenge the most academically able. I’m sure there are exception state schools that do but in general that’s not typically feasible with existing budgets.

Numerically there will obviously be more gifted students in state schools than in private education and there parents can find it quite difficult.

I should say I’m state educated from a different country so maybe that will help you stop projecting your preconceived prejudiced on me that I really don’t have.

Pretending that state schools have the resources to do everything private schools do while also saying private schools have unfair academic advantages is a contraction! You can’t make both arguments at the same time.

As an aside, 76 percent of students studying medicine at Oxford are from state schools… All of these things are very different than they used to be…

Sorry for all they typos!

@opoponax be offended if you want to but I’ve never said any such thing.

I said that state schools turning out medics doesn’t mean they have the financial resources to challenge the most academically able. I’m sure there are exceptional state schools that do so within existing financial constraints but in general that’s not typically feasible with existing budgets.

Numerically there will obviously be more gifted students in state schools than in private education and their parents can find it quite difficult to get the support they need. Not all private schools are good at stretching gifted children either but this can be part of the reason parents opt for private.

I should say I’m state educated from a different country so maybe that will help you stop projecting your preconceived prejudices on me that I really don’t have.

Pretending that state schools have the resources to do everything private schools do while also saying private schools have unfair academic advantages is a contraction! You can’t make both arguments at the same time.

As an aside, 76 percent of students studying medicine at Oxford are from state schools… All of these things are very different than they used to be.

So yes, they are jolly well taking our places.

Do you work in a senior academic position in a UK university @Cosyblankethottea ? Because otherwise, you’re talking out of your arse.

although, have it your way and let’s see how many UK undergrads (and their parents) are prepared to pay the actual cost of a place in a degree programme. The real cost for some degrees is between double and triple the UK student tuition fee.

I suppose we could call it the “racist surcharge.”

Most schools of all types are not set up to deal with genuinely gifted children. In many ways, the fact that more of your time is your own in the state sector with its generally shorter days can be advantageous to an academically gifted, self-motivated student. The idea that an external force has to provide challenge beyond recognition, encouragement and signposting is not always entirely healthy or essential. Not quite the same if the gift is, eg, in a sport or resource-heavy artistic or musical field, but giftedness in the purely academic sphere can often be supported surprisingly cheaply.

@opoponax there is a lot of research on why gifted children need academic challenge and this is pretty universally accepted including in government policy. It’s just not funded properly.

Let’s just agree to disagree though as my point was only this is one of the reasons parents choose academically super selective schools. A poster said she didn’t understand why parents made that choice so I was simply clarifying one of the motivations. It wasn’t to make any bigger point than that.

Out of interest, the Telegraph has just published its league table of the schools getting the highest percentage of Oxbridge offers. Second on the list was Raffles in Singapore (first was Westminster, as always). The sixth school on the list was also in Singapore.

Of course very intelligent children need academic challenge. It goes without saying. That's what excellent teaching can provide, maybe with a few tweaks to the normal provision, but it's not that resource-intensive.
For example, at primary from about year 2 my DS was taken out of class during maths lessons along with one other child in his year group of similar ability and they worked together on advanced maths problems. That was a simple tweak and they worked mainly on their own but it kept maths fun for him. At secondary he was encouraged to do olympiads.There was a handful of other DC that he could bounce off in his maths set and that kept the challenge fun and dynamic. The other DC in that little group have all gone on to do Oxbridge maths degrees and I don't think they would have got there if they hadn't been challenging themselves, engaging and pushing boundaries in their subject. I think there is a danger of reading too much into statistics and stated government policy and it is better to consider what actually happens in real life in decent schools. As a PP said, pure academic challenge for very intelligent children really doesn't have to be all that resource-intensive. What is more challenging is if their 'gift' doesn't fit into a box so easily and that can be difficult to channel, irrespective of resources and education sector.

Yes, many non-selective state schools are (shock!) meeting the needs of the academically able as well as those that struggle.

Of course gifted and academically able children need academic challenge. Super selective schools are simply not stuffed full of gifted children though, they are stuffed full of academically very able children. The true outliers remain outliers even in these schools, and such children are not automatically better catered for in a super-selective school than in any other. You may therefore find the situation where the parents of the most gifted children in a school are perfectly happy with the school’s provision, whereas the parents of some of the academically very able feel their children are not sufficiently well catered for. I think, therefore, @LondonGirl83 and @opoponax are to a certain extent talking at cross purposes.

