Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Revolution is my Name)
    That doesn't prove that there are "really awful" teachers at Private Schools though. I mean, there was a paedo at my school a few years ago, so obviously that's not a problem unique to Private Schools, and also I hardly see how that makes them an awful teacher in terms of the quality of teaching that they deliver, which is what this debate's about.
    Okay I'm kind of surprised that you didn't bring up the fact that i just claimed that i enjoyed 2G1C, which shows almost as much about you as the fact that i enjoyed it!

    Okay if being a paedo doesn't make someone a bad teacher in your book then i'm not sure what would. Now don't get me wrong, i love a good screw from the next 60 year old guy but it doesn't help with concentrating on my work hehe. Oh and you just condoned paedophilia by the way and don't say you didn't cause you did so stop talking.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by loafer)
    LOL. tell that to the hundreds of articles that mention quotas from oxford university, the cherwell, britannica and the guardian then, they call it a quota. http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...idgeandelitism
    Susan Stobbs, director of admissions for Cambridge Colleges, said the university had refused to accept any quota from the Government.
    So if it's not legally binding that they impose it, then I can't see it should be a quota rather than a target?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Oh yeah and that loafer guy just boy'd your face off mate :P
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tombarlow123)

    Okay if being a paedo doesn't make someone a bad teacher in your book then i'm not sure what would. Now don't get me wrong, i love a good screw from the next 60 year old guy but it doesn't help with concentrating on my work hehe. Oh and you just condoned paedophilia by the way and don't say you didn't cause you did so stop talking.
    I know you're trolling, but, regardless, if a teacher's a closet paedophile, then I fail to see how that would in any way impede the academic achievement of his students, if otherwise they're a good teacher?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I was private school until very recently as my bursary was taken away and I could no longer afford it, despite a scholarship...

    and yes, it makes a HUGE difference, at my current, crappy state school, I am having to practically self teach myself 4 AS levels with little/no help, whearas in my old school, I know I would have had volumes of help, not only with grades, but with my uni application, ECs and almost every aspect, however now, I will get very little help on my UCAS, the school offers no EC for 6th form, none of the pastoral care, extremely underfunded to the extent in which walls have huge cracks.....so I dare anyone to tell me that going to a **** state school as opposed to a top private school doesn't make a difference, as I know that if I was still there I would have gotten AAAA at A2 if not higher, now I am unsure of getting AAA at A2
    Offline

    14
    (Original post by Revolution is my Name)
    So if it's not legally binding that they impose it, then I can't see it should be a quota rather than a target?
    arguing over whether its a quota or target is useless, the media and universities obviously to use both interchangably.

    the main point is that I oppose positive discrimination in any form, whatever 'disadvantaged' or 'under-represented' background you come from.


    i dont care if you are black, chinese, state-schooled, disabled, brazilian or bangladeshi - you should not be prioritised above a better candidate
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Revolution is my Name)
    I know you're trolling, but, regardless, if a teacher's a closet paedophile, then I fail to see how that would in any way impede the academic achievement of his students, if otherwise they're a good teacher?
    OMG i can't believe you left out the 2G1C thing again! Unbelievable!:woo: You must know what it is considering you know all the internety terms. By the way i just looked up what trolling meant and that is exactly what i'm doing! HA! But still, the fact that you used it doesn't really show you in a great light...

    ...so i'm just gonna go ahead and call you a noob cause its the only one i know. I men i would say knob but apparently thats too offensive for internet people...ya dumb knob..
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by loafer)
    arguing over whether its a quota or target is useless, the media and universities obviously to use both interchangably.

    the main point is that I oppose positive discrimination in any form, whatever 'disadvantaged' or 'under-represented' background you come from.


    i dont care if you are black, chinese, state-schooled, disabled, brazilian or bangladeshi - you should not be prioritised above a better candidate
    Again, I never said that there should be prioritising above better candidates, nor even prioritising an application as a whole because of the school they went to. I'm just saying that, say, if a certain University were to place great importance on GCSEs, then it should be taken into account the schools that people went to in order to achieve the grades that they did. So, say, if a State School candidate were to get 5A*'s, and a Private School candidate the same, then the State School candidate would be judged to have done "better" in terms of any GCSE requirement, because of their disadvantaged circumstances.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by loafer)
    arguing over whether its a quota or target is useless, the media and universities obviously to use both interchangably.

