This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- Social class prejudice and private schools in Britain
- A level self study
- Fitting in at Exeter
- Doing AQA computer science a-levels privately NEA
- Online Courses
- Is grammar school actually better?
- Oxford Biochemistry / Biology
- Worth applying to Trinity as a state comprehensive student
- University of Exeter REAL review: WARNING - POSH
- ✎Starting Early: GYG Study Blog of Y9 Student📖
- Moved from the UK to Turkey
- comp sci, maths, physics, further maths?
- Anyone doing a Review of Moderation?
- Should I take comp sci or Politics for A level?
- Accounting/CompSci Year 10 Work Experience
- Accounting/CompSci Year 10 Work Experience
- Accounting/CompSci Year 10 Work Experience
- Accounting/CompSci Year 10 Work Experience
- Computer
- The “middle class” attitude of and universities
Comp School/Private School
I know there are numerous threads on this but I'm still a bit confused on the topic.
Student A goes to an average comprehensive school with an average A- Level point score of 800. He/She gets 4 A's in AS and is set for 3 A's at A Level.
Student B goes to an top-performing private school with an average A- Level point score of 1150. He/She gets 4 A's in AS and is set for 3 A's at A Level.
Which, if any, would get an advantage when applying to oxford/cambridge because of their schools
Student A goes to an average comprehensive school with an average A- Level point score of 800. He/She gets 4 A's in AS and is set for 3 A's at A Level.
Student B goes to an top-performing private school with an average A- Level point score of 1150. He/She gets 4 A's in AS and is set for 3 A's at A Level.
Which, if any, would get an advantage when applying to oxford/cambridge because of their schools
Scroll to see replies
I'm not sure how an average A-level point score is calculated. Cambridge look at your UMS points (at least they used to I'm not sure if they do this year with the abolition of the CAF) but Oxford do not, and never have. Thus, the grades are what are important and as in this case they are equal.
To be fair, the vast bulk of Oxbridge applicants will have taken 5\4 AS grades and achieved A grades and are predicted 3/4 A grades at A-level.
To me both candidates stand a fairly equal chance. However, one should remember grades make up but one part of the application. Tutors will weigh up aptitude exam performance, the quality of written work, personal statement quality, and interview performance to come to a conclusion.
To be fair, the vast bulk of Oxbridge applicants will have taken 5\4 AS grades and achieved A grades and are predicted 3/4 A grades at A-level.
To me both candidates stand a fairly equal chance. However, one should remember grades make up but one part of the application. Tutors will weigh up aptitude exam performance, the quality of written work, personal statement quality, and interview performance to come to a conclusion.
It's a meaningless question. Both would be called to interview and assessed largely on their performance there.
They say it makes no difference about whether you go to a comprehensive of private school.
This is B*******! Why would you spend £60,000 on your kids education if it made no difference? Also you simply can not deny that there is a certain prestige about going to a fee paying high performing school - people will assume you've had a better education (of course because you have!)
I go to a good comprehensive school and our university admissions tutor is always telling us that it will be harder for us to get in to Oxbridge simply because we have not paid for our education.
Personally i think private education is morally abhorrent... but that's just my opinion!
This is B*******! Why would you spend £60,000 on your kids education if it made no difference? Also you simply can not deny that there is a certain prestige about going to a fee paying high performing school - people will assume you've had a better education (of course because you have!)
I go to a good comprehensive school and our university admissions tutor is always telling us that it will be harder for us to get in to Oxbridge simply because we have not paid for our education.
Personally i think private education is morally abhorrent... but that's just my opinion!
Amy***
They say it makes no difference about whether you go to a comprehensive of private school.
This is B*******! Why would you spend £60,000 on your kids education if it made no difference? Also you simply can not deny that there is a certain prestige about going to a fee paying high performing school - people will assume you've had a better education (of course because you have!)
I go to a good comprehensive school and our university admissions tutor is always telling us that it will be harder for us to get in to Oxbridge simply because we have not paid for our education.
Personally i think private education is morally abhorrent... but that's just my opinion!
