Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Unfair bias against private schools watch

Announcements
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    bhaal85: But if this toni magg is "not a useless toff" then why did (s)he go to a public school when I assume (s)he could have done perfectly well at the local comprehensive?

    Makes no sense!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by calumc)
    Perhaps, but in less depth, which is generally far easier - doing 8 standard grades/GCSE is a lot easier than 3 AH/A-level.
    Not neccessariliy.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by edmundwillis)
    But if this toni magg is not a useless toff then why did (s)he go to a public school when I assume (s)he could have done perfectly well at the local comprehensive?

    Makes no sense!
    Elitism, poor reputation of *state skoolz*, who knows?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    bhaal85: see my earlier post about my opinions regarding elitism and public vs. state schools!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by fishpaste)
    I think the people who took this year's P3 paper would be inclined to disagree
    Ah, that reminds me - your exam system sounds a lot easier - as I'm sure iiikewldude can vouch for. You get loads of papers each covering/counting for a small amount, can do resits, and your previous years work actually counts for something. We get a paper or two at the end of each year, that's it! We have a lot less room for error, and very little room to improve.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by edmundwillis)
    bhaal85: see my earlier post about my opinions regarding elitism and public vs. state schools!
    Sorry, I missed out 6 pages.

    But the Original poster's story seems somewhat unbelieveable regarding quotas.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by calumc)
    Ah, that reminds me - your exam system sounds a lot easier - as I'm sure iiikewldude can vouch for. You get loads of papers each covering/counting for a small amount, can do resits, and your previous years work actually counts for something. We get a paper or two at the end of each year, that's it! We have a lot less room for error, and very little room to improve.
    Is this the IB?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bhaal85)
    Is this the IB?
    No, (Scottish) Advanced Higher. I will admit I have little knowledge of how IB works.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Toni Mag)
    Please, folks, not everything is necessarily better at private schools. Some things are and some things are not. Some teaching is worse than some state schools; some classes are larger; some students are less able; some students are poorer! Every school different AND varies over time in terms of student attainment. To lump all private schools as by definition 'good' is as silly as labelling all state schools as failing.
    I seen some quite poor private school with classes of 30+, teacher who have little control over the student and mediocre results; but those school are in the minority, whereas in the state sector they are in the majority. I certainly think most private schools are good; but I think a lot of comprehensive students things they are very good, which isn't the case.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by calumc)
    Ah, that reminds me - your exam system sounds a lot easier - as I'm sure iiikewldude can vouch for. You get loads of papers each covering/counting for a small amount, can do resits, and your previous years work actually counts for something. We get a paper or two at the end of each year, that's it! We have a lot less room for error, and very little room to improve.
    You're limited to what papers you can resit when. Only the level one resits are available in November for example. So the resit system doesn't aid us in applying for universities, for example, because we haven't had a chance to resit at that point (unless by some crazy means you manage to cover a 1 year syllabus in a couple months for the january season).

    I could believe Physics Alevel is quite easy for a scottish student, the AS is made pissy to attract students, but then there's a huge jump to A2, where the style of question completely changes. Further maths is a different ballpark anyway IMO.

    Everybody's subject to the same rules anyway. So it's not like it devalues the individual grades.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by fishpaste)
    You're limited to what papers you can resit when. Only the level one resits are available in November for example. So the resit system doesn't aid us in applying for universities, for example, because we haven't had a chance to resit at that point (unless by some crazy means you manage to cover a 1 year syllabus in a couple months for the january season)

    Everybody's subject to the same rules anyway. So it's not like it devalues the individual grades.
    The system certainly sounds a lot more forgiving though - my school Rector brought this up with me when I mentioned applying to Oxford as he felt it would disadvantage me, but there was nothing we could do about it.

    In the words of iiikewldude, one of the few people who've experienced both systems - "I did an A level in physics as well but that was pish and i'm pretty sure i nailed an A for that - the English get it so much easier than us.". Okay, this is one person's opinion, but based on the A level material I've seen it sounds right on the mark.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by calumc)
    The system certainly sounds a lot more forgiving though - my school Rector brought this up with me when I mentioned applying to Oxford as he felt it would disadvantage me, but there was nothing we could do about it.

    In the words of iiikewldude, one of the few people who've experienced both systems - "I did an A level in physics as well but that was pish and i'm pretty sure i nailed an A for that - the English get it so much easier than us.". Okay, this is one person's opinion, but based on the A level material I've seen it sounds right on the mark.
    How can it be? If it were that forgiving we'd all be overachieving our uni offers. You can't make exams easier without expecting a response. Unis ask for more (AAAA or AEA or STEP).

