Anna Kathis

The Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission released its annual report last week, criticising the inability of top Russell Group Universities to admit sufficient numbers of state-school educated and underprivileged students. In 2013/2014, half of the Russell Group universities admitted significantly less pupils than their Higher Education Statistics Agency benchmark target recommends. According to these figures, there are 2,800 missing students from state schools at Russell Group universities.

It is important that this data is collected by a reliable source and made public, in order to pressure the ruling elite into creating more diverse student bodies. Oxford and Cambridge still miss their HESA benchmark of state-schooled students by 10 percent, showing that we need regular reports and new policies to close this gap.

The recent report wants to tackle these problems by doubling the proportion of young people entering higher education who live in areas with the lowest higher education participation by 2020 compared with the 2009 levels. Currently people from areas with the lowest higher education participation are two and a half times less likely to attend higher education compared with those from areas with the highest higher education participation. Even though there have been positive indicators in the last years – since 2009, the participation-rate of people from low-participation in higher education areas has been rising at a rate of 1 per cent per year – the gap won’t close until the 2060s if this trend continues.

The Social Mobility Commission correctly indicates that more action is required. It wants to achieve equal access to higher education by streamlining existing participation arrangements under a new umbrella body, the Office for Students, which will undertake research and provide funding to promote open access to universities. It is a reasonable approach because policies work better when enacted by central agencies with clearly defined responsibilities. The Office for Students will focus on schools and areas that are identified as the worst performers.

Social mobility is not only about real equality, a goal which David Cameron shares with most of us, but also about diversity and the dominant university mind-set. We need state school students for the good of the educational climate. Who else will question why obtaining a blue and a first are the most sought after goals at Cambridge? Who else will be appalled when colleagues start ranking the corridor according to class? And who will be shocked when they hear that the only objective in finding a job is, for many, to simply become filthy rich? Cambridge needs more students from state schools. It’s not just about fairness and the principle of equality and enabling equal chances, it’s also about establishing an atmosphere that is not so distant from reality at one of the best universities in the world.

However, one crucial factor will always be money, as the commission rightly mentions. The government announced that from 2016-2017 onwards, living-cost grants for less well-off students will become loans. The average debt for the poorest 40 per cent of students will then rise from £40,500 to £53,000. Currently, students are still willing to face these debts, but their patience could reach a tipping point soon and end all aspirations of open and fair access to higher education. Trust in the loan system was further weakened by the decision to retrospectively change the repayment conditions of student loans by freezing the entry loan amount.

There are challenges to be overcome when increasing access to higher education and Oxbridge, but a positive trend shows that progress is possible if the government and universities work together to create effective outreach programmes. Reports that lay open the status quo and propose policies to improve social mobility are a helpful step on the way to real equality.

 

Emily Fishman

Last week the government published the State of the Nation report, aspiring to create a ‘one nation Britain’. This term, first coined by Disraeli, is not new, and was repeatedly used by R.A.B. Butler and Harold Macmillan in the 1950s. Unfortunately, however, a ‘one nation society’ has never been achieved.  

The statistics in the report serve as a reminder as to how far from ‘one nation’ our society is. Only half of the poorest children are ready for school by the age of five, whilst there is a lack of apprenticeship placements for those over sixteen. Most alarming of all, 1.5 million children are still living in poverty.

While the report may seek to endeavour towards a ‘new stretching ambition’, the reality is more of an overstretched dream, built on political rhetoric. This was confirmed earlier this week when The Guardian launched a vicious attack on the low rates of state school applicants to some Oxbridge colleges. Robinson, the newest college in Cambridge, was unfortunate enough to be the only Cambridge college mentioned. Yet as access officers from the college have reiterated, “Robinson College would never select applicants based on their background or schooling; applicants from a diverse range of backgrounds are selected on the rigours of aptitude and ability at interview”. The report fails to consider this, and by shifting the blame onto college admissions it cleverly hides the government’s lack of impetus when it comes to addressing the issue of state school applicants.

While I agree with the new incentives proposed in this report, there is no discussion on how new teachers would be coordinated into working within disadvantaged schools. It also implies that only ‘good young teachers’ are suitable, but what about provisions made for mature and experienced teachers? Quite clearly there is no holistic plan to coordinate demand and supply for teaching nationally.

However, the report does outline its action plan in dealing with underperforming schools. Underachieving establishments are to be changed to academies, their leadership refreshed and, in some cases, a complete refurbishment of the school and its ethos is recommended. But this upheaval is a wasted effort. Children of all ages simply need support, guidance, and to be treated as individuals, especially with regard to life after school. The report remains negligent in failing to suggest this.

It is completely barbarous to blame Oxbridge colleges for a lack of state school applicants, as this report ignorantly does, when blame should really be placed on a lack of government support for underachieving schools. Robinson College, for example, has an excellent access team and subcommittee, all engaged in wanting to make Robinson the ‘alternative’ college for Cambridge. Access at Robinson aims to achieve a direct as well as an indirect approach,  inspiring prospectus students through college events, essay prizes and subject taster days, all while accommodating for maintained schools by providing free transport. Social media is an effective platform, allowing prospectus students from all over the world to visit the ‘Students of Robinson’ Facebook page.

There will always be inherent obstacles in society, but this report merely skims the surface, rather than digging deep in an attempt to fix the issues present.