This is B*******! Why would you spend £60,000 on your kids education if it made no difference? Also you simply can not deny that there is a certain prestige about going to a fee paying high performing school - people will assume you've had a better education (of course because you have!)
I go to a good comprehensive school and our university admissions tutor is always telling us that it will be harder for us to get in to Oxbridge simply because we have not paid for our education.
Personally i think private education is morally abhorrent... but that's just my opinion!
Oxford tutors will be able to see whether you've had a better education - through your GCSEs, ASes, predictions, submitted work and aptitude tests. They won't have to assume anything. An AAA candidate from Eton and an AAA candidate from a standard comprehensive are equal in the tutors' eyes, and if not, there'll be a bias towards the comprehensive pupil (who was presumably spoonfed less for his grades).
There are advantages to private schooling, but in terms of it being easier to get a handful of A*s and the three As, and encouragement with the Oxford process, rather than simple bias.
- one of many comprehensive-schooled kids going to Oxford
AnubisX
I'm not sure how an average A-level point score is calculated.
I just scooped the scores from the BBC league tables/ Thanks for the reply. 800 is similar to my school and 1150 is a local private school
generalebriety
It's a meaningless question. Both would be called to interview and assessed largely on their performance there.
The reason I ask is because I've heard people talk about if you have gone to a bad school, cambridge will take this into account. Can anyone verify this?
I know that intiviews/personal statement carry a huge weighting in the decision but does the school the cabdidate come from have a weight in the decision?
Amy***
They say it makes no difference about whether you go to a comprehensive of private school.
This is B*******! Why would you spend £60,000 on your kids education if it made no difference? Also you simply can not deny that there is a certain prestige about going to a fee paying high performing school - people will assume you've had a better education (of course because you have!)
I go to a good comprehensive school and our university admissions tutor is always telling us that it will be harder for us to get in to Oxbridge simply because we have not paid for our education.
Personally i think private education is morally abhorrent... but that's just my opinion!
This is B*******! Why would you spend £60,000 on your kids education if it made no difference? Also you simply can not deny that there is a certain prestige about going to a fee paying high performing school - people will assume you've had a better education (of course because you have!)
I go to a good comprehensive school and our university admissions tutor is always telling us that it will be harder for us to get in to Oxbridge simply because we have not paid for our education.
Personally i think private education is morally abhorrent... but that's just my opinion!
The advantage that private education gives you, as far as I can observe, is one of social ability and confidence. You have the confidence that comes from knowing you've received a good education, the confidence to display and enhance your knowledge because you go to a school where you tend not to get mocked for being smart, and the confidence that comes from spending time around a lot of other confident, socially able people. This is the intellectual and social ability that gets you through an Oxbridge interview.
I would have loved the chance to go to a private school, or a top grammar school. I found that the biggest disadvantage I had in my first year at Oxford was a sense of crippling inferiority and lack of confidence (I got over it in the end
)
Well one would like to think it wouldn't really matter and that they'd both be called to interview and assessed on their performance there.
If you're looking at it pessimistically (from a state schooled students point of view) then they might be more likely to choose the privately educated kid because of the whole 'old school tie' thing.
If you're looking at it optimistically (from a state schooled students point of view) then they might prefer the state educated kid because they have achieved those grades even faced with what might be considerable disadvantages and without 'spoon-feeding'.
I have enough faith in humanity to presume that it wouldn't really be taken too much into account, unless the state school the student is coming from is truly dire.
If you're looking at it pessimistically (from a state schooled students point of view) then they might be more likely to choose the privately educated kid because of the whole 'old school tie' thing.
If you're looking at it optimistically (from a state schooled students point of view) then they might prefer the state educated kid because they have achieved those grades even faced with what might be considerable disadvantages and without 'spoon-feeding'.
I have enough faith in humanity to presume that it wouldn't really be taken too much into account, unless the state school the student is coming from is truly dire.
Robbie10538
I know there are numerous threads on this but I'm still a bit confused on the topic.
