I must say I did smile lightly in wonder at the BBC’s Mike Baker who staunchly rejected any suggestion of “inverted class war” against the Middle & Upper Classes in UK University selection.
That may well be the case but he then goes on to make some glaring contradictory statements. For example:
But they are not using crude measures to promote less able pupils from inner-city comprehensives ahead of more able students from independent or grammar schools.
No, they are doing it because they just want to be sure they are getting the best students, selected on merit, and chosen because they are most likely to thrive at the university.
Followed by:
Oxford [University] has a tough job on admissions. Almost all of its 15,000 applicants are predicted to get at least three A grades at A-level. So how do its admissions tutors make sure they are picking the best students, irrespective of social background or prior educational experience?
First, Oxford requires most applicants to take a special university entrance exam on top of their A-level studies. Then it interviews some 10,000 students before making 3,500 offers for 3,200 places.
Because it is as interested in future potential as in past attainment, Oxford collects information on the applicants’ backgrounds against five criteria. It then awards students a “flag” if they meet these criteria, which include: whether their school has below average GCSE or A-level grades, whether they live in the poorest postcode neighbourhoods, whether they have taken part in summer schools aimed at pupils from deprived homes, and whether they have even been in care.
If they meet at least three criteria, they are “flagged up” to the individual college admissions tutors.
I honestly had to re-read both statements several times to try and work out quite what exactly he was trying to say. Was he saying that Universities select on merit or was he saying that they’re chosen on the basis of social background?
He tries to cover this up later by being a wee bit wishy-washy like saying that a system that flags up students from poorer backgrounds for further investigation is “fairer” and focuses on the “potential” of students.
What it doesn’t it doesn’t cover up however is Baker completely contradicting himself. For example, how exactly is a University picking the best student “irresepective of social background” if it then flags up potential students on the basis of if they’ve been to a School from a deprived background, benefitted from extra classes aimed at Students from poorer homes or if they’ve been in care?!
As you can see it just doesn’t add up to be honest.
Furthermore, he then decides to pooh pooh the influence of possibly the 2nd most powerful politician in the country: Lord Mandleson and Baker noted (correctly) that Universities would “always, in the end, decide admissions.”
That is not in dispute but then one must ask what exactly is the point in a Government trotting this report out and embarking on a high profile policy announcement if Universities just ignore them?
This initially appears to be another contradiction and is confusing but once you read between the lines, Baker is effectively saying: “Universities can just say no thanks but it would not be in your best interests. The Government is offering advice that you can’t refuse.”
I’m a big fan of reforming education to make it a tougher and more rewarding experience for students. Focusing on harder GCSEs and A-Levels rather than window dressing with International Baccalaureates should be the order of the day followed by bringing back Secondary Modern schools to ensure a vocactional path for those who don’t want to go to University.
The one thing Baker doesn’t do is bash the Universities which is good because their job is made almost impossible these days by a broken education system which results in, as Mike correctly states, 16,000 students with straight A* grades.
The only way to improve access to University is to invest in schools in deprived areas. If you provide students who want to go to University with the facilities and the opportunities then they will grab them. Force flagging students from the rotting bogside Comprehensive helps nobody and just skews the system as much as the tsunami of A* grades do.
That Mike doesn’t highlight this as the real culprit behind the crisis of University admissions is the real crime here.
