[Closed] Why is this bilge getting air time?

Can't say I disagree to be honest.

Every child should be educated to the best of their abilities both the gifted and the no so.

I don't think anybody gets upset that sports teams take the most promising youngsters, regardless of background or parents' wealth, and train them intensively to be the best, even though there'll be many who drop out for a variety of reasons along the way.
Why is it not OK for the next generation of doctors, lawyers, engineers and politicians to be given the same opportunity to excel?

I don’t think anybody gets upset that sports teams take the most promising youngsters, regardless of background or parents’ wealth, and train them intensively to be the best, even though there’ll be many who drop out for a variety of reasons along the way.

you'd pretty pissed off if they were doing it with state funds though.

The English education system is utterly up the swanny and broken IMO
There's a reason Wales, NI and Scotland do it differently (although none perfect).
I agree with the OP - remember this is your tax money paying for elitism.

Every child should be educated to the best of their abilities

I'm going to be terribly old fashioned and say that can't happen unless there is some form of streaming, which implies selection.

Mind you I agree that in this case, given the selection carried it, it is a non story.

Tbh it's not overly different from putting people in credit, general and foundation courses. This is just at a more extreme level and on a school basis.

I don't necessarily disagree with putting people in classes suited to their ability, so putting them in schools suited to their ability isn't really a massive stretch.

you’d pretty pissed off if they were doing it with state funds though.

Not sure about that. It depends on if they get disproportionate amounts of state funds.
In this case it does seem dubious to be praising this school so heavily.
Since by this stage with that sort of selectiveness the majority of the hard work will have been done in primary and secondary.

@dissonance - the issue here is that the press and politicians celebrate this Uber performance. The trickle down effect is parents and all schools start selecting pupils, leaving the middle of the road and lower less supported and funded.
Secondly, I don't believe in such selection at such an early stage, and that's different from streaming. And I'm ex grammar school....

Selective sixth form or not, getting that many Oxbridge offers for kids in receipt of free school meals (including a 14-year-old who has been in the care system) suggests to me that they are doing something right.

getting that many Oxbridge offers for kids in receipt of free school meals (including a 14-year-old who has been in the care system) suggests to me that they are doing something right.

Selecting the most able? What were their GCSE results?

getting that many Oxbridge offers for kids in receipt of free school meals (including a 14-year-old who has been in the care system) suggests to me that they are doing something right

The cynic in me says 'well done for teaching to the test'.

Im early 50s and went to an independant grammar school that had a tough academic selection process.
At A level time, and a lot before, there was tons of input on how to promote yourself in the iniversity application process. An awful lot of my peers went to Oxbridge every year.

Fast forward 30 yrs and my twin daughters are applying to university themselves....they are bright one had 11A* and an A, the other 9A* and 3B at GCSE.
However there was practically zero zero input or knowledge within their state school on how to fulfill their academic ambition.

If that is replicated throughout the UK state education system then i would be stunned if any child from that background got into a Russell group uni, let alone Oxbridge.

So, i feel having some expertise within the school and selecting able kids to benefit from it is the only way to get these children into Oxbridge. Without this state school 'hot house' then it will remain the preserve of the independantly educated.

....and 41 offers isnt 41 students taking places there.

Anyway its pretty much a numbers game breninbeer, get all 8's and 9's at GCSE, have all A/A* predictions and you'll likely get an offer. Medic and Vet courses have tougher selections but its not rocket science to get an offer. It was likely much harder in your day.

I’m struggling to be offended by this.

There are plenty of 6th forms out there, the one in article is selective, probably finding not just those with the best grades, but those that will thrive within their established culture, those that will establish friends and support and ultimately excel. I’m not sure that education should be universally average...a good average standard, yes, but the whole thing shouldn’t try to aim for the average denominator, there should be some places which aim to raise it. This place is doing just that. If every 6th form interviewed, you might get a better match between students, curriculum and culture and so the whole group progresses faster together.

If sport has taught us anything it’s that skills are only part of the equation, it’s the team, the culture, the management that raise mediocrity to excellence. Finding a good fit of all three can do remarkable things, as is shown in the article.

The cynic in me says ‘well done for teaching to the test’.

Like pretty much 90% of the education my two have received in the last couple of years, if I'm being honest. The size of the GCSE curriculum doesn't seem to allow much deviation these days, sadly.

I'm just heartened to see something resembling equality of opportunity for bright kids (albeit a small number) from poorer and very difficult backgrounds, even if it does involve gaming the system.

the issue here is that the press and politicians celebrate this Uber performance.

I agree as hopefully my second sentence made clear.
Whilst there is a minute chance that this school looked at kids regardless of results and attitude and somehow identified the potential my money, as yours seems to be, is on those at earlier levels doing the hard work. Then the selective six form takes the cream of the crop.

it’s the team, the culture, the management that raise mediocrity to excellence.