Student A goes to an average comprehensive school with an average A- Level point score of 800. He/She gets 4 A's in AS and is set for 3 A's at A Level.
Student B goes to an top-performing private school with an average A- Level point score of 1150. He/She gets 4 A's in AS and is set for 3 A's at A Level.
Which, if any, would get an advantage when applying to oxford/cambridge because of their schools
Student A goes to an average comprehensive school with an average A- Level point score of 800. He/She gets 4 A's in AS and is set for 3 A's at A Level.
Student B goes to an top-performing private school with an average A- Level point score of 1150. He/She gets 4 A's in AS and is set for 3 A's at A Level.
Which, if any, would get an advantage when applying to oxford/cambridge because of their schools
even stevens.
Robbie10538
The reason I ask is because I've heard people talk about if you have gone to a bad school, cambridge will take this into account. Can anyone verify this?
I know that intiviews/personal statement carry a huge weighting in the decision but does the school the cabdidate come from have a weight in the decision?
I know that intiviews/personal statement carry a huge weighting in the decision but does the school the cabdidate come from have a weight in the decision?
If the applicant had four As, I don't think it'd be an issue whatsoever.
In this case, it would depend on other factors.
Robbie10538
The reason I ask is because I've heard people talk about if you have gone to a bad school, cambridge will take this into account. Can anyone verify this?
Yes, it's true. But it's not done on schol 'name' -- rather, the school's statistics. Each school has a set of numbers (including number of pupils; % that get 5 A*-C GCSES; % that pass A Levels; % who go onto Higher Education, etc.), and it's this that's used. So try to distance yourself from the 'named school' kind of thoughts. It's the numbers that count.
For most people, this is irrelevant: the numbers indicate that your education has been okay, and your grades are whatever they are. For those who have attended below-average schools, though, these numbers come into play to even things out. I can't remember the stats exactly, but at the worst schools (and I mean worst) in the country, it might work out that a B at GCSE is considered equivalent to an A* (bearing in mind that at some of the worst schools, it's considered a miracle to get above a C -- let's get this into perspective!). So, someone coming from a badly-performing school with a string of Bs and Cs would be looked at very seriously in competition with someone from a very top school with a string of A*s. The B/C kid would have to prove him or herself in other ways (*particularly* the interview), but the admissions tutors would give it a serious look.
However, the vast majority of us, though we have varying educations, really do get an okay deal of it. Most of us are lucky. So, for most of us, this stuff doesn't matter very much. (That is, most of us should be in the position to get plenty of As at GCSE).
You should also note that this is absolutely NOT an exact science. None of the applications process is. Tha applications are looked at as a whole; and the student's ability is assessed as thoroughly and sympathetically as possible, whatever their background
Cambridge and Oxford 'see' more of an applicant than any other university -- that can only be a positive for everyone.
rkd
. An AAA candidate from Eton and an AAA candidate from a standard comprehensive are equal in the tutors' eyes, and if not, there'll be a bias towards the comprehensive pupil (who was presumably spoonfed less for his grades).
indeed
i would have thought that an AAA privately educated student and an AAA state-comp educated student, the latter would be seen as more favorably as they were less spoon-fed and indeed had to work harder for their grades*
*the working hard part is judging from my experience, i went to a state comp which had some ridiculous pass rate of 21% at GCSE and thus inevitably that reflected the level of education and teaching quality their
epitome
Yes, it's true. But it's not done on schol 'name' -- rather, the school's statistics. Each school has a set of numbers (including number of pupils; % that get 5 A*-C GCSES; % that pass A Levels; % who go onto Higher Education, etc.), and it's this that's used. So try to distance yourself from the 'named school' kind of thoughts. It's the numbers that count.
For most people, this is irrelevant: the numbers indicate that your education has been okay, and your grades are whatever they are. For those who have attended below-average schools, though, these numbers come into play to even things out. I can't remember the stats exactly, but at the worst schools (and I mean worst) in the country, it might work out that a B at GCSE is considered equivalent to an A* (bearing in mind that at some of the worst schools, it's considered a miracle to get above a C -- let's get this into perspective!). So, someone coming from a badly-performing school with a string of Bs and Cs would be looked at very seriously in competition with someone from a very top school with a string of A*s. The B/C kid would have to prove him or herself in other ways (*particularly* the interview), but the admissions tutors would give it a serious look.
