SW London grammar and private year 7 entry 2024 - Continued

[11plus24]

New thread continued here

In cases where there is a primary school attached - 50% of the incoming children are state, so in practice it means 1/3 from their own prep, 1/3 state and 1/3 from other preps.

Alleyn's and Jags clearly said it was a 1/3, 1/3, 1/3 split on their open days.

@12345change I agree with you that 50% sounds high, and it can't be a quota since it is unlikely that so many state school applicants score high enough every year. But I do agree that, bursaries aside, top indie schools try to admit as many state schools applicants as possible (assuming they score high enough). Anecdotally, I know of several state schools pupils trying for just one top indie (e.g. Westminster or City) thinking that it will worth the financial sacrifice if they get in. If I had to guess, I'd say it's probably around 30% rather than 50% in some of these schools. But if you add the bursaries (City aims to raise the number of bursaries to 20%) then you might get close to 50%.

I can tell you many indie has more than or around 50% intakes from the state school. I cannot say they have strict quota in their admission process, it is just a fact where they end up with. These numbers are from the headmasters on their open days.

Note that even some schools may want to set a target of 50% state school intake at 11+, the actual composition of state school students in year 7 is much lower, because of the junior schools or other entrance years such as 10+ or 8+. Most private schools in London have a state school percentage of 15%-30%, with only a few of the most socially diverse ones reaching the high 30% or low 40%.

Latymer Upper has about 50% state intake at 11 plus and over 20% of all students receive some kind of bursary. This has been the case for many years.

Its a non-issue really because on day 1, they will all be 'private school pupils' regardless. 😆

You’re right. Also I’m not sure being from a state primary necessarily means more socially and economically diverse…

This point is spot on. The idea that all prep school kids are rich and privileged and all state primary kids are poor and underprivileged is such nonsense. If you can afford to send your child to a private London day school without a bursary (or even with a small bursary) you're certainly not poor, wherever your child went to primary school.

This is certainly true. Most of the students who can afford private school are somehow privileged.

While it is not a definitive indication of social diversity, I think the state school intake percentage difference between these schools - such as LU as above, perhaps closer to 40%, vs some other schools that are closer to 10-20% - does give some insight into the composition and characteristics of the student populations.

We were told the same thing, but that it usually ends up being around 50%

At the schools we visited, one said they had no idea of the breakdown, the other said it "ended up at roughly 50%" - following on that this was organically obtained.

Neither seemed to dwell on the distinction too much. We got the sense that their view was that kids are kids, each judged on their own merits.

This sounded very plausible: neither state nor prep school kids are homogenous masses, so it's hard to see what a quota would achieve, if one were ever used.

However, I would think that all schools want to draw from the widest possible pool: If all pupils are coming from one sector, or even from one school, then reasonably they could suspect that they are not attracting as strong a talent pool as they could into the application process. But encouraging a good funnel of candidates is different from applying a quota at point of admission.

No doubt, the distinction between privileged vs underprivileged cuts across that between state vs independent. But only in this sense: Some state school pupils are as privileged as some private school pupils (ditto for underprivileged). But average numbers matter. It is unlikely that many oligarchs (of which there are many in London) will send their kids to state rather than a fancy prep. Likewise, it's unlikely that most low middle class parents can afford private all the way through. On average, there is more wealth in private primaries than state primaries. So the diversity top indie schools seek is not (only) a good mix of privileged and under-privileged pupils, but also a good mix of middle-class vs super-privileged kids.

My children went to state primary and are now in private secondary.

About 40% go to private from our state school every year. Many getting into Hampton / KGS / Kings / LEH / Guildford High etc etc.

The people who send their kids to certain state primary schools in Notting Hill (Fox, St Mary Abbots) Hammersmith (St Peters) Chiswick (Belmont, Grove Park) are often as wealthy, or more so, than the nearby private schools. I would say they are hardly offering any economic diversity to the private school cohort, but I am also not convinced they have any advantage when applying to super selectives.

