Lets not not assume that all independent schools have ouoil and parents whi are well off, we sent our son to an independent senior school beacuse he falls outside of the state system ability to support his needs. At the independent school he is treated as an individual not a statistic and his whole self esteem is vastly enhanced.

HJM, Southampton, UK

Parents often have to scrimp and save to give their kids a better education in the public school system, while at the same time lightening the load on the State sector (which they still pay for)...and yet the Government pushes discrimination against these kids despite better grades and a more rounded education.

How about we provide a better State education system rather than focusing on the "negative" fact that Independent Schools are just better?

Just another example of this country re-basing itself to ensure a PC society. That'll really help us to reverse the rot that's set in under Labour. What happened to "Education, education, education"..? It failed due to an incompetant Government and the fact that tax money would sooner pay for wasters on the dole and immigrantion. But that's another story.

DC, London,

Its not really surprising when you think about it in financial terms - the only people who can afford to go to university these days are those from fairly well off families who can support them financially, or the incredibly poor who are eligible for huge bursaries.

The new top up fees have A LOT to answer for in descisions concerning whether or not to go to uni.

Amy, LONDON,

I went to a Private school and this is an issue that always causes me a degree of irritation. Contrary to popular mystique, my school was not full of wealthy toffs that didn't shed a tear at the cost of private education. Rather, it was children from a range of families, most of whom had decided to sacrifice in varying degrees, to ensure their children had the best educational environment. Also, far from being an elitist tradition, many of these parents had never been to private school.

It is ludicrous to think that any astute parent would choose to pay twice through taxation and then private fees- just for social snobbery.

Look at the grade results and then ask, why do universities take so many private pupils. Also, think logically of the cost of university and the size of the average student loan- who is going to be, more often, able to afford to go to uni? How many students survive with no familial support and solely on their student loan?

Education should be free.

Alex, bristol, bristol

The government are all marxist (and hypocrites.)

Excluding their own children of course, they'd rather clever working class children didn't succeed, than stupid working class children got bad grades.

It's politically much easier to destroy a gifted child's future than to wait 20 years and invent a new social support policy for his peers.

(Although MPs reserve the right not to put their own children in that particular boat, eh Gordon?)

Charles, London,

Those that have been to schools doing The International Bacculareate are more than prepared for their university courses. So they are even ahead of those in schools who have done only A levels. More and more independant schools are turning to IB, and a few state schools are doing this as well. The children who go to university are more motivated to do so which ever school they come from, but more so if their parents have encouraged them and invested to help them by putting them through the independant section or by paying for extra tuition after classes. The rest don't have these advantages... A levels have been dumbed down in the last few years and it is very difficult for universities to pick out the best. and most able, which is what they want. We should go back to having a percentage system for marking these exams, helping universities to pick the best. University is for the best. This year A level maths reduced the syllabus, which makes it easier... Ask any teacher !!

Jane , Maidenhead , Berkshire.

One way to ensure a social mix in schools would be to allocate a number of university places to each 11-18 school and college based upon their size. There would be no advantages attached to attending one of the ISC schools and those opting out of the state system would be forced (at a great saving to themselves and for the good of the community and society) to opt back in.

Such a system should also ensure that those from relatively disadvantaged backgounds who have ability and achieve against significant odds would rightfully progress to university- Achieving 3 Cs at A level or equivalent is much harder to do if you attend certain inner city state schools than gaining 3 As at many of those represented by the Independent Schools Council. However, we all know that this system could be beaten by a redistribution of those who perviously paid to opt out across the state ststem, but at least this would achieve what the equality watchdog is proposing in one easy step.

Dave Coppock, Northampton,

Bring back more Grammar schools!

If the Government did its job properly and made all state schools good, surely it wouldnt matter your social class because you would get a good education???