    the main point is that I oppose positive discrimination in any form, whatever 'disadvantaged' or 'under-represented' background you come from.


    i dont care if you are black, chinese, state-schooled, disabled, brazilian or bangladeshi - you should not be prioritised above a better candidate
    That's the entire debate.. grades don't neccesarilly mean a better candidate, external, enviromental factors are major determinants of the ability of an individual to attain such grades. In this case, generally state schools, in terms of teaching, academic support and work ethic are inferior to private schools. Hence, someone who attains AAB from a state school, can be seen to be 'better' that an individual with a similar portfolio from a private school, due to differences in enviroment impeding on the state schooler.

    Ofcourse there are gradations of school quality and they aren't strictly state/private =/= bad/good, and there are many other factors which determine applicant quality.
    Offline

    14
    (Original post by Revolution is my Name)
    Again, I never said that there should be prioritising above better candidates, nor even prioritising an application as a whole because of the school they went to. I'm just saying that, say, if a certain University were to place great importance on GCSEs, then it should be taken into account the schools that people went to in order to achieve the grades that they did. So, say, if a State School candidate were to get 5A*'s, and a Private School candidate the same, then the State School candidate would be judged to have done "better" in terms of any GCSE requirement, because of their disadvantaged circumstances.
    and you work off a ridiculous assumption that the university will be able to meet the government quota from all those thousands of 100% indentical applicants, who are still somehow completely equal after a personal interview and UMS scores and GCSEs and ECs have been taken into account.

    what do you think they do currently? pick the random people from a hat because there are so many applicants that are exactly the same, even down to UMS scores and ECs? and the hat happens to just pick people from private schools?

    and no better candidate from a private school will lose out to someone from a state school just to meet these targets/quotas.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    If two candidates have achieved very similar grades, but one is from the state sector, is could be argued that the student from the state sector has achieved more than the student from the private sector and therefore is more deserving of a university place.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by infernalcradle)
    I was private school until very recently as my bursary was taken away and I could no longer afford it, despite a scholarship...

    and yes, it makes a HUGE difference, at my current, crappy state school, I am having to practically self teach myself 4 AS levels with little/no help, whearas in my old school, I know I would have had volumes of help, not only with grades, but with my uni application, ECs and almost every aspect, however now, I will get very little help on my UCAS, the school offers no EC for 6th form, none of the pastoral care, extremely underfunded to the extent in which walls have huge cracks.....so I dare anyone to tell me that going to a **** state school as opposed to a top private school doesn't make a difference, as I know that if I was still there I would have gotten AAAA at A2 if not higher, now I am unsure of getting AAA at A2
    @everyone...this guy pretty much ends the argument.

    Also, sorry to hear about messed up A level results
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Okay i also read about that 'don't feed the trolls' thing so i know what you're going to do. As a parting shot before i am dragged away by the censors of this forum...thing... i'm just going to apologise to the people's whose arguments i failed to back up, swallow my pride, and call you a silly nanny...yeah...a silly nanny - you're one of those

    By the way i also realise i'm not funny, it just improves my self esteem very slightly to have a go at internetknobs such as yourself - i know its sad but its sliiightly less sad than spending my teenage years (i assume you're a teenager and not a fat, sweaty old man) typing rubbish on the internet and getting worked up over other people's reasonable and assured opinions. I also know that by typing all this i sound sad, pathetic and hypocritical but ah well i'm new to this. Byeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by loafer)
    and you work off a ridiculous assumption that the university will be able to meet the government quota from all those thousands of 100% indentical applicants, who are still somehow completely equal after a personal interview and UMS scores and GCSEs and ECs have been taken into account.

    what do you think they do currently? pick the random people from a hat because there are so many applicants that are exactly the same, even down to UMS scores and ECs? and the hat happens to just pick people from private schools?

    and no better candidate from a private school will lose out to someone from a state school just to meet these targets/quotas.
    I never said the targets/ quotas, or the levels that they are set at, are necessarily a good idea. All I said was that the school that someone went to should be taken into account, and, where that will effect certain areas of the application, them being viewed differently with respect to that. If the quotas force the Universities into doing that, then they're a good thing. But if the State School proportion is as high as it could conceivably be, then fair enough, there's nothing that can be done further.
    Offline