I am not following. Are you disputing that on average, there is much more wealth in private primaries than in state primaries? Sure, some state primary school families are as rich as some private school families.

I think the vast majority of private school pupils whether they come from private or state primaries are wealthy. How you define wealth is always interesting and I find people with children in private schools often don’t consider themselves as wealthy… and yes there are different levels of wealthy I acknowledge that…but compared to how I grew up, many getting bursaries would be considered as wealthy by my parents.

I think apart from bursary students the level of wealth from state primary to private primary is not that great, in these affluent parts of London. Sadly, these state school offers are not going to kids at underperforming schools. Those are the kids that should be given special consideration.

Fox primary school has half of its students going to the state Holland Park school, and maybe a third going to private schools. This contrasts with the private prep school close by that sends 95% of its kids to private schools every year. Some parents in Fox primary who choose secondary schools are certainly wealthy, but I agree that on average the range will be different from the prep school nearby where most of the parents never think of state schools as an option from the start

Somewhere like LU, about 40 come up automatically from the prep school. Then it's roughly 50% from state schools, some of which will be excellent, some not so much (postcode lottery) and the other half from private schools. Some private schools prep very heavily for 11 plus - eg. Faulkner House or Bute. Other private primary schools are non-selective and don't do half this level of 11 plus prep. Some private prep schools are run by barking mad people and there is no advantage of being at these schools.

The reality is, in Sept, primary school will be over and done with and they will all be 'private school kids' once they enrol at LU. When they apply for uni, this is how their grades will be contextualised. Primary school is neither here nor there at this stage.

The exception would be those on full bursaries / part bursaries who, for the purposes of UCAS, may meet other contextualising criteria due to their address, family income, etc.

Emanuel targets 50% state, very open at the open day. They don’t necessarily get that in terms of children going but that is the aim.

State schools could be the faith primary schools, which has a selection process.
Also state schools with private partnerships such as The Fulham Bilingual, a unique partnership between Holy Cross Catholic Primary, a state English school and L'Ecole Marie D'Orliac, a French private school.

Are you implying that all state school kids are non fee paying? Most pay the fees for secondary but just didn’t go private for primary . A very small percentage will be part bursary or full bursary but not many. State school families don’t automatically = poor.

Not all and if you had read my other posts you would have seen I had said coming from a state primary doesn’t mean more socially and economically diverse…

I questions the % as I wondered if so many private secondary schools take half state half private what then is the point of private primaries etc. surely they would find themselves going out of business. It seems from what other posters have said 50% coming from state is an over exaggeration.

Alleyn's aim for a third from the junior school, a third from private prep schools and a third from state schools. Having had children in different school years, I would say that seems to be about what it is in reality.

It might help the discussion to distinguish between top private secondaries in London or other big cities (ie. about 30 or so schools), which receive so many applications, and the rest of the private sector. The top 20-30 private secondaries are targeted by people across the wealth spectrum, from families seeking a bursary to super-wealthy families that spare no expenses on tutoring. This small number of private schools, which are discussed on Mumsnet all the time, can afford to be more picky. And so they seek to have a diverse mix across many criteria (wealth, ethnicity, etc). Some of these top schools, which were mentioned already, openly aim for a certain percentage (30%-50%) of state school pupils as a reliable proxy to have a little bit more diversity. This is not of course the diversity of a standard state comprehensive but, comparatively speaking, a bit more diversity than that found on average in a prep school in Kensington or Hampstead. For example, these top 30 schools will attract low middle class families who make sacrifices to send their DC to private, only for secondary. But these families are unlikely to make this sacrifice for schools that are not at the very top academically. The situation will be very different in middle-to low ranking private secondaries, where the pull of applicants will be mainly affluent families that go private all the way through.

I don't think any school 'aim' for a specific quota of state school or prep school kids. the % we are all quoting are just the historic averages? They aren't genuinely going to turn down a better state school candidate just because they need to fulfil a prep school quota......