Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

British private schools - now just for the rich and foreigners

Announcements Posted on
    • 12 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fires)
    it reflects the pre-Oxbridge interview coaching, prepping and cultural training of those schools
    This.
    Whats wrong with this? Heck, if I was paying £26,000 a year for my kid to go to a private school, I'd expect this to be the case.
    They're paying a pretty hefty price for this, don't act like they're getting it for free.
    (Original post by Fires)
    it reflects the predispositions and selection criteria in use in Oxbridge.
    Not this.
    The high percentage of people who went to fee paying schools is because they had better preperation.

    Just some figures from 07-08...
    In 2007-8, Cambridge admitted 57% of its new undergraduates from state schools and Oxford 53.4%.
    from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/8622475.stm
    There clearly isn't a bias. Less than 50% are from fee paying schools. Furthermore, they're trying to get increase the numbers of state educated undergraduates.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Appeal to reason)

    There clearly isn't a bias. Less than 50% are from fee paying schools. Furthermore, they're trying to get increase the numbers of state educated undergraduates.
    I am doing Statistics at Uni enough to know that arguments can be stilted any which way, but OP is at least right about the disproportionate representation - only 8% of UK school attenders are at fee-paying schools, yet they make up, what, 48% of the Oxbridge intake? Clearly there is a bias, and a huge one, no matter what the underlying causes of that bias.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lyrical_lie)
    You should have seen my school, I don't think there was single person there who wasn't Scottish. Sure we had the Irish and Italian blood but everyone was very Scottish.
    You're saying the student population of your private school hasn't become 33% foreign students from Asia yet? :eek:
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aspiringlawstudent)
    The fees have to be high otherwise you won't be able to keep the riffraff out.
    Didn't work for me, did it?

    Plus they have academic filtering...
    • 12 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HelenOn)
    I am doing Statistics at Uni enough to know that arguments can be stilted any which way, but OP is at least right about the disproportionate representation - only 8% of UK school attenders are at fee-paying schools, yet they make up, what, 48% of the Oxbridge intake? Clearly there is a bias, and a huge one, no matter what the underlying causes of that bias.
    It couldn't possibly be because of their better preperation that they are more likely to get an offer, and then achieve that offer. :rolleyes:
    Nope, it has to be that they prefer people from fee paying schools. :lolwut:
    • 87 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lulubel)
    private schools are just better. they produce better graduates than state and so it goes without saying that most of the students at top unis will be drawn from private schools.

    state schools unfortunately have got worse since they got rid of selection.

    poor students with potential can no longer excel because they are kept back by the disruptive behaviour other students. the state schools are little better than zoos.

    if selection was brought back, then at least the poor people who are academically minded would be able to learn in an environment where they could excel -- thus increasing their chances of going to a top uni.
    So, where did you study then? I assure you that my state school was nothing like how you said they are
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Appeal to reason)
    It couldn't possibly be because of their better preperation that they are more likely to get an offer, and then achieve that offer. :rolleyes:
    Nope, it has to be that they prefer people from fee paying schools. :lolwut:
    That may be true, but it isn't what you said in your earlier post - you said there was no bias, eg, no statistical bias, whereas in fact the statistical bias could hardly be more significant, regardless of cause.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HelenOn)
    I am doing Statistics at Uni enough to know that arguments can be stilted any which way, but OP is at least right about the disproportionate representation - only 8% of UK school attenders are at fee-paying schools, yet they make up, what, 48% of the Oxbridge intake? Clearly there is a bias, and a huge one, no matter what the underlying causes of that bias.
    If you're doing stats than surely you should know that those percentages are not the whole picture and you can not make a valued judgement on just those alone.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    always goood to hear foreigners bringing cash into the place
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ah.meh)
    If you're doing stats than surely you should know that those percentages are not the whole picture and you can not make a valued judgement on just those alone.
    And I didn't - I was confirming that there is a huge statistical bias. Perhaps you don't know what a "statistical bias" is? It isn't a value thing - it's just a statement about the figures.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Calling for charitable status to be removed from private schools because they are becoming increasingly elitist makes no sense. Charitable status helps private schools keep their fees lower- without it, there would be huge fee increase across the board. This would make them more elitist by further reducing the number of people who can actually afford to educate their children at private school to the very, very top bracket of high earners.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Ops, obvs touched a nerve there!

    Firstly, you did. Secondly, don't presume things. That's were you went wrong in your first post. I never said it was a value thing, it was about how you interpreted your stats. As a stats student at uni level I thought you would have enough intelligence to understand that such limited data is really not very useful.
    • 13 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    What you must realize is that at public schools, it isn't the didactic paradigm, it's confabulating and invoking a rapport with the fellow pupils.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I have always gone to a private (public) school and I intend to send my children to public school. But it is not full of snobby idiots, I have met some of the kindest, most intelligent people there, and I have loved it.