But they havent they've selected the best and kept them the best. These kids would most likely do as well in any other setting they have just taken kids from a huge area who are the best and put them in one place then acted all happy that they are doing well.

But if the problem is that disadvantaged kids lose out on Oxbridge places, then this is giving them the chance to go. If they had gone to 'normal' schools then perhaps they would not have been given the impetus to try for Oxbridge & their places would be going to someone from a more middle-class background.

But they havent they’ve selected the best and kept them the best. These kids would most likely do as well in any other setting they have just taken kids from a huge area who are the best and put them in one place then acted all happy that they are doing well.

And why not? Those with the ability, in whatever field, should be encouraged to fully realise their abilities, instead of being held back by a system that treats everyone the same. Everyone isn’t the same! I failed the 11+, never went to grammar school, never had an opportunity to go to university.
Oh, poor, poor me. Hard done by, failed by the system, blah blah blah.
You know what? I’ve never felt let dow, because I know for a fact that I just don’t have whatever it takes to go through university, I’m not smart enough, or have the drive needed.

It takes a damn sight more to get into oxford other than passing the test. It’s massively oversubscribed so to get an offer you’ve got to demonstrate something extra special, Sonora not just about coaching them to pass a test it’s a whole load of other stuff too. Just goes to show your background doesn’t and shouldn’t affect your opportunities. Ok his exercise is about Oxford, but other similar programmes could be applied just getting more kids to uni full stop. If the method works for Oxford it can work for any uni.

Well done on the kids, they got a lot of focussed help but at the end of ge say it is them who have to knuckle down and do all the hard work and invest the hours to achieve it.

I’m not smart enough

Cant argue with that!

Those with the ability, in whatever field, should be encouraged to fully realise their abilities,

Indeed they should but what is the evidence the school that the op alluded too has done any better than any other school would have?

A wider point is that the evidence shows, very clearly that grammar schools have a small positive impact on the results of those few attending and also a small negative impact on the results of the results of the many who dont attend.
I would be interested to see if areas with grammar schools do better for the top end than others in terms of oxbridge entries.

If they had gone to ‘normal’ schools then perhaps they would not have been given the impetus to try for Oxbridge

And perhaps they would have done just as well elsewhere. The obviously did well enough to get in this sixth form.

tbh I don’t get the whole oxbridge thing.

tbh I don’t get the whole oxbridge thing.

...is probably one of those whimsically contrary statements that would have you ace the entrance interview.

is probably one of those whimsically contrary statements that would have you ace the entrance interview

I did actually apply to oxford.

So, i feel having some expertise within the school and selecting able kids to benefit from it is the only way to get these children into Oxbridge. Without this state school ‘hot house’ then it will remain the preserve of the independantly educated.

I think this is true breninbeener, there's two sides to Oxbridge access. No doubt the universities should be doing (a lot) more but there's a limit - they can't forcibly drag the kids there. End result is a lot of public school dross hoovering up places that ideally would go to more able kids. But if they have no one to explode the myth of what Oxbridge is really like then it's easy to be put off by stereotypes and make other choices.

Read that article this morning despite trying to swear off the Guardian's bogosity - yeah the headline premise is balloches but it did get me thinking around the idea of selection at 16/17 for A-level study. Feels like a slightly different proposition to selection at earlier stages of kids academic life, which is not a principle I support - don't think I like this much either but it seems like it would be a less destructive practice.

If additional expertise/experience is needed to get pupils into Oxbridge then there must be a reasonable argument to centralise it in one place.

I find it hard to believe it is easier to get into Oxbridge now than it used to be, I doubt anyone as dilatory as I was would get in now even in a dodgy subject.

Anyway its pretty much a numbers game breninbeer, get all 8’s and 9’s at GCSE, have all A/A* predictions and you’ll likely get an offer. Medic and Vet courses have tougher selections but its not rocket science to get an offer. It was likely much harder in your day.

That's not true. That will probably get you an interview. The hard bit is getting the offer. My answer is based on

Having attended Cambridge

Best mate bring head of admissions at an Oxford College for 3 years

Preparing students for Oxford admission as part of my job

I'm glad I saw this. I remember hearing about it and thinking that the must be some selection going on. This is more than dune selection

Finally I hate the way that our education system keeps coming back to Oxbridge admission. It's important. But I can honestly say a highlight of last year was the girl who just got an E in A level physics. Hopefully she'll have a career in Engineering. We need the best at every level.

I know for a fact that I just don’t have whatever it takes to go through university, I’m not smart enough, or have the drive needed.

I thought the most interesting quote in the article was the head of another local school warning against fetishising Oxbridge, and celebrating the pupils who successfully got apprenticeships just as much as those who got uni places. Wise words and a wider view of what success might actually mean for kids.

