Turn on thread page Beta

University discrimination? watch

Announcements
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by luuucyx)
    not really, if youre capable of the grades then whats to say you wont achieve them?
    tbbbhhh, youre quite clearly state schooled and im private schooled so this is never gonna be eye to eye is it?
    i dunno, i just think that the people at state schools and private schools who do achieve the grades they need should be looked at equally and not be turned away just because of their school.

    1. Generally you're from a **** area that the **** school is at and most of the students are from that **** area...normally plagued with single parents, drugs and suicide...
    2. That is hard to overcome in general and with so much ******** going on it's hard to reach your grades.
    3. Students mess around more having not been taught the importance of education...generally don't give a **** (so learning in a class is hard if you want to learn)
    4. More bullying for 'being a nerd'...aka You try to work hard at school and you do your homework...yes it's common to be bullied if you do all your homework because you will be classed as a nerd.


    I should have and had the ability to get AAA from working extremely hard(luckily i came from a **** area but went to a decent ex-grammar school)...I got ABB because every-time i had exams...some ******** went wrong...Mum tried to kill herself, someone disappears, gets put in prison or dies or whatever.....During my final A level exams i was told to move out of home by my school.

    If it was not for my good school i would not be here now...yes i had the determination to get to uni(i'd stay after school and trek it an hour and half home a few times a week) but the school provided the help i needed. If i went to a local state school whereby 80% of the kids drop out of 6th form...i'd have been screwed....Put it this way...none of my mates from my area's primary school went to university if they went to the local school secondary....only three people from my primary school went to university, me being one and the other two being people that somehow managed to get into a half decent school.

    Going to a good school is detrimental mostly because of the difference in worth ethnic and the fact teachers are much, much better.

    I don't entirely agree with what labor are doing...but if i was deciding students to come to my university, i'd rather the ones that had to work their asses off to make a better lives for themselves and their families...then people who are half spoon fed.

    The main reason being their going to be more independent...thus more likely to do well at their degree when they don't have their parents pushing and pressuring them every step of the way....since a lot from lower backgrounds aren't used to having that anyway so makes no difference when it's not there .

    “But data shows that people often do better coming in with lower grades from a poorly-performing school then if they come in with higher grades from a well-performing school.”
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good Apollo)
    Indeed, and for the reason you mention above, it's more or less impossible to tell which students are the "spoon feeding" types and which are not (because almost nobody goes to both a public and state school). Therefore, it's pretty much impossible to consistently determine what someones potential is purely from their grades and school, which is why I'm proposing we use the students achievements as the sole basis for their consideration, because this is more likely to mean students with a greater potential get offered places. It's not perfect, some good students do slip through the net due to no fault of their own, but in my view fewer than if we place an emphasis on which school a person went to (as evidenced in the post you quoted).
    Well yes, that would work if indeed there were more people whose grades reflected their potential than there were people whose grades were a lot less than they were potentially capable of. However, in my experience at an average-ish state school, the latter is most definitely the larger of the two categories, so that wouldn't work, although I can easily see why you would disagree if in your experience it was the other way around.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Revolution is my Name)
    For ****'s sake, I type out half a page of reasons why they should be, and the only reason I get back in response is "No they shouldn't be". Stop wasting my time if you're not even going to argue properly.
    Let me present you with another analogy: the England cricket selectors decide to base their selections on one particular County game. One player scores 57 against the best team in the league, and another player scores 57 against the worst team in the league. Would you not agree that the first player should be selected over the second, as, if they were indeed of equal ability, then the second player should have scored significantly more than they did, given the weaker opposition and easier opportunities to score? Again, I fail to see how that situation is any different.
    because its cricket? and not peoples lives?
    its nothing like the same situation at all.
    they get the grades, they do the same work to get them.
    stop being so bitter and horrible towards people who have the money to pay for schools!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Holly Hiskey)
    I've been state schooled AND private schooled, and I agree- pupils at state school get a LOT more help as well as generally having smaller class sizes. Also, a few kids from the local private school came to my sixth form for various reasons and immediately started getting lower marks than they had been getting at their previous school simply because there was less help ( although I'd like to point out that my sixth form is actually one of the best in the area and did actually get consistently good results, it was just that they weren't used to that style of being taught)
    yeaah, my schools the biggest private one in the area with 30 people in a class. it used to be 3rd in the league..now its like 160th haha
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by luuucyx)
    because its cricket? and not peoples lives?
    its nothing like the same situation at all.
    they get the grades, they do the same work to get them.
    stop being so bitter and horrible towards people who have the money to pay for schools!
    -School wouldn't afford doing exams as modules across the eyar so we only get 1 shot
    -Horribly organised, coursework was always lost/deleted
    -Horribly misinformed students being told they only need 5 A-C when subjects like medicine require more
    -No entry requirements so you get tons of retards in your class
    -Teachers are of a much lower standard
    - Loss of motivation when a grade B is in the top 10% of your class.