    With all due respect, he wasn't doing 4-5-6 of them! And this is the same Alevel material which covers more than your AH maths?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by fishpaste)
    How can it be? If it were that forgiving we'd all be overachieving our uni offers. You can't make exams easier without expecting a response. Unis ask for more (AAAA or AEA or STEP).

    With all due respect, he wasn't doing 4-5 of them! And this is the same Alevel material which covers more than your AH maths?
    It is certainly more forgiving than here which is what I was arguing. I suppose AEA are equivalent in their (for want of a better word) "exclusiveness" to AH, as both are arguably "extras" above the norm in their respective countries.

    I will agree that it "covers more" in the sense of being wider ranging, but this is at the expense of depth - I would not agree it is a "bigger course" for example. AH maths covers harder and more in depth areas which only appear in further maths down south, so is still the harder course in my opinion. Obviously A level maths AND further maths will be harder than AH maths alone, but as a single course AH certainly sounds like the harder of the two.

    Yes, he didn't do 4-5, but he sat AH and A level exams in the same year - and aside from doing both in the same subjects (rather pointless) I can't see any fairer comparison.
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by Toni Mag)
    Thanks to you all for the response and encouragement everyone. In no particular order:
    (i) I applied for History, but I'd rather not say which college as it might identify the admissions tutor (who was very helpful / supportive afterwards). It was an older college.
    (ii) The fact that there is a quota for private schools does NOT mean that there is one for state schools: the quota for private schools is a certain maximum. There is no max for state schools, only a min that corresponds to the complement of the private school max.
    (iii) The school received a report afterwards which made absolutely no reference to any quota, I have to say, but didn't fault my application in any respect. Consequently, the school contacted the college and that's what led (eventually) to the talk with the tutor. The implication was that the college (rather than the university) had an imposed or self-imposed max for private school applicants, and had (slightly) exceeded that limit in the previous years. I am firmly of the opinion that colleges make adjustments over a three-year rolling average (if you see what I mean) so that their figures don't exceed a quota.
    (iv) Taking my experience into account, I would advocate a blind points system for each subject for each university. I believe they have something like it in the south of Ireland. It would mean going to a general, broad, bacc-style exam - 6 subjects say - so awarding points out of 600. The market would then determine the threshold for each subject for each university, based on the UCAS applications. Law at Oxbridge might be 570; Law at Nottingham might be 500; etc.
    (v) I am not in favour of 'positive' discrimination; as someone from an upper working class background, and female, I can do without being patronised; I'll get there on my own bat or not at all.
    (vi) My school reported the matter to the TES - against my wishes - but they weren't interested.
    (vii) I'm looking forward to getting into Oxbridge because I believe (honestly) that admissions aside, if one can do the business there, they do NOT care about gender / race / creed / background. ROLL ON NEXT YEAR!

    Love

    toni
    Your 'idea' is flawed in that it will let more public school students in, as they often have the chances to perform more extra-curricular activities than state schools. Justtake sport, i had friends at uni who had done rowing and lacrosse in school. WE had football and basketball and that was it. not even a hockey or rugby side!
    J
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    AH maths covers harder and more in depth areas
    Matrices are not in depth. It's just different things. I've done pure6 and mechanics3 simultaneously, a single maths student may do mechanics3 if he's doing maths with mechanics. And pure6 wasn't harder than mechanics3, it was just different. I think the hardest stuff for me in either maths or further maths was the M2/M3 statics. So I wouldn't say it was more indepth, it was just more pure maths instead of more applied maths.

    which only appear in further maths down south, so is still the harder course in my opinion. Obviously A level maths AND further maths will be harder than AH maths alone, but as a single course AH certainly sounds like the harder of the two.
    Well, as far as I can see, there is more maths in P1/2/3 than half of AH maths, and I can assure you the applied is just as hard as the pure. And as I said, the pure3 module is absolutely notorious for its indepth-ness, and trickyness.


    Yes, he didn't do 4-5, but he sat AH and A level exams in the same year - and aside from doing both in the same subjects (rather pointless) I can't see any fairer comparison.
    It is indeed a better perspective than you or I could have, but it's still not a fair analysis to do a single Alevel and then conclude that the english have it easier. I'm sure if I did say 5 Alevels, and an AH, then concluded that the AH was a piece of piss compared to the Alevels, you'd appreciate that my analysis wasn't very fair.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by edmundwillis)
    bhaal85: But if this toni magg is "not a useless toff" then why did (s)he go to a public school when I assume (s)he could have done perfectly well at the local comprehensive?

