To be upset about ‘university blind’ recruitment

The worst candidates I've ever recurited have been Oxbridge graduates. Blind recruitment would benefit them as if I saw that on an application, I'd be biased against them from previous experience.

I taught at a post 92 new uni for over a decade. The main difference between these courses and posher unis isn’t the standard at the top end, but the distribution. In more prestigious unis few students get lower degrees as they have very good academic skills when they start their degrees. Post 92s give more people a chance, so average grades are lower. I’ve been an external examiner for RG courses so know this directly- the strong students at our place produced work which was just as good quality as the good students in the RG.

The problem is that so many employers don’t believe this and just judged our alumni on the institution, so I fully support university blind applications. Especially as our students often had such a range of skills to offer as well- most having balanced their studies with jobs and kids. A lot of graduate recruitment seems to value confidence and polish over these qualities though.

👏

In reality how many kids whose parents can't move into a catchment like Tunbridge Wells where there are five grammars nearby .. have them coaxed within an inch of their lives from age seven for the 11+ .. and then afford all the extra curricula that allows them to be 'rounded individuals' miss out because of money .. or simply send them through the private route that affords all of the above ?

My best friend was a head .. a 'super head' .. she had some fabulous kids in her 'failing school' (the one she was put in to improve..) on a level playing field without money , they would have swept the board but not against 4 years of coaching.

They would have been at Cambridge or Oxford but didn't even go to Uni as the cost was prohibitive..

I hope they got 'the jobs' .. way way too much money influencing Uni these days.

Hopefully employers can see beyond this to pick kids who have natural ability . Doesn't mean your child doesn't.. but money has influenced stuff for too long and it's made employers cynical.

Think you missed the email to join the old boys club

The reason employers are choosing to recruit "university blind" is because they have learned that the university someone went to is not a very good indicator of whether they will be a successful hire. Excellent candidates sometimes come from Manchester Metropolitan (including one of my Directors, incidentally) and bad candidates sometimes come from Oxbridge.

Partly, this is because of how candidates got into Oxbridge or other Russell Group/1994 Group universities in the first place. It essentially requires a good memory, because the UK education system remains one that is largely based on remembering stuff for an exam. It says nothing about what a person is like in a team environment or how innovative they are for example.

Our firm has also worked out that a lot of schools don't push their brightest pupils to apply, so we lose those candidates; then there are the savvy youngsters who choose to study at the university closest to home to save money; there are those who cannot be away from home because they are a part time carer (including an excellent candidate we hired from London Met last year) and there are also mature students who again are more restricted in their choices. Of course, there are also candidates who had nowhere private to study until they got to university too. Studying in a nice big detached house on a quiet road is a lot easier than studying in a council flat on a flight path and next to a busy road.

Also, the bottom line is this. If a candidate goes to a top university and emerges from the experience unable to attend assessment centres and out perform candidates from universities lower in the league table, then they're not really all that in the first place are they?

Well, theoretically a first should be a first, in the same way an A* A'level from one school should be the same as from another.

Good for him! My children are mixed race with “foreign names” as my husband described them (they have his surname and their first names are from his culture) and this is precisely why I see the value of blind recruitment.

This is just such utter elitist bullshit that you should be pleased to see disappear!! If employers believe any particular uni gives a "degree above" and can substantiate that then that's fine. If employers have decided that "uni blind" suits then for their needs then the fact it's oxbridge means nothing to them.
Hopefully it will help with the nonsense that an oxbridge degree is always better than another. Nothing to do with skin colour or anything else.. A good degree is welcomed by employers. Just because you're oxbridge doesn't make one better than the other.

That may be the case (and don’t get me wrong it sounds like he’s done brilliantly), but he’s also male, living in a peaceful western democracy, has received a decent education and is about to go to one of the best universities in the world where he will have access to amazing teaching and likely make some seriously impressive contacts, plus have access to a huge range of careers etc (at careers fairs and other events). In these ways he is more privileged than most people in the UK let alone the rest of the world. So does it really matter that he can’t write Cambridge on some of his possible future job applications?

Have you seen any reliable stats on how many companies are actually recruiting blind? No, you haven't, because there aren't any published There are some high profile companies who say they do this, but plenty of other companies that don't, and they will be rubbing their hands together with glee at the prospect of less competition for the top grads. So don't worry about it. He'll be fine.