However, the vast majority of us, though we have varying educations, really do get an okay deal of it. Most of us are lucky. So, for most of us, this stuff doesn't matter very much. (That is, most of us should be in the position to get plenty of As at GCSE).
You should also note that this is absolutely NOT an exact science. None of the applications process is. Tha applications are looked at as a whole; and the student's ability is assessed as thoroughly and sympathetically as possible, whatever their background
Cambridge and Oxford 'see' more of an applicant than any other university -- that can only be a positive for everyone.
For most people, this is irrelevant: the numbers indicate that your education has been okay, and your grades are whatever they are. For those who have attended below-average schools, though, these numbers come into play to even things out. I can't remember the stats exactly, but at the worst schools (and I mean worst) in the country, it might work out that a B at GCSE is considered equivalent to an A* (bearing in mind that at some of the worst schools, it's considered a miracle to get above a C -- let's get this into perspective!). So, someone coming from a badly-performing school with a string of Bs and Cs would be looked at very seriously in competition with someone from a very top school with a string of A*s. The B/C kid would have to prove him or herself in other ways (*particularly* the interview), but the admissions tutors would give it a serious look.
However, the vast majority of us, though we have varying educations, really do get an okay deal of it. Most of us are lucky. So, for most of us, this stuff doesn't matter very much. (That is, most of us should be in the position to get plenty of As at GCSE).
You should also note that this is absolutely NOT an exact science. None of the applications process is. Tha applications are looked at as a whole; and the student's ability is assessed as thoroughly and sympathetically as possible, whatever their background
Cambridge and Oxford 'see' more of an applicant than any other university -- that can only be a positive for everyone.
Thank You- That was very helpful
epitome
Yes, it's true. But it's not done on schol 'name' -- rather, the school's statistics. Each school has a set of numbers (including number of pupils; % that get 5 A*-C GCSES; % that pass A Levels; % who go onto Higher Education, etc.), and it's this that's used. So try to distance yourself from the 'named school' kind of thoughts. It's the numbers that count.
For most people, this is irrelevant: the numbers indicate that your education has been okay, and your grades are whatever they are. For those who have attended below-average schools, though, these numbers come into play to even things out. I can't remember the stats exactly, but at the worst schools (and I mean worst) in the country, it might work out that a B at GCSE is considered equivalent to an A* (bearing in mind that at some of the worst schools, it's considered a miracle to get above a C -- let's get this into perspective!). So, someone coming from a badly-performing school with a string of Bs and Cs would be looked at very seriously in competition with someone from a very top school with a string of A*s. The B/C kid would have to prove him or herself in other ways (*particularly* the interview), but the admissions tutors would give it a serious look.
However, the vast majority of us, though we have varying educations, really do get an okay deal of it. Most of us are lucky. So, for most of us, this stuff doesn't matter very much. (That is, most of us should be in the position to get plenty of As at GCSE).
You should also note that this is absolutely NOT an exact science. None of the applications process is. Tha applications are looked at as a whole; and the student's ability is assessed as thoroughly and sympathetically as possible, whatever their background
Cambridge and Oxford 'see' more of an applicant than any other university -- that can only be a positive for everyone.
For most people, this is irrelevant: the numbers indicate that your education has been okay, and your grades are whatever they are. For those who have attended below-average schools, though, these numbers come into play to even things out. I can't remember the stats exactly, but at the worst schools (and I mean worst) in the country, it might work out that a B at GCSE is considered equivalent to an A* (bearing in mind that at some of the worst schools, it's considered a miracle to get above a C -- let's get this into perspective!). So, someone coming from a badly-performing school with a string of Bs and Cs would be looked at very seriously in competition with someone from a very top school with a string of A*s. The B/C kid would have to prove him or herself in other ways (*particularly* the interview), but the admissions tutors would give it a serious look.
