State pupils on same grades as private counterparts ‘get better degrees’

The fundamental dishonesty in this piece of politically motivated research is to equate a degree classification from a high ranking university to that of a low ranking one. And this is compounded by glossing over the fact that subjects present different levels of academic challenge to obtain a degree. The study assumes that a 2:1 in Law from Nottingham equates to a 2:1 in Fashion Design from Nottingham Trent. So if students from independent schools (whom the study shows to achieve an average 320 UCAS points as opposed to 280 from state schools) choose to go to Russell Group institutions where they take academically demanding degrees they are treated as being no different from state school pupils who choose low ranked institutions and who read less challenging degrees (creative media, sports studies etc.). Is it not highly probable that the former group go on to more taxing courses and higher ranked institutions? The study fails to address this and you have to wonder why this might be. The authors also find that in 10 HE institutions the data showed that former independent students clearly outperformed state students with comparable qualifications. Yet it did not list this group. Why? And, even if you accept all the previous assumptions about all degrees being equal, the headline conclusions about differential achievement only hold with data for students who got ABB and below. This suggests it's only the weaker indie pupils who don't achieve at least as well at university. The data has been manipulated and cherry-picked to support a desired political stance. And this is quite shameful.