OU, like other unis, depends on the course.
I did an Open degree in very disparate subjects and the modules varied dramatically. The easiest module was the easiest exam I've sat since GCSE. The hardest was harder than some of my Oxbridge exams.

He sounds fantastic! He also sounds like someone whose abilities will shine through in any recruitment exercise.

Many People work hard. It’s not just those that get into RG / Oxbridge Unis.
Its not exclusive.
Many people don’t go to Uni. That doesn’t mean they are all lazy and incapable.

Our charity does this HR vet all applications and whittle down to 8. Head of the department then invites four for interview. Sometimes it works, something you have to start again

I don't know what all this networking stuff is. I went to a fancy school and a posh university and although I am presumed to have come out with some kind of network that is going to help me do, er, something, in fact I have just come out with a bunch of friends who all do completely different things from me and aren't any use at all in my career. I must have done it wrong.

Eh? How is working hard to get in to Oxford and working hard to get a first not a personal achievement?! They don't just dish out firsts to rich kids!

Well we saw what a bunch of former Oxford students managed to do to this country…

My DS is applying to various charities at the moment.
Hes had the same.
Absolutely nothing allowed on the application that may identify you.
Even his name was coded on one application.
ie initials plus day and month of birth. Not even allowed to put year of birth to avoid age discrimination.
I think it’s brilliant.

I do agree with name blind recruitment. It makes much more sense than university blind because a) the person has no control over their name b) their name has no impact at all on their ability and c) it avoid racism and sexism coming into play.

A couple of years ago I taught two boys in the same class. Both incredibly intelligent, hard working and articulate. Both sporty, musical and dramatic. Both from affluent, supportive families. Both Black African. One was called a name on the same lines as Charles Brown. The other a name on the same lines as Oluwatoni Osuntogun. These two young men are now among the most privileged teenagers in the country. But, statistically, 'Charles' still has a distinct and unfair, racism based advantage over 'Oluwatoni'. Even though they are both Black.
(obviously these are not the students' real names, I've made them up! But one had a traditionally British name and one a traditionally Nigerian name).

He will benefit from the high quality education and work ethic required from Cambridge, he will benefit from being around a cohort of bright young people, he will benefit from a high employer presence at recruitment fairs etc. There is so much that an oxbridge education offers.

Also… institution blind recruitment tends to allow the best to flourish. Often there will still be a very high proportion of oxbridge grads that are successful even with institution-blind recruitment. The tutorial process prepares students well for lots of grad recruitment exercises….

What happened in the 1980s really isn't relevant to the conversation now. I was at Cambridge late 1980s, got over 70% average overall and was in top 10% of my year, but because of the way they calculated classes for my particular subject I got a 2:1. Today you and I would both have got a 1st!

Having been in the unique position of actually done both, I can tell you it's a load of cobblers.

Oh and I too am autistic.

The employer has their academic grades, just not the university. That stops hiring managers assuming that someone will be impressive and the right candidate simply because their education was at a certain university and it also stops that awful ‘old-boys network’ kind of favouritism which leads to businesses being run by people with broadly the same educational background and nowhere near enough diversity of experience. Blind recruitment is good news for the majority of very able young people who have lots to offer a workplace without them being rated heavily on what sort of privilege they’ve already been fortunate enough to experience.

I’d expect some of the responses to my post so far to be, ‘Privilege? My child wasn’t privileged and went to Oxford / Cambridge! That’s some sort of discrimination!’

I’ve been a teacher for twenty years and I’ve lost count of the number of staggeringly bright pupils I’ve known who didn’t go to Oxbridge. Most deserved a place entirely on their own merit, far more than pupils who also had the advantage of personal tutors / secondary schools with an ‘Oxbridge Advisor’ / parents or teachers who helped write their application forms or gave them practice interviews. It would make them no less valuable adults in the workplace.

Maybe your son had none of those things, but the simple truth is that very few pupils get into universities like Oxford or Cambridge without support and success already present in their lives, whereas Oxbridge graduates often expect doors to open for them as that’s what they are used to. Let them present themselves at interview and be judged as the people they are now.