Pours on petrol, lights match, and steps back ....

[pist]

Lego Club - absolutely, must be very creative + construction minded! - and have leadership skills

Think the issue here is really support from parents. A greater proportion of indie/grammar kids have good parental support from a young age, so achieve closer to their potential earlier in life. As the DCs grow up, they become more sel-freliant and achievement will increase for the dedicated ones. This does not mean that that indie/grammar is better/worse than comp, simply expresses the statisitcs of different backgrounds. - and yes societies do matter, as do good grades - thank heaven we are not all the same.

[scarlett]

There are lots of suportive parents whose children attend comprehensives though !

If you can't afford independent education and not every child will pass the 11 plus....then what choice do you have ? Your child will have to go to the local school...my 2nd one may have to ....and so perhaps some of these parents may actually be more supportive etc to counteract the schooling their child may receive.....

As well as President of the Lego club, ds1 also is in charge of the library.....although I think that was due to a misdemenour in class......

[pist]

"There are lots of suportive parents whose children attend comprehensives though ! " - sorry, messed up on the quote again!

Absolutely! - but in the statistics all comp parents have been put in one box, the indies in one and the grammars in one. That's the trouble with statistics.

It's statistically just a bit more likely that you have a supportive home environment if you are in e.g. grammar - look at all the parents here.

BTW knew a v bright girl from deprived home, who completely on her own initiative studied a few practice papers, sat Tiffin's and won a place. Sadly she turned it down not wanting to leave her friends. Have never known a girl who deserved a place more than this one. Hope she one day wil be one of these top graduates!

[Looking for help]

Well I'm not surprised they get a better degree because the majority of comp educated kids never take part in societies. In fact without the inde and GS pupils, but more so the inde pupils, all these societies would crumble. That is why an inde educated child remains more employable because whilst at Oxbridge they became president of this society, chairman of that, rowed for their College etc.

Tipsy, I am sorry but this is not a reasonable response to the report.

The point is that the statistics suggest that once they get to university comprehensive educated students get better degrees than their independent/grammar educated contemporaries arriving there with the same A Level results.
Getting a 2 2 because you rowed for your college does not make you more or less employable than getting a 2 1 because you didn't. It makes you less employable than the student getting a 2 1 simply because the 2 2 is not as good as the 2 1. Most large companies won't interview 2 2 graduates, insisting on at least a 2 1. So the rowing for the college just doesn't come into the equation. It may do if both candidates have the same degree, but won't otherwise.
I find this report reassuring, to be honest and proof that positive discrimination in favour of students from poorer schools is a good thing, not a bad one and is to be encouraged. Runs for cover now

[Waiting_For_Godot]

Just remember LFH, that you are probably not classed as poor by uni admission standards so they will still let in the poor bright and the rich independently educated because of such discrimination. On the whole there are a lot of inde kids that would never have got to university under normal circumstances, but that does not mean that only state schools are filled with the brightest. It would be interesting to see if what the stats say if they compared a comp educated AAA with a Westminster A*A*A*. To get into Westminster pupils need to be around the top 5% and already were very, very able to begin with. Compare a Malvern BBB to a comp CCC then of course the comp child was probably brighter to start with.

[Looking for help]

I am most definitely not classed as poor, I fall wholeheartedly into that beaten middle section, who get no help with anything, and with four kids am often struggling to see how we can possibly cope
This is not necessarily an argument about wealth and poverty. I think it is about which children cope better with university life. I know my son , the product of a lovely grammar school, spoon fed all the way to great things by his school, is struggling a little to sort out his time, and devote enough attention to some of his classes at university, I think he's sorted it out now, fingers crossed. However, I think if there's an edge to students from comprehensives, it's possibly because they have had to fight a little bit harder to get where they are and so the gap between school life and university life is not so big. They may be used to independent learning in a way that those being cajoled to produce excellent results are not.

[mad?]

If you can't afford independent education and not every child will pass the 11 plus....then what choice do you have ?

Let's face it most cannot afford indie and most do not take the 11+ as only a tiny minority have access to the grammar school system. So really this report is saying that the privileged few (grammar and indie) do relatively less well than the norm when it comes to degree grades. Not entirely surprising as once parental pressure/help is less evident presumably truth will out?
I am not convinced about the 'clubs & societies' comment vis a vis indies but needless to say there is a balance to be found in uni life and elsewhere between breadth and depth if long term potential is to be realised. All work and no play does indeed make jack a dull job candidate.

[Waiting_For_Godot]

When I was at uni (for a short time ) I noticed that the students who had been to boarding school were more organised at didn't go wild in the first year the way many students do. They did their coursework, turned up for every lesson and knew when to stop partying. Were they any brighter? Probably not but they did manage their time better than most.

[Chelmsford mum]

The report is saying that comp educated pupils achieve a higher standard of degree than those from grammar or independents with "similar" A levels.
I see no reason why this surprises anyone at all? I believe it is harder in many comps to get good A levels than it is in the relatively more peaceful, less disruptive, more pushy parents ethos of the other kinds of school.(I am aware this is a generalisation but there is truth in it)
I am the product of a comprehensive school in a less than affluent London borough.Not once, and I mean once, in my upbringing did my parents enquire about homework or "check up" on me.I was the first in my family to go beyond age 16 in education.I did have to sit in classes (not so much in sixth form), where there was serious disruption to lessons.I used to go off to the local library after school as there was nowhere to work at home and independently research and plug the gaps that were there in the teaching I received.
So when I arrived with very good A level grades to my rather randomly chosen, with no parental/school advice, Russell Group Univ, (even though I only in recent years found out what the heck that meant ) , I was surrounded by students from indep schools and grammars.
I would like to suggest, dare I say it, in all humility, that the fact that I had very high grade A levels as they did, did not necessarily mean we were of the same standard of "raw" ability.I am not saying I was the brightest - far, far from it.However I was not spoon fed, "taught to the exam", given prepping/support of any kind from parents or even really from school.Therefore I was better equippped than some to do the independent study that university requires.I could and did do this more effectively than some of my independently educated peers.
I agree with LFH.You do have to "fight that little bit harder" to get good grades in the average comprehensive, compared to grammar and indep schools.
These comments ,as I said before, are generalisations but I think they hold some truth.

[pheasantchick]

The article seems to assume that comp = deprived and poor, indie/grammar = clever kids. However, there are alot of good comps in non-grammar areas with supportive parents etc. so maybe the results are not that surprising.