Attending a fee-charging second level school does not appear to greatly change students’ chances of getting into high-points university courses, new research suggests.
The analysis found that while students who attended fee-charging schools were about 9 per cent ahead in their performance on entry into second level, this gap remained roughly the same at 10 per cent in the Leaving Cert.
The authors, Michael O’Connell and Gary Marks, say the individual ability of children is by far the most significant factor in achieving high Leaving Cert points.
While other factors such as affluent family background, gender and school type can play a statistically significant role, these are “minor and marginal compared to individual variation in ability”.
Westmeath home on 48 acres with stunning lake and countryside views for €780,000
‘I want someone to take an actual stand on immigration’: How will TCD student debaters vote?
Spice Village takeaway review: Indian food in south Dublin that will keep you coming back
Katie Taylor and Amanda Serrano set to show true boxing values at strange big-money event
The authors suggest that if fee-charging schools are adding on anything to the Leaving Cert performance, above and beyond what the State schools are adding, “it must be relatively modest”.
The findings are contained in research, published in Irish Educational Studies, conducted by academics at UCD who analysed data from the Growing Up in Ireland, a longitudinal survey.
Researchers examined the data in order to explore the likely causal effect of different factors which may have contributed to students’ success.
The UCD study suggests that private schools may offer better facilities for pursuing non-academic pursuits such as sport, music, debating teams, or a series of informal contacts to use in professional life after leaving school like an “old boy network”.
However, it notes that fees for the private sector are modest and the ability of the fee-charging schools to use “deep financial pockets to boost their attendees’ exam performance” is limited.
“Paradoxically the ‘elitist’ schools may not be sufficiently elitist to make a difference, because of their modest fee levels. Their success instead far more heavily stems from the students they take in each year, who have the higher ability on average, and come from a more affluent background,” it states. “Being part of a cognitive elite is more important than being part of a financial one.”
The paper advises caution on the “blank slate” idea that any child dropped into particular institution or from a particular family setting will perform just the same as any other child in those institutions and settings.
“Clearly what is paramount in the race for Leaving Certificate points is the individual ability of children themselves. The other factors can play a statistically significant role, but these are minor and marginal compared to individual variation in ability,” the paper states.
The findings appear to echo conclusions reached in a separate study by researchers at Maynooth University several years ago.
That study, which followed more than 8,500 children from primary into 627 secondary schools, collected information from the children, their parents, their teachers and looked at their Junior Cert results.
When researchers measured “value-added” education – in other words, taking into account where the students are starting from in terms of ability and background – they found the dominance of fee-paying schools in progression melted away, despite their greater resources.
As a group they performed no better on average than other schools and State schools tended to perform best.