London, Student, London, UK

This is not an issue that schools alone can solve. In fact, the main cause of this inequality is the home environment established by the parents.
Brits are becoming so self centred and it shows.
I wonder which children are read to most,; have the most caring, involved, concerned, encouraging parents; live in homes with the most books; do not have the TV as a babysitter; etc etc?
These are social issues and the govt has set up the environment to support the decline of Britain.

abritincanada, calgary,

The top universities should base their admissions on academic ability, however this is not the case. I was rejected by oxbridge without so much as an interview despite gaining better a level grades than required and having outstanding references. Maybe its because I wouldnt fit in with the majority of private school pupils that attended them after coming from state school or coming from a working class family where nobody has ever attended university. I believe that oxbridge still have an elitist attitude which is well out of date.

Jim, Manchester,

Yesterday MrBrown told the CBI that because of changes in the global economy more than 5m unskilled jobs would be lost. "We have 9 million highly qualified workers in Britain, but the challenge of the next 10 years is that we will need 14 million - 5 million more. Higher standards of living will depend on higher standards of learning."
At the moment, higher standards of learning in this country depend on higher standards of living.
In our target-driven, cost-cutting society, however, would it not make more sense to educate children better at state schools rather than forcefeed them 'training' when they are discovered to be underskilled or long-term unemployed in later life. Returning people to an education system which has not succeeded in making them literate or numerate, under threat of removing their meagre means of subsistence, would not seem the most cost-effective way to their achieving the "higher standards of learning" Mr Brown is aiming at.

Mia Clark, Manchester, GB

The government's ever increasing obsession with social engineering should be scrapped immediately. Then they should turn their attention, and all their efforts, to improving the state schools, which are the root of the problem. Unless these are significantly improved by much better discipline - without which proper teaching & learning cannot take place, everyone who possibly can will flee the state system. The obsession with attainment targets and politically correct lessons is rightly causing independent schools to consider dropping the National Curiculum.
A final thought - why don't the Russell group of universities declare their independence from the state, raise their own funds & offer bursaries (as could the state & local authorities)?

Dave, Wrexham,

Yes - in my experience state school pupils are more likely to not be of a calibre to compare with non-state funded education. State education has got to work out what it is trying to achieve. Proportional representation at our top universities of our schools is not of itself a sound goal. We need the students that are good enough to be there on all levels - if our country believes that we need to have people capabable of being at the top of their field internationally.

Basing entry only on academic qualification might indeed be a way forward, although it doesn't take into account that to really be able to make the most of your abilities in this world you DO need to be confident enough to impress in all situations your career takes you to.

How about if ALL our state schools started working on making their students confident and well-rounded? Or is that too radical?

Ruth, Isle of Wight,

Instead of the same old argument why not take a closer look at what goes right in independent schools and wrong in the others? The social class/ money argument is too simplisitic to explain what is going on.

Further, the quality of school qualifications and in what should determine the selection. It is most unlikely that someone with A levels in media studies, sport and the like will be able to cope with the demands of a science subject at University. Independent of social background. Hence, the percentage of applications from state or independent school is irrelevant but the quality of their A levels is.

There is of course also the individual's responsibility to do the best he or she can to get good grades. Something which a social class/ money argument denies right from the start.
Then again - it is so easy to blame money and daddy's envelope....it is them not me.

Susanne, Edinburgh,

When state schools are as good as private schools, universities admissions will perfectly reflect the ration between state schools and private schools. The government is trying to tackle the symptom rather than the cause of the problem.

Harry, Cambridge, Englang

Jane, from Maidenhead: It is not the fault of state school students that the only education they have access to is sub-standard. Besides, I believe that top universities do indeed harbour prejudices against state school pupils. I offer myself as an example: when I applied to do an English BA in 2006, I seemed to be the perfect student. I took part in a variety of extracurricular activities, had excellent references, a good level of Spanish, fluency in French, a passion for my subject. I was predicted and awarded an International Baccalaureate Bilingual Diploma of 35 points (i.e. 535 UCAS tariff points). Nonetheless, I was rejected by very single university I applied to. I believe this was due to an unfair system that assessed me on the basis of where I was from rather than what I could do. Things are now looking up for me, but no thanks to an unjust system that has been discriminating against hundreds (dare I say thousands?) of students like me every year.