    Makes no sense!
    She. A mixture of circumstances really. All the comps in the area were 'failing' according to Ofsted. Went to an RC state primary and won a full scholarship to this fee paying school. No state 'grammar' (or equivalent) in the region.
    Also, I had personal circumstances that might have made it handy / necessary for me to board for periods.
    Anyway, I ended up there. There was one comp that I fancied but I wasn't in their catchment. The point was that I was there, whether or not it makes sense to YOU, my friend. And I don't think it should be held against me.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Ok, this is a topic that I have been discussing recently with friends so I thought I'd comment from experience. Whilst deciding upon a secondary school, I got a scholarship for a quite good private school as did a friend, who was pretty evenly matched academically with me from 4-11. Anyway, I subsequently turned down the private school, opting for the local comprehensive instead (walking distance, my mates going there and recently having 'good' results for a comp, being my main reasons). However my friend went for the private school as she lived closer to it than the comp anyway.
    3 years went by...I got 5,6,8 for my KS3 Sats...she got 7,7,7. Another couple of years passed, I got 3As,4Bs,4Cs she got 5A* and 5As. Just to illustrate how this came about, I was predicted As for English but only 4 people in my class of 30 took the higher tier paper, so the teacher(eng, oxon) thought it would make sense to teach everyone to C standard.
    She also was advised on A-Level choices alot better, whereas I picked 4 subjects quite blindly and regret 3 of the 4 that I took. To add insult to injury she also hammers me in E/C as mine are almost all sport/sport-related.
    Fortunately I'm now at one of a few local colleges and although I have less academic subjects than most and initially recieved B/C target grades, my teachers are great and got my looking for AAAad(no this isn't an ego boost).
    Well, I've ranted about the disadvantages, so here's the advantages from my perspective; I interacted with a much broader range of society(from my year, 200 or so students, 1/4 do a-levels, 1/4 vocational courses, 1/4 work, 1/4 watch daytime television)...I know people whos parents own villas in portugal and multi-million pound firms as well as others whos parent sell a selection of drugs(all the way to class A) for a living. I know plenty of people who have been mugged at knife point, but equally know people who have been convicted of such crimes, you may not see this as an advantage but I'm 100 times more street-wise than anyone I know from various private schools and I feel this probably also makes me a more balanced individual.
    I also had a far larger selection of subjects to chose from than at most private schools, although this kindof backfired as I picked non-academic/obscure subjects just because I could.

    Like I said this is only from my probably narrow perspective, but I would persoanlly like my kids (long way off and hopefully education system is overhaulled by then :rolleyes:) to go to private, but not boarding school.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    toni magg: I can understand why you ended up at a Public school and I have sympathy for the family reasons which made boarding useful. However, where boarding is not a neccessity and where a pupil is bright enough not to be coached I just think that it is the parents' and pupils' moral responsibility to choose to go to the local comprehensive (hats off to roundabout!)

    That is really the only way that you can improve the school system by making comprehensives more representative of class and intelligence percentages throughout the country.

    To pick up where roundabout left off, I chose as my first choice my local comprehensive which had 20% (and is still at 20%) 5A*-C and subsequently went into Special Measures (toni: failing according to Ofsted!). I achieved 8,8,7 at KS3 - above my peers from primary school who were equally clever/same background and went to much better secondary schools (grammars and Public).

    I am awaiting GCSE results but I don't expect them to be very good (relative to my peers) because I didn't bother revising very much. I achieved an A* in ICT a year early (yes even 'bog standard' comprehensives let you take exams early if you're good enough) but this year I didn't work very hard and my brain didn't turn on in many of the exams so am expecting a maximum of 6A and 5B (maximum).

    My point is - it a student is actually clever they can do well anywhere if they are prepared to put in a little bit of work. And I concur with roundabout that I have widened my horizons by mixing with the 'dangerous' working class. Although admittedly I have missed out on extra-curricular sport/music etc.

    By having a few agreeable, 'unstupid' middle class children with their aspirational, supportive parents (who often become governors): teachers become better motivated. My dad, for example (along with new senior management and headteacher), has helped (as Chair of Governors) to get the school out of Special Measures through his energy and belief that the local school should be first choice for all parents in the vicinity. Myself and others who take pride in their learning have also helped the cause through the School Council and helping at school events; and when we appointed the new (excellent) headteacher as well as deputies and subject teachers as part of the Student Panel.

