The Times today. School levers face 'toughest fight for University places in a decade'. Your comments?

[stayingpositiveifpossible]

Hello there,

Just read this article, not sure if I'm supposed to link but here goes:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/cecee68e-f7ed-11ec-84c1-32e852e780b0?shareToken=d4a685d62855dee29864d4d8a9abdf56

My question is, with an already stressed cohort for this year and next year and going forward - how helpful is it to publish something like this? Do you feel it is helpful or alarmist and scaremongering?

I have read alternative views than this, particularly with regard to disadvantaged students?

p.s. it is behind a pay wall sadly

Well across the sector there will be enough places for everyone that wants to go. Though the spaces will be at the lower tariff end. But the top tariff has always been competitive so nothing new there.

I'm not sure the press should avoid subjects because they're stressful though and they have published after exams so no one should have their A level performance affected by a Times article.

I don’t think it’s helpful or scaremongering. It’s just news.

I work in HE, at a lower down the table institution. Most of the universities in that area are desperate to increase income and will be taking everyone they can. We are under pressure to take absolutely anyone with a pulse that applies to boost the coffers. It’s only an issue at the top.

It's definitely an issue at the courses and universities the Times journalists want their children to go to and possibly feel they have a right to attend.

The rest of us maybe not so much, there are a whole load of courses out there for a range of students.

One needs to bear in mind the demographic of the average Times reader...

Everyone is scraping the barrel for money, if news like above encourage some DC to take up places... well ...

DS applied for medicine. Very quiet, studious young man (DH and I not sure where this has come from!) who has wanted to be a doctor despite us taking him to see Adam Kaye…

He was predicted all As for GCSEs (and of course as not actually examined, got them). Predicted A for A levels; volunteered every Sunday at local hospital; was on some youth panel at other local hospital; umpteen on line courses, forums, etc over lockdown; read lots of books around medicine, ethics, doctors, nhs blah blah blah.

We knew it would be competitive and it has been crazy. Not helped by places like Exeter telling him after he applied ‘sorry, we only had 47 places for new applicants as we paid so many £10K to defer from last year’. Scottish universities have apparently been under pressure from Westminster not to accept many English applicants (there was a news source for this, can’t find it right now).

This cohort has been screwed, and it has been so difficult for unis too, I would hate to work in admissions. It has been gruelling, and I think it made DS feel better to know it is not him, it is particularly tough this year.
(less than 16% of applicants for medicine were offered a place this year).

Independent schools should have been held to greater account over inflated grades last year.

The fact that they got away with it was because Ofqual did not have the capacity to perform its regulatory function, not because the schools that most inflated their grades (affecting numbers who qualified for university places last year) practised accurately or ethically.

Thanks for your comments already, it is an education!

Sorry OP, but are you seriously suggesting that newspapers shouldn't publish factual news stories in case they make people feel bad?!

No. Not at all. Just that when there are headlines and evidence existing which show that at least fifty per cent of students have suffered mental health issues due to the aftermath of the pandemic - that there should also be material which reflects the extra stress of this scenario on students and parents.

As one poster has already said 'they are screwed'. How could this be done differently? I don't think that is an unreasonable viewpoint personally.

Also I'm not sure parts of the article are factual. I've read different things (in the Times) in recent weeks regarding the impact of this on 'disadvantaged' students.

I'd like to know about alternative viewpoints...

less than 16% of applicants for medicine were offered a place this year

I think it was less than 16% of applications that resulted in offers. As most students apply to four places some will have more than one offer and some will be rejected from one place but get an offer elsewhere. Good luck for next year.

How many a level students do you know who read the Times? I can't see great swathes of students fainting in their sixth form common rooms as they come across this story on page 9.

It is absolutely unreasonable to suggest that a newspaper editor should refrain from publishing a story, or using an accurate headline, because people may be sensitive and upset.

This is the situation. The Times has reported it. If you find this difficult and stressful that is not the responsibility of the newspaper reporting it.

Most universities are no longer the high esteemed places of academia anymore, they are businesses, if a potential student goes to them waving money around a place will appear. They do have to create that supply and demand balance, where they hold back enough to maintain that elusive desirability but in reality they want the money.

It is an important article, that is true. No, I'm not suggesting that said editor should refrain from publishing such an article.

Neither am I expecting that every sixth form student will be reading page nine of the Times!

However, the article contributes to a general debate which illuminates what is going on?

Are you suggesting that parents/carers/students shouldn't be discussing it?

This

My question is, with an already stressed cohort for this year and next year and going forward - how helpful is it to publish something like this? Do you feel it is helpful or alarmist and scaremongering?

You aren't asking to discuss the actual issue - that there might not be enough places at (some) universities for the students in this year's cohort.

You are asking to discuss the rights and wrongs of the publication of a news article which sets out the facts about the number of places and applicants.

You asked people to respond to your questions - how helpful is it to publish something like this? and "is it helpful or alarmist and scaremongering?*

My response to those questions is that a newspaper does not and should not publish news stories based in whether they are "helpful" (by which I can only assume you mean "makes people feel good about themselves", as surely a student or parent of student who is rejected would be better off understanding the context of that rejection, rather than assuming it was entirely their own issue). A newspaper should decide to publish based on whether or not it is true. This is true, therefore it should have been published.

If a potential student goes to them waving money around a place will appear.

How does that work then?

Oh goodness - the press is also there to publish information in the public interest. (The third pillar of democracy - even though some might argue it isn't).

The last time I checked we still lived in a 'democracy' - where free speech is (albeit sometimes limited) but still possible.

So, yes, unless posters are talking about ice cream flavours at the seaside (which would be completely off topic) I'm actually really keen to hear ANYONE'S views on this....

heaven forbid someone might have an insight to offer that might be 'helpful' or 'interesting' eh?

Was it the Times or Torygragh that complained too many state school kids were taking RG/Oxbridge places...?

I'm really confused as to what you want from this thread. Your OP was about if the paper should have published the story or not. (Yes, of course they should.)

Now do you want to discuss the issue of uni places?

You do realise that part of the function of the press is to publish the stories so that people know the facts and can discuss them? So if you want people to discuss the issue of uni places then the Times article existing is good for you - it gives you and others information to discuss?

What is it you actually want?

Not sure. But I do remember coming across something along those lines i.e the new 'disadvantaged' were while males at prep schools...

...sure most articles are biased one way or the other. The last thing I read in the Times before this particular article - was that rates of 'disadvantaged' students were going up not down (and I've heard this from elsewhere too). Confusing.

white males not while males typo