The Sutton Trust, when rightly calling for Oxford and Cambridge universities to "make greater use of contextual data in their admissions process" does not go far enough (Eight top schools dominate entry to Oxbridge, 07/12/18). Slim chance of success is not the only reason "high-flying pupils from state schools" are far less likely to apply for an Oxbridge place. Fear of humiliation in an interview designed to trip up all but the best prepared must play a significant role; those interviews must focus more on what the candidate knows, and how knowledge gaps can be filled. If private schools have to rely on "personalised mentoring and university preparation classes", what chance do pupils coming from underfunded state schools, with narrow curricula and often non-specialist teachers, have?
So-called "top" universities should not be choosing candidates schooled in their requirements and traditions, but offering opportunities to the genuinely talented, who gain good grades in spite of their backgrounds. It does not require a degree in rocket science to recognise that a pupil with three grade Bs at A-level from a school in an impoverished area probably has more talent and innate ability than a pupil from a privileged background even if A-level and Pre-U grades are higher!
The trouble is Oxford and Cambridge have been criticised for years for what is plainly a biased admissions procedure, and little has changed; time for Labour to threaten legislation within three years, which would compel all universities to accept no more than seven per cent of their undergraduate intake from private schools.
No comments:
Post a Comment