    This body of pupils and parents has helped change the aspirations and attitudes of the entire school including other parents and pupils. The pupils should also help turn around academic results which will lead to a greater proportion of middle class aspirationals and so on - suddenly the school is on the way up and is no longer deemed a failure! [The school came out of Special Measures last term.]

    The irony is that my parents went to Oxford and Manchester university, and grammar and Public schools, respectively, which granted them the opportunity to become middle class lefties and hammer into me these left-wing values.

    I don't wish this post to sound like I'm blowing my own trumpet (1A*, 6A, and 5B at GCSE on this forum is hardly blowing one's trumpet!). My situation is just an example to show that if you have the right mindset and a certain amount of ability you can achieve something wherever you end up and for that reason we should be trying to do something to help the community by helping the local comprehensive school, failing or not.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by edmundwillis)
    toni magg: I can understand why you ended up at a Public school and I have sympathy for the family reasons which made boarding useful. However, where boarding is not a neccessity and where a pupil is bright enough not to be coached I just think that it is the parents' and pupils' moral responsibility to choose to go to the local comprehensive (hats off to roundabout!)

    That is really the only way that you can improve the school system by making comprehensives more representative of class and intelligence percentages throughout the country.

    To pick up where roundabout left off, I chose as my first choice my local comprehensive which had 20% (and is still at 20%) 5A*-C and subsequently went into Special Measures (toni: failing according to Ofsted!). I achieved 8,8,7 at KS3 - above my peers from primary school who were equally clever/same background and went to much better secondary schools (grammars and Public).

    I am awaiting GCSE results but I don't expect them to be very good (relative to my peers) because I didn't bother revising very much. I achieved an A* in ICT a year early (yes even 'bog standard' comprehensives let you take exams early if you're good enough) but this year I didn't work very hard and my brain didn't turn on in many of the exams so am expecting a maximum of 6A and 5B (maximum).

    My point is - it a student is actually clever they can do well anywhere if they are prepared to put in a little bit of work. And I concur with roundabout that I have widened my horizons by mixing with the 'dangerous' working class. Although admittedly I have missed out on extra-curricular sport/music etc.

    By having a few agreeable, 'unstupid' middle class children with their aspirational, supportive parents (who often become governors): teachers become better motivated. My dad, for example (along with new senior management and headteacher), has helped (as Chair of Governors) to get the school out of Special Measures through his energy and belief that the local school should be first choice for all parents in the vicinity. Myself and others who take pride in their learning have also helped the cause through the School Council and helping at school events; and when we appointed the new (excellent) headteacher as well as deputies and subject teachers as part of the Student Panel.

    This body of pupils and parents has helped change the aspirations and attitudes of the entire school including other parents and pupils. The pupils should also help turn around academic results which will lead to a greater proportion of middle class aspirationals and so on - suddenly the school is on the way up and is no longer deemed a failure! [The school came out of Special Measures last term.]

    The irony is that my parents went to Oxford and Manchester university, and grammar and Public schools, respectively, which granted them the opportunity to become middle class lefties and hammer into me these left-wing values.

    I don't wish this post to sound like I'm blowing my own trumpet (1A*, 6A, and 5B at GCSE on this forum is hardly blowing one's trumpet!). My situation is just an example to show that if you have the right mindset and a certain amount of ability you can achieve something wherever you end up and for that reason we should be trying to do something to help the community by helping the local comprehensive school, failing or not.
    I don't think parents have an obligation to send their children to a bog standard comprehensive. I think the government has an obligation to provide decent education for all, which it is failing to do. Why annihilate the one section which for the most part is working?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Toni Mag)
    Some of the arguments / presumprions above are simply ridiculous:
    (i) Why is BBB at a Comp better that AAA elsewhere? On the basis that teachers in a Comp are less committed / capable? There is NO proof that that is the case. In fact, DfES / Ofsted research suggest the opposite.
    To use a similar situation to as I did recently...

    You get beaten up for doing well in tests at school, you had to spend evenings looking after your siblings, your peers forced you into a life of drugs and vandalism, your inner city comprehensive teachers don't give a ****, they say that all that matters is getting a grade C, they don't care about you as you're "sorted", you're slowed down in the classroom by people who are struggling, your mother suffers depression, you didn't have the money for books and your mate was shot etc, then try getting AAA.

    Someone who got ABB in the above conditions is likely to perform better at university than an AAA student who had it easy.
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: August 30, 2004
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?
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.