Unfair bias against private schools

In my experience state schools students at Cambridge are neither stronger nor weaker than their public school counterparts.

Not necessarily. Colleges which have reputations for accepting lots of independent school students normally take more than other colleges, but this is primarily because students at such schools are advised to apply for such colleges.

In my experience state schools students at Cambridge are neither stronger nor weaker than their public school counterparts.

I wasn't saying they were better than those, but well, they all seem to have like 5 ancient languages then 5 modern languages, with loads of extra curricular shit, 10 million A*s, fantastic education from early ages... would they pick them all if they could?

No. The private:state ratio for applications and acceptances is similar, with at most a ~10% variation at some colleges. Even if there were too many good private school applicants there would be an unofficial, implicit knowing from tutors to favour state schoolers a bit (or vice versa), but never to have a set-in-stone fixed quota where they can't accommodate a good applicant.

Whether it's to address an imbalance regarding private/state, class, ethnicity, religion, gender, sexuality, and whether it's at a university or in the workplace, quotas really are not the solution. If certain groups are under-represented then target your advertising at them, make it clear that you're encouraging applicants from that background to apply, but don't make it so that you're fixing proportions so that a poorer, less able applicant from xx background is favoured over a better candidate from yy.

Just because they've had the opportunity to do extracurriculars such as skiing, debating, rowing, learning Greek or Latin, learning an instrument etc which people from poorer schools might not have had the opportunity to do, it doesn't mean that they're better; it doesn't mean they have a greater potential to do well at university.

I see, but they could not take 95% state and 5% privately educated really good they? Meaning they do have quotas to an extent? I see what you are saying though.

OK, I see, as I said on another post they do sort of have quotas if they have to "favour state schoolers a bit", although as you said they aren't set- in-stone.

I see, but they could not take 95% state and 5% privately educated really good they? Meaning they do have quotas to an extent? I see what you are saying though.

I wasn't saying they were better than those, but well, they all seem to have like 5 ancient languages then 5 modern languages, with loads of extra curricular shit, 10 million A*s, fantastic education from early ages... would they pick them all if they could?

How can you sort of have a quota?

Edit: Jools dealt with this better than I did. Ignore this...

Hi,
I went to a private school - not a very good one - because I won a scholarship and I needed to board for (serious) family (medical) reasons. I got all A* at GCSE and AAAAA at A-level last year. I applied to Cambridge, LSE, Durham, etc and got none!
The Cambridge admissions people were very nice. I was told, almost one year later when the admission tutor visited the hospital I work in, that I had done well at interview, but their quota for private schools was "over-filled". Can this be fair? My total family income is less than £35k p.a. and we struggle to keep me in private education. My folks haven't had a hol in 5 years, don't drink or smoke, and we have sold our car to reduce our weekly spend.
Please can we have some fair recognition that not all private school students are useless toffs. Why do we not have anonymous, needs-blind admissions?

I have applied again this year; here's hoping.

toni

No I don't think they would - they know better than to judge people by that alone. There are plently of people who have only one or two A*s who go on to get firsts (a good friend of mine is a prime example). I think I can honestly say Trinity College has a reputation for having no 'hidden bias' against public school applicants (they end up getting a higher proportion than most colleges because of this), yet they still accept 45-50 % state school students. They take those who they feel have the best potential, and generally ascertained at interview.

Though the government does have guidelines for universities to get them to take more State Schoolers

That's my piece.

Though the government does have guidelines for universities to get them to take more State Schoolers

Hi,
I went to a private school - not a very good one - because I won a scholarship and I needed to board for (serious) family (medical) reasons. I got all A* at GCSE and AAAAA at A-level last year. I applied to Cambridge, LSE, Durham, etc and got none!
The Cambridge admissions people were very nice. I was told, almost one year later when the admission tutor visited the hospital I work in, that I had done well at interview, but their quota for private schools was "over-filled". Can this be fair? My total family income is less than £35k p.a. and we struggle to keep me in private education. My folks haven't had a hol in 5 years, don't drink or smoke, and we have sold our car to reduce our weekly spend.
Please can we have some fair recognition that not all private school students are useless toffs. Why do we not have anonymous, needs-blind admissions?

I have applied again this year; here's hoping.

toni

Though the government does have guidelines for universities to get them to take more State Schoolers

To use myself as a comparison - you went to a private school, got straight As at GCSE and straight As at A-level. I went to a small rural state school, and got straight grade 1s at Standard Grade, AAAAA at Higher, and AAA at Advanced Higher- where in two of my three subjects I was not taught atall. We are both good candidates, but as an admissions tutor who would you pick?

Like H&E, I'm not entirely convinced this is totally true, however..

To use myself as a comparison - you went to a private school, got straight As at GCSE and straight As at A-level. I went to a small rural state school, and got straight grade 1s at Standard Grade, AAAAA at Higher, and AAA at Advanced Higher- where in two of my three subjects I was not taught atall. We are both good candidates, but as an admissions tutor who would you pick?