@Walkaround i never send independent schools are stuffed with gifted children. I said if you have a gifted child the resources are there to provide for greater differentiation and special academic programming (in some but not all independent schools) than the state sector can typically provide due to budget constraints which is part of why some parents choose them. You are entirely right about talking at cross purposes with opoponax.

@opoponax You keep bringing up your school but surely you realise you can’t generalise your experience to the entire state sector.

There is a difference in academic provision and attainment due to the resource gap between the private and sectors that is well documented.

I’ve already stated that there are individual state schools that are better than or equal to specific private schools on any number of metrics. But on average the facts are what they are regarding state and private school provision.

My arguments were never about race. They are about “source of funds” coming from certain countries. It is about the traceability of those funds and what checks are actually done and not done by the universities themselves. It about the fact that contextualisation is much harder/sometimes impossible when it comes to international students.
It is about the concept that it should not be easier for a foreign born bright child with rich parents to get a place at Oxbridge over a UK born child (whatever their parents income).
It is an actual issue.

@WindyHedges “although, have it your way and let’s see how many UK undergrads (and their parents) are prepared to pay the actual cost of a place in a degree programme. The real cost for some degrees is between double and triple the UK student tuition fee.”
I suppose we could call it the “racist surcharge.”

Using the race card to demean someone else’s argument is a cheap shot. The university’s do get funding from us British tax payers. We have a legitimate interest that the places should by and large go to our own children.

This is an argument about quotas. I am OK with 10 perhaps even max 15% at undergrad level. I am not OK with close to 25 per cent of undergrad places at Oxbridge going to international students. I have yet to research in detail the level at postgrad because there the funding and arguments are different.

As for medical degrees, yes, they cost a fortune in the UK for the universities. It is something that has to be dealt with. Some countries do indeed have residence requirements for medical students.

Why are international applicants allowed to apply to both Oxford and Cambridge, but domestic students may only apply to one? The big American uni's handle 40,000 applications per year. Oxford, for example, receives just 24,000 applications per year. Only 14,000 are from British students. If all the British students were allowed to apply to both schools, then the applicant pool would be 38,000...still less than Stanford/Harvard etc. I know the British system very much wants students to make their choice before applying, but it seems odd that domestic and international applicants are treated differently (I know international students pay a higher tuition). I just thought it would be nice to treat all applicants equally, either everyone can apply to both schools, or nobody can apply to both.

www.ox.ac.uk/about/facts-and-figures/admissions-statistics/undergraduate-students/current/overall-numbers

Our local 6th Form college is one of the top 6th forms in the country and folk here complain about kids switching from private schools at Yr12 just to go there.

I'd also like to say that not all private schools are equal. Here there are 2 outstanding ones and several also rans.

My DS spent a few primary aged years in a prep school and it simply wasn’t worth the money. We chiefly ended up the because it was simpler to defer a year in private system and he was very prem. I felt originality was stifled and compliance was over promoted.

@Cosyblankethottea

In my experience, if someone cannot justify their argument without dismissing someone as pulling a 'race card' they've lost said argument.
I teach at university and have been involved with universities for many years. The course I teach to undergrads requires top A levels,

International students aren't taking the place of UK students, they are ensuring we survive, it’s that simple.
explore-education-statistics.service.gov.uk/find-statistics/national-pupil-projections
It’s common knowledge in universities (amongst academics) we are heading for a dearth in supply of new students in the UK, despite what the Daily Mail report of easy A Levels and bumper numbers going to university, the actual number of 18-year-olds is shrinking, we are due a surge, but overall, as the .gov figures suggest, universities will struggle to fill lecture halls.
20-25% international students are normal numbers in top universities, be they Oxford, Cam or Durham. It’s the same abroad - Harvard has the same number of international students.
These international students bring brilliant minds to the university, and guess what, that's our business- bringing brilliant minds together.
The grad student situation is dire in the UK, simply we don't have the numbers of UK grads wanting to take up postgrad study, Research is the lifeblood of universities, and research demands the best minds, wherever they come from. We frankly don't care where they come from as the university benefits from their research and in turn the world. We don't care about jingoistic bullshit and leave those concerns for lesser minds.
The irony of the madness of voting for Brexit has meant the UK Research Council now funds bright students from across the world to come here to study for their PhD's, that wasn't the case before Brexit. They used to fund only UK nationals and EU citizens. Now the gifted UK student competes for PhD funding (and only the best need apply) with the gifted students from China, the US and Australia.