Camille Nedelec-Lucas, Bishop's Stortford, Hertfordshire

30% lottery, 30% selected by university, 30% scholarship (Gov Funded) based and 20% fee paying. Doh, I never went to Uni so cant do maths.

Andrew, London, England

Why has it become so hard to accept that the leading universities select people based on merit rather than on their educational or social backgrounds?

Surely if the government wants more pupils from State schools to enter Russell Group Universities, it should direct its attention towards improving the quality of education in schools, rather than creating hoops for universities to jump through. Put the money wasted on bureaucracy into the classroom and encourage more pupils from State schools to work sufficiently hard to achieve the academic level needed to get into a good university.

Hannah, Oxford, Oxon.

I teach in an independent scool ... Yes I know that makes me a social leper .. I tried the state sector but found out that helping individual students was less important "the big plan".
I can still remember being chewed out for:-
1) working late,
2) spending too long talking to parents at parents evenings,
3)being too keen on use of ITC in the classroom
4) helping a student successfully get her to Oxford ( I should have been at an IT training session - helping the instructor .(??) ..

Yes I am a Cambridge graduate Maths teacher and by now you probably totally despise me, though I went to a school where the majority of students had free places (the old direct grant)

The point is I tutor local kids from comprehensives successfully so that they can go to Russell group Universities ...

So a simple lottery to allow state sector students to get guaranteed places is unfair ... Unless you make it illegal for teachers from the independent sector to tutor state school kids ..

PJG, Glos,

Surely, having 'positive discrimination' for the sake of it, is simply wrong?

Is it not better that our top universities have the top minds?

It should be down to academic grades, overall intelligence only, and nothing to do with 'quotas'. What happens if one year the state schools do not put out enough people who meet the grades? Do we send people who should not be at the top uni's, to them, simply to be policially correct? Should some kid be given priority over another, simply because they are from an under-performing school?

It's just another case of policial correctness going crazy.

Arthur, Newcastle,

It is simplistic to say that offers of places at top universities should be given pro rata to state and independent schools. Most top fee paying schools are highly selective academically, so leaving aside the "toffs" who have inherited money, parents who make enough money to educate their children privately are likely to be successful, intelligent and probably highly educated themselves. Intelligence is largely inherited so this would account for some of the apparent "bias".

But it is true that fee paying schools know how to play the system and put a gloss on their pupils, so that they triumph over state school pupils of equal intelligence. This, and the woeful lack of a decent education for intelligent pupils in comprehensives, is what needs to be addressed. What about a separate selection process for applicants from comprehensives that selects raw intelligence and then provides a "pre-degree" year at uni filling in the gaps of knowledge and building self confidence for them?

Darren, London,

Fee paying schools get more pupils into good universities because the pupils are better educated - thats it. Nothing to do with 'class' or 'bias'!

Its not complicated, the Government needs to improve education at state school level. The absolute worst thing the goverment could do to education in this country is introduce quotas that universities need to fill from state schools. This allows the current poor level of primary & secondary state education to continue unchallenged, and undemines, as well as ultimately devaluing, the academic standards of the universities.

Victoria, London, UK

I feel that the government's attitude towards this matter, as with many others is rather pathetic.
Our Universities should be the pride and joy of our long established education system. Thus, instead of operating a policy of bringing these great instituions down to the standard of the state school system, why not raise the standard of secondary education to a level where-by the applicants can compete with those from private schools.
This may be achievable if the government invested all of the money wasted on 'think tanks' and 'focus groups', trying to turn us all into politically correct, try not to offend anyone, cant think for ourselves robots, and spent it on schools and hospitals.

