how come all the fancy universities i.e. oxbridge and imperial have this competive reputation on getting the most private school undergraduates, i.e. they are disadvantageding students from state schools. just becuase private and grammar schools like eton and them lot are so fancy they have the higher advantage into going to these universities?
sometimes i wish that the government would abolish private/grammar schools and turn them all state or convert the state schools in grammar schools.........
"them lot"? You're hardly helping your case.
No it's not a disadvantage, if they see you have potential, even though you didn't do as well as students from private schools, you will get a place, as oxford's and cambridge's admission requirements is highly influenced by interviews. I don't know about imperial though, they seem to just rely on grades.
There are many threads on this by the way...
Having applied to both Cambridge and Imperial from a state school, and getting offers from both, I find the discrimination harder to believe.
I'd imagine private school students might have a slight advantage, but if you look at the percentage getting in from those applying for state and private schools, I think they rate about the same. So I think the problem is that less state school pupils apply/are encouraged to apply.
Why do grammar schools always get lumped in with the private schools. I go to a grammar school and the secondary is on the other side of the playing field, and apart from the slightly better grades and the ****ing blazer, you cant tell the difference between the pupils (especially on the weekends)
just a quick question....
some private schools (i would argue most) have private tuition in preparing for oxford
now i come from a bog standard grammar school - literally i cannot find any reason as to why the 'grammar' is attached to our school as it is like every other state comp school in the area
question - will oxford take into account that some students will have had private tuition so to speak, or do they not care?
Of course they have an advantage, why else would parents pay thousands for pounds for the education? Having said that, the advantage is only in that private schools tend to have better teaching, facilities, encourage their pupils to aim higher and reach their potential. Whereas state schools tend to allow their students to do what is 'good enough'.
If you look at success rates, state and private applicants have a roughly equal probability of success - the difference is that a far greater proportion of private school pupils apply in the first place. This is partly because private schools simply produce proportionately more AAA candidates than state schools do: many select academically to begin with, and most provide a relatively higher standard of education (smaller class sizes, etc. etc.). Also, AAA candidates at many state schools are less likely to be encouraged to apply than those at private schools.
Notes: this is all "on average". I went to a state comprehensive.
By and large, Oxford and Cambridge would probably like to accept more state school applicants - for starters, their government funding is affected by whether they manage to do so. However, for this to happen, either a larger number of sufficiently good state school people need to apply, or they would have to discriminate systematically against private school applicants in an unjust fashion
Note: I am sympathetic in principle to the idea that a small number of applicants from especially tough education backgrounds (or indeed those who have other mitigating circumstances such as illness) may deserve a shot ahead of some applicants who are better on paper, should they demonstrate a lot of potential. They are however a drop in the ocean, and don't justify a blanket policy in favour of all relatively disadvantaged applicants.
because private schoolers are generally better applicants, particularly once it gets to the interview stage.
applicants from poor state schools are, if anything, at an advantage and their achievements will generally be looked on more favourably than those of private schoolers. cambridge for instance weights your gcses according to how your school historically performs (the exact methodology is on their website, i don't have a link handy).
if you're what they're looking for you'll get an acceptance, whether you're from private school or not.
Attending a private school can indirectly give you an advantage by giving practice interviews, things to say in your personal atatement or so on. But I doubt that when admissions tutors look at an application they even look at where you go to school.
OP you are a moron.
Does there have to be a stupid, pathetic, repetitive thread exactly like this every week regarding whether state school students are disadvantaged? The answer is NO. The universities don't care as long as you get the grades, I mean, there's nothing else which is proof that a state school student with lower grades is better than the privately educated student is there? I don't think that state school students should HAVE an advantage. All they want to do is get the best students. That's all. Just live with the fact that a lot of them come from private schools or grammar schools, like the rest of us.
Just deal with it and stop complaining!
P.S. Yes, I agree. This thread is annoying!
The private vs state school threads are making me really annoyed.
State school attendees: why do you believe you should automatically have a right to be favoured by the top universities over private-school pupils? Why?
Just because there's a mob outside wanting to burn my house down doesn't mean I should open the door and politely let them in. (Excuse the metaphor)
State school students are not doing themselves any justice in these threads by openly airing their grievances when most of these are not justified. The state school rights activists are doing more harm than good to their cause by suggesting that preference ought to be given to state school students - the top universities will never submit, and rightly so, because they have a right to set their own entrance policy.
State school prospective candidates, don't even think that you come to interview at a disadvantage because that'd setting yourself up for failure. The simple truth is that if you show yourself to be more capable than most candidates then you will have a strong chance of getting an offer. What you don't what is to be in a position in which you have received an offer on the basis of being "deserving" in some non-meritocratic way.