As usual there is a Ying and Yang to the story

The good bit is kids getting into the University that will change their life chances more than any other. Attending will get them interviews that others won't, they'll meet people who will be connected and open doors that they wouldn't otherwise even glimpse. Better them than some entitled public school boy/girl such as current political party leaders

Not surprised by, it's in London, it's more selective than any grammar school at 11 and would be condemned by teachers unions if it was called one, it gets national news coverage (it's in London), it gets used as a political anti brexit immigration is wonderful trope

Well done to the kids, they'll still be putting the work in, well done to the people who got them there. as for the teaching profession and any education professional/ civil servant/ politician, they should be asking why this isn't happening in Barnsley, Preston, Redcar, Maryport, Merthyr etc

Well done to the kids, they’ll still be putting the work in,

Of course

as for the teaching profession and any education professional/ civil servant/ politician, they should be asking why this isn’t happening in Barnsley, Preston, Redcar, Maryport, Merthyr etc

No one has yet shown that these kids wouldnt achieve just as well at other schools. Also:

London have less poor white trash!!

The empirical research conducted by Professor Simon Burgess for Bristol University into the “London effect” (Understanding the success of London’s schools, 2014) showed definitively that the difference in pupil progress from the end of primary school to the completion of GCSEs “is entirely accounted for by ethnic composition” and has been so for at least the past decade.

The cynic in me says ‘well done for teaching to the test’.

What do you think secondary education is? Being judged on results will always focus on the testing method.

In a not to disimilar way to the emissions scandal, look at the testing criteria, whats the best way to meet/ exceed them (since exceeding is the new normal).

you’d pretty pissed off if they were doing it with state funds though.

See it as an investment. These people will become successful in their fields which will be good for the country. Either than or they will just be successful and keep it all to themselves like 99% of people do...

I thought the most interesting quote in the article was the head of another local school warning against fetishising Oxbridge, and celebrating the pupils who successfully got apprenticeships just as much as those who got uni places. Wise words and a wider view of what success might actually mean for kids.

I think getting a good apprenticeship is far more valuable, on the job training along with in-depth theory, while being paid, meaning no student loan to pay off has got to be the best option if the student has any inclination towards working in a science/engineering/technology field.
No help at all if studying archeology, though - the first question you ask an archeology graduate is “can I have fries with that, please”. 😉
A bit cynical, perhaps, but a friend of very long standing went to uni to study archeology, and went straight to managing a restaurant. She’s the first to laugh at that joke.

I thought the most interesting quote in the article was the head of another local school warning against fetishising Oxbridge, and celebrating the pupils who successfully got apprenticeships just as much as those who got uni places. Wise words and a wider view of what success might actually mean for kids.

I think getting a good apprenticeship is far more valuable, on the job training along with in-depth theory, while being paid, meaning no student loan to pay off has got to be the best option if the student has any inclination towards working in a science/engineering/technology field.
No help at all if studying archeology, though - the first question you ask an archeology graduate is “can I have fries with that, please”. 😉
A bit cynical, perhaps, but a friend of very long standing went to uni to study archeology, and went straight to managing a restaurant. She’s the first to laugh at that joke.

I’m not smart enough

Cant argue with that!

Snarky. I may not be bright enough to get into uni, but I’m smart enough to know that I wouldn’t have got any benefit from it.
When I got a job in print, design and graphics, I got training on the job, the most important thing I brought into it was a skill at technical drawing.
Over the years, various people came to work at the two companies I worked for, who’d gone to art school and uni, and who all had these great fancy ideas, but didn’t have clue one about creating artwork that was fit to be printed, I had to teach them any number of things to make their work fit to print. It was an uphill struggle at times.
Plenty of really intelligent people are really not very smart...

The good bit is kids getting into the University that will change their life chances more than any other.

This is the bit I have a problem with. I’m all for systems that recognise the differing abilities people have and working with that - but do we really want to perpetuate a situation where only the bright kids or the kids with connections or the kids with money get enhanced life chances?

So, yes I have an issue with this - until we invest equally and recognise equally the life chances of those who have great qualities - other than those which lend themselves to academic progression.

I may not be bright enough to get into uni, but I’m smart enough to know that I wouldn’t have got any benefit from it.

You have very strong opinions about Uni for someone who never went!

I never went to University and I haven't got a clue if I would have got any benefit from it. I have a very well paid job that I enjoy doing but that was down to luck.
If I had gone to university I would not be doing the same job or having the same life but whether that would be better or not, who knows.
I didn't go because I was bored with education at 18 and had no aspirations to do any particular subject whereas now at 50 I am in a better position to know what I want and what my interests are.

You have very strong opinions about Uni for someone who never went!

There are some very strong opinions about Oxbridge in this thread too. I'd hazard from people who never went.