    14
    (Original post by Revolution is my Name)
    I never said the targets/ quotas, or the levels that they are set at, are necessarily a good idea. All I said was that the school that someone went to should be taken into account, and, where that will effect certain areas of the application, them being viewed differently with respect to that. If the quotas force the Universities into doing that, then they're a good thing. But if the State School proportion is as high as it could conceivably be, then fair enough, there's nothing that can be done further.
    we agree!

    the school may be taken into account in special circumstances, but not along arbitrary lines of state vs private, and x percentage must be from state school.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    My sixth form college has 2000 students.. We get nowhere near the attention that we should be getting in comparison to other state schools, let alone private schools..
    And people who are accepted from state schools achieve the same grades in my experience.. I think the article is a tad unfair..
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    That parents still pay lots of money for their kids to go to private schools despite being discriminated against qualifies that private schools provide so much of an advantage in any/all aspects of applying to university that the discrimination simply doesn't matter, and therefore that private schools provide a massive advantage that should be equalled as best able over state school applicants.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by luuucyx)
    i was reading the paper this morning and came across

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education...niversity.html

    so tonight i googled the whole thing and found

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/...ls-top-alevels

    i dont really understand why schools are discriminated against either way? everyones doing the same work? if you get the grade, you get the grade. the fact youve gone to a private school shouldnt matter.
    what dyou think?
    OK, I just googled the school it says you go to on your profile, and it gives this information about GCSE results:
    In 2009 33 girls (a third of the year group) gained all A* or A grades, with 8 girls gaining 10 or more A*.
    Surely you can see that 10A*< at a Private School is worth somewhat less than that at a State School, given that the percentage for that at my school is about 30 times less than it is at yours? And the all A*/A is about 15 times less?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    In the end, private schools rely on the bank balances of their pupils' parents for all their funding. So they're going to try to stay on top of the leagues tables and send kids off to Oxbridge. So they'll push their students and nudge them in the right directions to acheive this. And they face angry parents if they do anything wrong.

    My school was semi-private with an entrance exam. It was one of the best in the area - there were no fully private schools at all, so the local government paid most of the fees. This meant that there were a lot of extremely able, intelligent pupils at an essentially state school.

    -My art EXAM PIECE was lost a week before the exam
    -My Physics teacher spent most of his lessons on facebook, and there was no one to do anything about it
    -My chemistry teacher was off ill the first 6 MONTHS of AS, (when the step up from GCSE is still pretty scary) Did they get a replacement? Nope, we were given a list of books and videos to learn from.
    -None of the 'hints' about exam questions I heard about from other privately schooled friends.
    -Our careers tutor was ****. She told people with no A's at GCSE that they could apply to Oxbridge 'if they wanted to'. No-one from my year got in to Oxbridge, though about 11 applied. She gave half-hearted references. That's when she even turned up to school. We didn't get advice about personal statements or interviews, we were just meant to know what to do and expect somehow.


    And this was a really good school, because the state was a wealthy one that invested a lot of money in secondary schools. The point is, the school knew that most their funding was coming from the state, and only a little from the pupils, and that there was no alternative for parents who wanted their kids to do well (It was geographically isolated from anywhere else), SO they could get away with crap teaching, and half-arsedness.

    So yes, I support the policy.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    IMO, it's unfair that some people at state schools get worse grades than they deserve, just because their parents couldn't afford/didn't want to pay for a school with better teaching and facilities. You can argue about whether there are any benefits to going to private schools, whether all private school pupils deserve their grades or are spoon fed, blah blah blah. I think a good student will do well wherever they go, but a mediocre student might get higher grades than they deserve at a private school in some cases, but I'm not going to debate it

    But basically, universities want the best students for that course. They will take into account things like interview, personal statement, and maybe extra curricular things alongside grades. If there is a private school pupil who has perfect A levels not totally due to their own merit, and a state school pupil with slightly lower grades but obvious commitment and suitability for the degree, they should choose the state school pupil. It's not about turning people away because of where they went to school, I'd be happy to bet the majority of universities make the correct decision of who to give places to. What happens is both private and state school pupils claim they've been discriminated against, when actually there are a lot of factors that go into it, but if you deserve a place, you'll probably get it.
 
 
 
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?
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.