    There are many bursuries and scholarships out there for families with gifted children who cannot afford the fees, so its not just for the rich and foreigners.

    All public schools have to give out a percentage of bursuries and scholarships so its not true
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ah.meh)
    Ops, obvs touched a nerve there!

    Firstly, you did. Secondly, don't presume things. That's were you went wrong in your first post. I never said it was a value thing, it was about how you interpreted your stats. As a stats student at uni level I thought you would have enough intelligence to understand that such limited data is really not very useful.
    You aren't touching any nerves, I didn't make a value judgement and I wasn't wrong. The data set isn't limited in any way. It's just a simple and very large fact that 8% of the school population supplies nearly 50% of Oxbridge entrance. The interpretation of that fact is no doubt very complex but I wasn't saying it wasn't.
    • Thread Starter
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tsveta)

    There are many bursuries and scholarships out there for families with gifted children who cannot afford the fees, so its not just for the rich and foreigners.

    All public schools have to give out a percentage of bursuries and scholarships so its not true
    The Sutton Trust reports some research they commissioned that shows big variations in bursary levels with much lower percentages towards the "top" of the fee-paying elite schools.

    http://www.suttontrust.com/news/news...-on-bursaries/

    These are the highlights from the report:

    • More than a quarter of schools offer less than 5% of their total income in fee remissions (scholarships and bursaries), while another quarter offer more than 10%.

    • More prestigious schools tend to devote a lower proportion of their income to fee remissions: a school ranked 1-70 in The Times league table, for example, spends 4.3% of its income on financial aid; one ranked 211-280 devotes 7.2%.

    • Schools with higher incomes spend a lower proportion on bursaries: schools which devote 1-2% of their total income to bursaries have an average income of £10.4m; schools which devote 6-8% to bursaries have an average income of £8.2m.

    • Except for very small schools (which offer bursaries below 1% of income) the rate of bursary provision tends to decline with increasing school size and income.

    The report also explains that many private schools simply refuse to say what percentage of bursaries and scholarships they offer, thereby effectively reneging on the most basic condition of their charitable status.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HelenOn)
    You aren't touching any nerves, I didn't make a value judgement and I wasn't wrong. The data set isn't limited in any way. It's just a simple and very large fact that 8% of the school population supplies nearly 50% of Oxbridge entrance. The interpretation of that fact is no doubt very complex but I wasn't saying it wasn't.
    Meh, you bore me. boo hoo. you're just a very narrow minded person. I was saying that you seem to think in black and white, ignoring the shades of grey. ok you 8% of the population is privately educated, 50% of oxbridge students were privately educated. so? what about the percentages of those who apply, how many were privately or similarly state educated. what about those who were in state education till 6th form? they have had a majority of state education and a tiny part of private, yet they are counted as totally privately educated. I really think the main point is of those who are apply, i believe (dont quote me on this) that generally the oxbridge has similar percentages of attendees as those who apply.


    Edit: negged! ooooh how you make me weep.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Joinedup)
    I didn't neg you..., but 20 grand is just a tad under the AVERAGE wage.

    I think this might in some way be annoying to people.
    Okey dokey, but wages for a lawyer (solicitor not barrister) in peterborough is a lot lower than wages for a lawyer in london therefore the majority of my mother's wages do actually go to school fees (as she earns under 40k a year when you take off tax)... meaning lets say another persons mother earns 20k a year, is actually in a sense better off than we are(at least in my mind thats how it is) because their education is free and there are actually some pretty good state schools (that they could attend) out there that could equal academically my school. They are just a bit harder to get into. Im sorry if anyone found my message a tad annoying, but its not like i said we are struggling and my parents are both on six figure salaries.
    • 10 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cognito_08)
    Hasn't it always been the case though?

    I mean Private Schools have always been (on the whole) for richer families... like, am I missing something?
    especially since one of Bliar's first actions was to remove the Assisted Places Scheme ... in line with the standard practice of Bliar and Winky's administration of increasing centralisation and providing jobs to ensure ideological adherance and that success in all aspects of public sector activity were measured solely by arbitrary metrics
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cognito_08)
    Hasn't it always been the case though?

    I mean Private Schools have always been (on the whole) for richer families... like, am I missing something?
    exactly what I said.

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: May 16, 2012
New on TSR

Find out what year 11 is like

Going into year 11? Students who did it last year share what to expect.

Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.