@Cosyblankethottea If you want us to reduce the number of international students, we need UK students to have their fees funded, like many other EU countries, we need the return of non-repayable means tested grants, not loans and universities need more aggressive outreach to working class students

@fundogwalker

The big US universities have an applicant pool of 300 million US citizens and are geared for big numbers, in the UK we are not.

23 thousand + students applied to Oxford last year, if all the students who applied to Cambridge also applied, that number effectively doubles, that's double the interviews, double the processing for each university. And what would be the point if the respective universities can only take the same numbers they presently can take?? It would only make sense if each university doubled its size, which would cost many many millions, massive recruitment and building a new campus for the extra students.
Only unis like Manchester receives anything like those numbers (above 40 thousand) and Manchester is huge

I love the dynamic of the super bright child from a modest background making it. Girl in the year above dd1 is super bright. She is being mentored by an Oxford college. She comes from a single parent household her mum is a cleaner and they live in the rougher part of town. Superstar..

So people have a go at state students having more share of the pie, then international students also blamed for it.

Oxford has stated it doesn't have a quota system for nationalities, they are looking at abilities. Other countries have very clever people too, we should be happy that they are applying, so the top universities have a bigger pool to choose from, and that our young people are competing and mixing with the best in the world. It plays a big part in the UK staying relevant globally.

At university level, esp the elite ones it is not about general education of the public, it is getting the best students or you start the downward spiral. The names and buildings themselves don't do anything, it is the people.

As for the question about paying taxes, that is why the British students pay home fees, and the overseas students pay the full cost, the uni I went to (years ago) charge £35k/yr for foreign students last time I checked.

Many countries around the world have families busting their guts to send their kids to UK universities because they believe in the quality (not always value for money). There are also many wealthy people all over the world who can afford the fees, much like the British families paying for private school fees or going to US universities. I don't understand the source of funds issue, so students from certain countries are deemed dodgy, do we run background check on UK students too? It is not the case students are bringing in gold bars or suitcases of cash to pay fees.

The international applicants probably already apply to both in most cases. The doubling would not be of the 24,000, it would most likely be of the 14,000 domestic students. So, 24,000 goes to 38,000, not 48,000. And not every domestic applicant would apply to both schools.

I agree @MsTSwift. The girl is clearly a true outlier and it is great that she is being supported properly. More generally speaking, I think the trouble is that some parents can fall for the PR that is peddled that very academic children need some kind of special treatment to flourish. The reality is that most of those children may be very academically able but they are just in the top band of normal and can be challenged to fulfil their potential in a good school (whatever sector) with good teachers and supportive parents. True outliers (like the girl you mentioned) are like hen's teeth and it is much more of a challenge to serve their needs. I only know one DC like this and he was doing University maths by himself at nine. His parents weren't at all pushy but he was driving his own progress at breakneck speed. His schools have tried their best but the truth is that he is beyond them. He has also been supported by an Oxford college which improved things a lot. I think he is on the genius scale. His parents are both very bright but within normal parameters. His mum says it is really difficult and no school really works for him. She has another child with SEN and she says there are very strong parallels in trying to fit him into a normal education system and keep a degree of normality for him.

“Oxford has stated it doesn't have a quota system for nationalities, they are looking at abilities. Other countries have very clever people too, we should be happy that they are applying, so the top universities have a bigger pool to choose from, and that our young people are competing and mixing with the best in the world. It plays a big part in the UK staying relevant globally.

At university level, esp the elite ones it is not about general education of the public, it is getting the best students or you start the downward spiral.”

Sorry I just do not agree with that. We have enough very bright students with very high IQs in this country. In some cases, they haven’t quite fulfilled their potential due to the education they have received previously. We owe these kids a chance. We cannot just go shopping abroad. That is elitism.

I do not see how the Torie government not funding universities should have anything to do on a principle level, with the prospects of a bright poor UK resident child.

It is the easiest way for the elite unis to recruit bright students who pay high fees abroad (often having experienced a top education there vs a more mediocre state education available here). However, it is not in the best interests of our country. It is in the best interests of the uni itself, nothing more.