AG, London,

Le's be honest and matter of fact about this. Of course the public school pupils get most places. That is what their parents are paying for - getting their children a fantastic education to enable them to do well later on. But what everyone, but most importantly the government, seems to very conveniently forget is that public schools teach not only academically but also MANNERS, SMART DRESS, RESPECT, GOOD SPOKEN ENGLISH AND SELF ESTEEM,which are equally as important as a good academic education. What is the point of gettig 8 GCSE's and 3 A levels if you cannot even speak your own language (many primary school/secondary school teachers!!!), have no social awareness, manners (not least of all table manners), and do not understand the importance of smart dress?

When and only when, these things are brought into state schools, state schools will be able to compete fairly with public schools.

I speak from experience, having four children who have been in both sectors. Susi, Salisbur

Susi Northen, Salisbury, UK

There was no "class bias" at Oxbridge even when I went there 25 years ago.

If you were good enough, you got in regardless of background - and what's more there were scholarships (which are now even more numerous) to assist those from poorer backgrounds.

This whole affair reeks of pathetic Socialist jealousy and refusal to accept facts:-

1. The education given in state schools is worse than ever.

2. More parents are realising this and (some of them whilst undergoing extreme financial hardship as a result) acting on the fact that the only way their children are going to be taught to be numerate and literate is to send them to a private school.

The above simple facts are the REAL reasons why fewer state school pupils and more private school pupils are GOOD ENOUGH TO GET IN to the top universities.

End of story.

Jon Leigh, Southern, France

All those teaching in state schools which refuse to run schemes to help the most able children reach their potential - on 'ideological 'grounds - should hang their heads in shame. They have much to answer for. We know that bright children from poorer backgrounds ultimately do worse than less bright children from better-off homes, so why would any teacher who had their pupils true interests at heart deny them a chance to a more fulfilling life? Presumably, their ideology envisages an 'equal' state of affairs where all children fail equally. While there are people teaching our children who cannot think beyond their own half-baked ideas, then nothing will improve in state education and the private sector will continue to get most of the opportunities. I wonder if it has ever occurred to these ideologues that if state schools were truly excellent and gave their pupils every chance to succeed, then the private sector would wither on the vine.

anne, bournemouth,

Based on early results of my postgraduate research of the relationship of higher education to employability, highly ranked prestigious schools are not a reliable measure for career success. A good deal of the foundation for my work is based on previous studies done in the UK.

F. Capobianco, Pasadena, USA/CA

Can someone please explain why equality is such a worhwhile goal. I suspect that it is set up as a goal simply to ensure employment for social engineers.

Richard, London,

Will the last intelligent working class person to leave the country please switch off the lights. The snobs can use the light from their haloes.

John, Overijse, Belgium

This article should contain an estimate of the number of state school kids who could have got into a Russell group university if they had attended an independent school. That figure would be the most damning indictment on ten years of Labour rule. A school should help all children attain their potential not just those near the league table boundaries. It is criminal to use bright kids as unpaid classroom assistants, put them in classes with those who don't want to learn or who can't even speak English.

peter, cambridge, uk

"If sixty percent of applicants are from state schools, then probability dictates that about sixty percent of the places should go to students from state schools. "

Graham, I don't know whether you were taught probability in the state or private sector but your "analysis" takes no account of the relative abilities & qualifications of the applicants. As for accusing admissions tutors of taking bribes, where is your evidence?

In short, yes you are paranoid - seek medical help.

Ian, Chelmsford, UK

Is it not time for this paper to research and print the results on those bright and really well educated students who go on find that their first year at university is less educationally rewarding than their final years in school? Too often, it seems, these students are deeply disappointed with the level expected of them in their first year, finding it a gross waste of time and expense.

kate nicholson, oxford, england

Don't blame private education; too many state pupils opt for the less testing subjects like business studies, communication studies etc instead of double maths, science, a foreign language. What is at the heart of this problem is the shortage of teachers of these top A Levels; now the government are blackmailing private education to make up this shortage or lose their charitable status. The waterdown began with the umbrella O Level of science instead of chemistry, physics and biology.