    I went to state and private, my A levels clearly show that (which I attended private) opposed to my GCSEs (which were at a state school).
    Also unlike at my private college that also does GCSEs we weren't taught exam technique using past papers, which makes all the difference at GCSEs..
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by luuucyx)
    because its cricket? and not peoples lives?
    its nothing like the same situation at all.
    they get the grades, they do the same work to get them.
    stop being so bitter and horrible towards people who have the money to pay for schools!
    You were referring to the raw statistic of someone's grades in comparison to their school; I was referring to the raw statistic of someone's cricket score in comparison to the team it was against, both times ignoring any other external factors. Therefore I can't see why they should be considered any differently.
    But they don't do the same work to get them? I had to teach myself most of my GCSE subjects because the teaching at my school was completely inadequate. Did anybody who got 11A*'s at a private school have to do that? Of course they ******* didn't, thus it's absolutely ridiculous to say the same work is required from both people.
    I'm not being bitter and horrible to people who can afford to pay for schools; I'm being bitter and horrible towards those who can afford to pay for schools, then seem to think that that made no difference to their achievements, and thus slander all those who failed at state schools and had their opportunities limited because they couldn't pay for a private school, yet who you and others seem to think failed solely because of a lack of effort.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rite)
    Isn't the problem low-quality public schools rather than high-quality private schools? Surely you should be raising the standards in order to have everyone on the same level rather than lowering them. Positive discrimination is just avoiding the problem.
    This. A thousand times this.

    Why not improve the system to reduce the inequalities, rather than persecuting those who have acheived, and perpetuating a state-school system that is medicore at best when put next to the private schools in this country? Why drag everyone down to the base level just to make things "equal"? Why not bring up the base line so that everyone is "equal"?

    I understand that not everyone will be the same in terms of raw intelligence, but people can at least be given an equal chance. Private school pupils should not be discriminated against just because the government is failing those who can't afford a private education.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Revolution is my Name)
    You were referring to the raw statistic of someone's grades in comparison to their school; I was referring to the raw statistic of someone's cricket score in comparison to the team it was against, both times ignoring any other external factors. Therefore I can't see why they should be considered any differently.
    But they don't do the same work to get them? I had to teach myself most of my GCSE subjects because the teaching at my school was completely inadequate. Did anybody who got 11A*'s at a private school have to do that? Of course they ******* didn't, thus it's absolutely ridiculous to say the same work is required from both people.
    I'm not being bitter and horrible to people who can afford to pay for schools; I'm being bitter and horrible towards those who can afford to pay for schools, then seem to think that that made no difference to their achievements, and thus slander all those who failed at state schools and had their opportunities limited because they couldn't pay for a private school, yet who you and others seem to think failed solely because of a lack of effort.
    no cricket and schooling really are not the same.
    lots of labour mps were private schooled, and they got to where they are but now they want to shut off options to private schooled kids.
    what exactly do you think of grammar schools?
    quite clearly you have no idea what its like at a private school and as youll say i have no idea about state schools. i suppose to an extent thinking about local schools i do see youre point, because if they had sent some of their students to abs then they couldve got far better grades, BUT some of them wouldnt want to go because they cant be bothered to work. [and no dont say im trying to make out all state school kids are like this because im not]
    i think its unfair to discriminate against private schooled kids but i get that state school kids whove been really disadvantaged that get good grades should probably be looked upon more highly than kids from elite private schools, at the same time i live next to a school were people i went to primary school with achieved better gcses than me sooo its a two way thingg
    yes, you are being a little bit mean.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Say there are two people of the same intelligence, and one goes to private school and the other a higher education college. The one who goes to the HE college has to work alot harder than the private school student to achieve the same grade.