However, the vast majority of us, though we have varying educations, really do get an okay deal of it. Most of us are lucky. So, for most of us, this stuff doesn't matter very much. (That is, most of us should be in the position to get plenty of As at GCSE).
You should also note that this is absolutely NOT an exact science. None of the applications process is. Tha applications are looked at as a whole; and the student's ability is assessed as thoroughly and sympathetically as possible, whatever their background
Cambridge and Oxford 'see' more of an applicant than any other university -- that can only be a positive for everyone.
I'd quite like to add that while this is how it works in theory, I think frequently it simply doesn't pan out. Figures of university success etc. suggest that it isn't really the case.
Spike4848
I'd quite like to add that while this is how it works in theory, I think frequently it simply doesn't pan out. Figures of university success etc. suggest that it isn't really the case.
What do you mean by "university success"? That's a bit fluffy -- can you define what you mean, here?
Do you mean the fact that proportionately more fee-paying school students get in than non-fee-paying? If so, the word "proportionately" is crucial. The MAIN PROBLEM with admissions, when it comes to state school figures, is simply that not enough state school students apply. The numbers getting in from each sector are proportionate to the number of people applying (very roughly speaking, 4 applicants to each offer); the difference in fee-paying to non-fee-paying comes in primarily because a far great proportion of fee-paying students APPLY to Oxbridge in the first case (or university generally, actually, but people rarely bother to pick up this fact). If more people from one sector apply, more of them will get in. A proportionate fact.
It is a great problem that this goverment chooses to Oxbridge-bash (in the latest instance, David Blunkett, flailing around quite literarally not having a clue what he's talking about). The media, too. What they're not advertising is the fact that, largely, there is actually a great deal of fairness across the sectors -- it is only the extremes that are...extreme. So, for instance, Westminster school gets a very high percentage of people into Oxbridge each year; and the worst school in Britain is unlikely to send one person a decade. Of the schools in the very large middle section, a proportionately similar number of applicants get places. It's just that MORE (far more) fee-paying students, in relation to the number of places available, apply.
It really is very simple, but the government and media, for various reasons, choose to exploit Oxbridge negatively. If more state schols students apply, more will get in.
Seriously.
Oxbridge tend to just flip a coin to decide on candidates.
Related discussions
- Social class prejudice and private schools in Britain
- A level self study
- Fitting in at Exeter
- Doing AQA computer science a-levels privately NEA
- Online Courses
- Is grammar school actually better?
- Oxford Biochemistry / Biology
- Worth applying to Trinity as a state comprehensive student
- University of Exeter REAL review: WARNING - POSH
- ✎Starting Early: GYG Study Blog of Y9 Student📖
- Moved from the UK to Turkey
- comp sci, maths, physics, further maths?
- Anyone doing a Review of Moderation?
- Should I take comp sci or Politics for A level?
- Accounting/CompSci Year 10 Work Experience
- Accounting/CompSci Year 10 Work Experience
- Accounting/CompSci Year 10 Work Experience
- Accounting/CompSci Year 10 Work Experience
- Computer
- The “middle class” attitude of and universities
Latest
Trending
Last reply 8 hours ago
Weidenfeld Hoffmann Trust (WHT) Scholarship Notification (2024-2025)Last reply 11 hours ago
Oxbridge applicants for modern languages - 2025 entry (applying in 2024)Last reply 1 week ago
Will I get into Oxford with my GCSE results? - EngineeringLast reply 3 weeks ago
will 5 a levels give me a better chance at getting into oxford?Trending
Last reply 8 hours ago
Weidenfeld Hoffmann Trust (WHT) Scholarship Notification (2024-2025)Last reply 11 hours ago
Oxbridge applicants for modern languages - 2025 entry (applying in 2024)Last reply 1 week ago
Will I get into Oxford with my GCSE results? - EngineeringLast reply 3 weeks ago
will 5 a levels give me a better chance at getting into oxford?