Celia, notts, Notts

As the state sector has gone down the tubes, the univerities are only trying to maintain standards. They should be thanked and you should be investigating what is going on in our state schools, not this.

Johnny Norfolk, Mileham Norfolk, GB

the one major fact left out of this article, grades. Are the majority of Private funded schools not gaining a higher Alevel record than government funded schools? A class divide can't be expected to be fixed at university level, it goes to the roots of Government schools not being as competitive as Private schools.
I wonder if articles like this contribute more to class divide than they fix.

MAtthew, Belfast,

Seems like money buys better education or is it better off parents bring up their children better? The real reasons are a mix of government policy , class, race , wealth and background. Kids are getting the worst deals in the worst schools in the worst parts of Britain.

javed, london, uk

fee paying schools tend to take in people from a higher social class in areas where people do not strugle for money, hence the ability to have personal tutors etc and education others do not have access to, pehaps resulting in smarter individuals Having said this i have just left state school and one of the 20 or so applicants to oxbridge was accepted....the head boy with straights As throughout school and captain of te rugby team who has won more awards for academic acheivement than nyoe know was not accepted to oxford, Making me wonder what must be done to actually enter these institutions when you are from a state school

melissa, reading,

The government is obviously targeting the wrong problem, they should be improving the standards of the other 'lesser' schools! it is obvious that private schools do give better education and there is no reason why children from those school should not deserve to go to top unis more than the others.

J, london,

There is nothing like amateur statistics to skew an argument, is there? To say that, "if sixty percent of applicants are from state schools, then probability dictates that about sixty percent of the places should go to students from state schools" is utter nonsense. Universities are looking, inter alia, to take the best students, and if more of these proportionately are coming from the private sector, then probability in fact dictates that a far higher percentage will come from the private sector.

The argument should not centre around quotas and university bias. It should centre around improving the quality of state education, so that pupils from these can compete properly with students from the private sector. This improvement in state education has been a central platform of New Labour since they first came into power - and its total failure to make a difference should not be used as an argument against the private sector.

George Eccles, Les Adrets, France

Admission to university should be on academic merit only. Forcing universities to take a percentage from this social class or that is missing the point.

Top universities chose the best and brightest, and IF a higher percentage of those candidates come from the private sector that is a problem of the state system. It is wrong to assume that it is elitist staff chosing people who sound posh, which is part of the argument here.

The bigger issues is why we are making all these teenagers put themselves through univesity to get dubious degrees that won't get them a job - degree in Media Studies or Experimental Dance anyone?

And once you get all these people out the other side, they cant get a job and have £10,000 of debt to repay. University does alas become an excuse for three years of drinking and partying for a lot of people - shock horror.

Steve, Sheffield, UK

Well that is pretty obvious,......... how about some new news on the front of the paper !

Jane , Maidenhead , Berkshire.

Because my grandson has gone to a top university he is finding the first year is not stretching him enough.. He has already done all the work at his Public boarding school, and the lecturers have to help the ones from state schools for months before they are all at the same level.

Jane , Maidenhead , Berkshire.

I suppose daddy never hands over an envelope to the appropriate individual so that Johny gets that coveted place, no I am just being paranoid.

I'm sure that this is happening because fee paying schools produce more confident and well rounded individuals that impress at the all important interview.

If the above, is what is actually happening, then students from state schools would be better of trusting their fate to a computer that selects names at random from a list of suitably qualified students.

If sixty percent of applicants are from state schools, then probability dictates that about sixty percent of the places should go to students from state schools.

The current selection process must leave the universities open to allegations bias or even worse! Bring on the lottery.

Graham, St Albans, uk