    I'm an A2 student and there are over 23 people in each of my classes. This puts me and my classmates at an obvious disadvantage in comparison to private school students who probably have less than ten people in each of their lesson. As such, I have to work harder to make up for the disadvantage I am put at. This is just one example of why it is easier for private school students to succeed. There are many more reasons why it is more difficult for students from state schools/HE colleges.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by xSkyFire)
    -School wouldn't afford doing exams as modules across the eyar so we only get 1 shot
    -Horribly organised, coursework was always lost/deleted
    -Horribly misinformed students being told they only need 5 A-C when subjects like medicine require more
    -No entry requirements so you get tons of retards in your class
    -Teachers are of a much lower standard
    - Loss of motivation when a grade B is in the top 10% of your class.

    I went to state and private, my A levels clearly show that (which I attended private) opposed to my GCSEs (which were at a state school).
    Also unlike at my private college that also does GCSEs we weren't taught exam technique using past papers, which makes all the difference at GCSEs..
    trust me, teachers are most definitely not of a much higher standard. some are good, but we do have some reaaallyy awful ones.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by luuucyx)
    i see your point, but i know the some universities look at schools not grades.
    students from private schools get rejected because theyre from private schools, even with the same grades. and no they shouldnt be.
    Exactly how do you 'know' that some pupils from private schools get rejected because of what school they are from, as oppose to being faced with a better candidate? You don't, so please don't state speculative comments as fact.

    Getting a place at university depends on a lot more than just grades, hence the whole personal statement + references lark. An AAB/ABB/possibly-lower-depending-on-the-subject candidate with more work experience, an obvious passion for their subject and a better prepared application can be more qualified for a course than an AAA candidate with not all/ none of the above.

    Of course every application should be marked based on the applicant's individual merits, however it also makes sense to presume that a pupil from a bad school will have to work a lot harder to acheive good grades than a pupil from a good school *regardless of whether or not this good school is privately funded*.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by luuucyx)
    trust me, teachers are most definitely not of a much higher standard. some are good, but we do have some reaaallyy awful ones.
    Lol I've been to both and half the time we didn't even have a teacher.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lil Piranha)
    This. A thousand times this.

    Why not improve the system to reduce the inequalities, rather than persecuting those who have acheived, and perpetuating a state-school system that is medicore at best when put next to the private schools in this country? Why drag everyone down to the base level just to make things "equal"? Why not bring up the base line so that everyone is "equal"?

    I understand that not everyone will be the same in terms of raw intelligence, but people can at least be given an equal chance. Private school pupils should not be discriminated against just because the government is failing those who can't afford a private education.
    I'm guessing you go to a Private School by that comment? Because you obviously have no comprehension of the root of the problems at State Schools, which is usually that the vast majority couldn't give a toss (and, if they do, it's very superficially), and their parents don't care about their education enough to make them give a toss, and then under-achievement and not caring is bloody infectious. True, the government is failing them by not providing a good quality education; but, at the end of the day, most of the people don't particularly care. It's just completely unworkable to try and raise State Schools to the level of Private Schools, both because of the difficulty of improving the quality of such a large number of them, and because most State School pupils will never be able to give as much of a toss as those whose parents are paying for it.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by luuucyx)
    trust me, teachers are most definitely not of a much higher standard. some are good, but we do have some reaaallyy awful ones.
    You're definition of 'awful' will be different to ours.

    My A level english teacher:
    - Didn't show up to school for two weeks because she broke up with her boyfriend.
    - Then would go back out with someone else and then break up...again not come to school for about 1-2 weeks.
    - Then proceeded only to discuss her boyfriend relationships in lessons for a further two weeks - a month.
    - Would do hand stands and yoga in class...
    - Was late most days so we only had one lesson a week from her because the other ones she tended to miss from being late.
    - Didn't even study English at university...she did 'cultural arts' or something.

    She was awesome fun but we learn't NOTHING. I stopped going to her lessons in the end and started teaching myself in the library instead during the lesson.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Revolution is my Name)
    I'm guessing you go to a Private School by that comment? Because you obviously have no comprehension of the root of the problems at State Schools, which is usually that the vast majority couldn't give a toss (and, if they do, it's very superficially), and their parents don't care about their education enough to make them give a toss, and then under-achievement and not caring is bloody infectious. True, the government is failing them by not providing a good quality education; but, at the end of the day, most of the people don't particularly care. It's just completely unworkable to try and raise State Schools to the level of Private Schools, both because of the difficulty of improving the quality of such a large number of them, and because most State School pupils will never be able to give as much of a toss as those whose parents are paying for it.
    Lmao you just described me and everyone else back when I was at secondary school perfectly.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rite)
    Isn't the problem low-quality public schools rather than high-quality private schools? Surely you should be raising the standards in order to have everyone on the same level rather than lowering them. Positive discrimination is just avoiding the problem.

