To Think that Grad & Apprenticeships are now only for Diversity Candidates

Exactly. Someone's disadvantaged upbringing should definitely be taken into context and assessed holistically. But don't just ignore the university completely. On average in the grand scheme of things the student at a better university is more intelligent and academic. That does not always necessarily translate into being better at work but there's a decent enough correlation.

On the more academic courses especially Bristol brags about how academically selective it is. Some of the contextual offers are very high grade offers. It is also very expensive to live in Bristol with many first years consigned to the outskirts. Whereas a local uni means less debt if you can live at home. Economics matter.

Outliers do make it into Bulge Bracket, MBB, the Magic Circle etc

The advantages offered by access to informed parental support/pushing, better coaching (schools etc), connections, resources and experiences mean these firms are over represented by certain profiles of majority white male and certain ethnic minorities (majority male). People often recruit in their own image and the selection criteria has conscious and unconscious biases baked in, meaning that you are going to get a distorted view of what good or unacceptable looks like. Especially at senior levels and in the front office.

.

Again, this just shows a complete lack of understanding of disadvantage and diversity.

one could argue (and they do) that you’re replying on old fashioned measures of success and will get exam taking machines.

it’s a pretty old fashioned approach.

I'm looking to test their ability to process information and work ethic. These are tested by A Levels and are what I need as an employer.

Many pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds in Tower Hamlets achieve AAA and higher. They don't go to UEL when they can get into UCL, Imperial or King's.

As employees? Who knows?

you’re not looking to test their degree taking ability are you?

So are students at the University of East London equal to those at say, Bristol?

Both universities offer degrees in Accounting and Finance. According to UCAS, the most common A Levels of accepted students at UEL was CCD (the highest BBB, lowest DEE). For the same course, Bristol students had the most common grade of ABB (highest AAA, lowest BBB).

In other words, for the same degree, Bristol students need to achieve much higher than students at UEL. Bristol also makes extensive use of contextual offers, but even so the lowest accepted student at Bristol had the same A Levels as the highest accepted student at UEL.

So yes, students at UEL are less well-qualified and lower achieving than at Bristol. As an employer looking for a finance trainee, I would not consider a first from UEL equal to a first from Bristol.

Completely agree with @Bambamhoohoo. I think there are a few posters on this thread who need to check their privilege. No harm in us all doing it actually.

I live and work very close to UEL and for many of the students, just getting to uni even a “not very good” one is a huge step forward given the background they come from. Most are local and have grown up in Tower Hamlets (or Hackney or Newham, equally deprived), one of the most deprived boroughs in London that has the highest rate of child poverty in the UK. So “judging on their extra-curriculars” also demonstrates (un)conscious bias. How many families can afford extra-curriculars?! Some can’t afford to eat.

Through my employer (bulge bracket bank) we do a huge amount of volunteering work with schools and not-for-profits in Tower Hamlets and Hackney / East London to try to support the local population and help level the playing field. There is a wealth of untapped talent who just needs a chance and some encouragement to show what they’re capable of. I’m actually quite proud to work for a company who takes this so seriously and isn’t just paying lip service to the idea. In the last 2 months alone I’ve been involved in at least 4 activities supporting the local community like this (one for 16-18 year olds, one for female students, one for the homeless, one for children under 11) as well as mentoring someone who works for a Hackney based community organisation and being a school governor for a Hackney primary school.

But they are not trying to get a place at university, they are trying to get a job. So how is universities being unequal relevant?

your bias that students from a higher tier university make better employees is exactly what needs to be safeguarded against.

The disadvantage is something that should be noted on the application in terms of context. But it's disingenuous to suggest all higher education institutions are equal. Applications should be assessed holistically.

I didn’t design the practice, merely sharing what happens in one company in the real world. In my company there are reasonably gender balanced applicants - it isn’t a case of wading through hundreds of amazing men to find the handful of women and hiring them regardless of whether they are any good or not.

No idea about primary school teachers, but I suspect there are no where near the supply of male candidates to aim for 50/50, and no one wants people who are lesser qualified or capable or suitable getting these jobs. I don’t believe men are pushing for equality in the teaching sector - I could be wrong!

Depends. Maybe by “not very good” you really mean accessible and stuffed full of poor people and children of immigrants?

again, we are back to disadvantage. Universities like UEL are stuffed full of disadvantaged students. Why shouldn’t they get a graduate apprenticeship/ scheme? Why should it go to the students of higher ranking universities?

Oh yes sorry. I mean it's not really the best uni is it? But I'd look at it within the wider context of their application. Any extra curriculars they did etc. hardship/extenuating circumstances etc

Your whole point was you said you wouldn’t remove university.

If it's blind testing then you don't know do you?

Edited double post

What about someone who went to university of east London?
how do you reckon their university would look in your blind testing?

Because the bulge bracket are relatively exclusive and competitive to get into?

Spent some time thinking about this last night. I think that it is sensible to remove name, sex, race etc and to hire on the quality of the application alone. But I wouldn't remove university. It's not a guarantee, but it's indicative and should be taken in context with the whole application. I know someone who got a 3rd at Cambridge because she spent too much drinking and chasing after lads.

University education isn't the only thing you need. They'd like to see extra curriculars, good leadership. Someone running the Oxford Union for example. Or someone running a finance society etc.

University education shouldn't be fully excluded but should be taken into context with the wider application. For example is the Nottingham graduate really on the same level as someone who went to Harvard?

What I'm against is box ticking where an application is advantaged for being black, only one arm, LGBT etc.

It’s not disputable that this is the case. You can think up all sorts of reasons why they should be doing this stuff off their own back but that doesn’t change stats.
I did a contract at a post 92 uni and couldn’t believe how excluded its student population were. you don’t think people who work at universities and employers are under some kind of shared delusion when really disadvantaged students just aren’t trying hard enough?

@Isthisit22These schemes are for university students. Intelligent people. They really would have very closed ears if they never heard about these schemes. It would mean they never went to a careers event or employers career fair either. On that basis, I’d probably question their motivation to get one.

I certainly knew students who thought the intern schemes were akin to slave labour and didn’t want to work for those firms anyway. They just wanted a little job near home and no intention of branching out! I do not agree that background totally bars dc, its attitude and possibly some family pressure in some cultures. The idea high achieving students don’t know about intern schemes is faintly laughable. Unless they study and live as a hermit.

Can’t believe anyone doesn’t already realise this

Isn’t it obvious? Frequently those students don’t come from a background where they would even know those schemes exist. Frequently they don’t have the confidence in themselves to apply due to poor life experiences and lack of parental aspiration/ knowledge. Frequently they don’t have the resources to prepare for or attend interviews.
Parental involvement has been proven to be a large factor in academic and life success.

Obviously not all go to local universities but if you come from a lower socioeconomic group where nobody has gone to University before then it's cheaper to stay at home and go to the local ex-poly and continue in your PT job than it is to leave the region and go to a more prestigious university where you worry you might not fit in among the private school kids.

@JaninaDuszejko Why do you think “first in family” grads go to local universities? That’s rather patronising. They can, and do, choose RG and move away from home because they don’t want to be labelled. They also know which universities are best - and why shouldn’t they?