    Agreed, but 'raising standards' takes years; what about the interim period and the students graduating from state schools now. That doesn't help them does it?

    I don't disagree with the policy at all.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Revolution is my Name)
    I'm guessing you go to a Private School by that comment? Because you obviously have no comprehension of the root of the problems at State Schools, which is usually that the vast majority couldn't give a toss (and, if they do, it's very superficially), and their parents don't care about their education enough to make them give a toss, and then under-achievement and not caring is bloody infectious. True, the government is failing them by not providing a good quality education; but, at the end of the day, most of the people don't particularly care. It's just completely unworkable to try and raise State Schools to the level of Private Schools, both because of the difficulty of improving the quality of such a large number of them, and because most State School pupils will never be able to give as much of a toss as those whose parents are paying for it.
    I think it would be possible tbh.
    The school could strive to show students what their life could be...if they are to work hard.. Try at best to give the students determination and motivation.
    Of course they're not going help every single student and the whole thing would be hard but do-able.
    Offline

    14
    (Original post by luuucyx)
    i also like how private schooled kids wear the jack wills.
    however, state school kids wear it too. i think if you saved up all the money people spend on the wills, they could afford private school.
    one hoody buys you at least three days schooling?
    mmm

    an aspirational brand for aspirational people.

    first it was marketed to the public schools, then the universities that people from public schools went to - and now anyone who (presumably) wants to aspire to that public school look wants in - and everyone who was in before now wants out.

    this thread bores me.

    positive discrimination is so last decade.


    EDIT: i am surprised by how many people here agree with this.

    if you are an intelligent person you will be clever enough to realise that doing well in exams is very important and you will study hard enough to achieve good grades. Who gives a **** what your teachers were like. they are YOUR qualifications - YOU have the responsibility to make sure you do well! not your teachers.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Basically universities should accept the best person for the place based on academics, etc - the same has happened at my school ( i go to a grammar school ) but not quite to the same extent.

    If universities really don't want to discriminate against students it shouldn't matter where you went to school/college and also what ethnic group you're from ( bit off topic but this really annoys me too - if you're totally non-racist then race should have no bearing on whether you get the place or not)
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by luuucyx)
    no cricket and schooling really are not the same.
    lots of labour mps were private schooled, and they got to where they are but now they want to shut off options to private schooled kids.
    what exactly do you think of grammar schools?
    quite clearly you have no idea what its like at a private school and as youll say i have no idea about state schools. i suppose to an extent thinking about local schools i do see youre point, because if they had sent some of their students to abs then they couldve got far better grades, BUT some of them wouldnt want to go because they cant be bothered to work. [and no dont say im trying to make out all state school kids are like this because im not]
    i think its unfair to discriminate against private schooled kids but i get that state school kids whove been really disadvantaged that get good grades should probably be looked upon more highly than kids from elite private schools, at the same time i live next to a school were people i went to primary school with achieved better gcses than me sooo its a two way thingg
    yes, you are being a little bit mean.
    For ****'s sake. I give you a reason why Cricket and Schooling are, in this case, the same. What do I get back? "no cricket and schooling really are not the same". Why the **** should I bother to continue this argument, when can't even give reasons as to why you hold an opinion?
    They don't want to "shut off options" though. Levelling the playing field =/= Shutting off options. At the end of the day, if a University judges based on GCSEs, then you won't be rejected because of that if you get all A*'s; it's easier for Private School pupils to get that than State School pupils, and not have their options shut off, so why are you complaining?
    I don't see why they shouldn't be bothered to go because they can't be bothered to work; at the end of the day, it's just the difference between turning up to one school and turning up to another, but I still think that'd be enough to improve grades, both because of the better teaching, and the better work ethic/ lack of the "I couldn't give a toss" attitude, which may then lead to them to work harder out of school.
    It's not a "two way thing" at all. Yes, some people at a nearby school got better grades than you. But that won't be because of the school, otherwise your parents, and every other parent at your school, would have sent their children there instead. Ever think it might be because they're more intelligent/ put more effort in than you? And that, if they'd gone to your school, they would've done even better?
    I never said I wasn't being mean; I just clarified the reasons why.
 
 
 
Poll
Cats or dogs?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.