University Fair Access

[sidress]

I have seen the debate of universities admitting more pupils from 'poorer' backgrounds and just feel it is quite unnecessary to positively discriminate against middle class children at state schools (I can see the argment with private schools but this is not the issue). You can't buy qualifications, you get them from your own hard work. That is a choice you make irrespective of your parents wealth or not whether your parents are wealthy or in regular trouble with the law. Likewise the ability of parents to support is little to do with wealth except hiring private tutors. I didn't exactly have a priveledged upbringing yet outperformed many 'posh' kids in the school, similar story with my own kids.

There are perhaps better means of measuring 'disadvantages' in this field such as learning difficulties, did parents go to university, going to good or bad schools, boy/girl and so on.

Is it just more PC gone mad?

The "poorer backgrounds" thing is based on a set of criteria that used to be known as WAP (Widening Access Participation). I think it's just Widening Participation now. The WAP criteria was based on home postcode, parental participation in HE, school location, and other socio-economic factors that escape me just now owing to the infusion of lovely wine flowing round my bloodstream.
AFAIK that criteria is still used when people refer to students from "poorer backgrounds", it's just a lazy phrase to imply broadly the same thing.

If it means poorer in more ways than finacially then it makes sense but I always feel lack of wealth and luxuries in life is an excuse for poor performance and it just isn't. If parents and pupils want the results to get into uni they will give this priority over hanging street corners and crime.

You clearly have no idea, OP.

Students from poorer backgrounds are sometimes battling with not just low parental aspirations but absolute disbelief, from home, that university is a worthwhile thing. It's the "university isn't for the likes of us" curse.

Then you have the actual financial issues- making bright but badly-off students realise that the "debt" is worth it, that there are universities other than the one in the next city and that they do have the right to apply for Oxbridge/RG institutions.

The WP programme run by our local university involves a huge variety of things, from supplying existing degree students as mentors to KS4 and KS5 students to providing free bus travel to open days.

As Head of 6th Form in a school where even the brightest are fighting against the parental expectation that they will
Go And Get A Job (any job), anything the universities can do to help is good.

Sidres, my elder DD will be one of those "disadvantaged" because she goes to a superselective, lives in a very wealthy area (though we are not) and has two professional parents who have been to University.

Do I think it is fair? Yes actually I do. She has been privileged to be brought up in a literate household, been read to from birth, joined the library as a baby, had ballet lessons, music lessons, swimming lessons etc. She has been overseas on holiday and on school trips, been to the ballet, opera, museums and art galleries. She knows how to pay a bill, book appointments, travel independently, make small talk and behave appropriately in any given situation. She will leave secondary in two years with her A/A*s, her DofE, World Challenge and music grades.

There are a lot of kids who have never been out of west London, do not have a computer at home, never been to concert, have parents with poor English skills, and cannot afford books or out of school activities. I come across kids who do not even have proper table manners, as they survive on takeouts. If any of those kids have the motivation and basic aptitude to apply to Oxbridge, they have my full support, even if they "steal" a place from my DD.

My DD has had the advantages described by beingfluffy (apart from the school) but due to her living in an low participation area, going to a school where only 10% of the sixth form going to 'good' unis, me being a low paid single parent who never went to uni. She meets the criteria for a Widening Access course.

She has a conditional offer for a very competetive course and there is evidence that students that have entered the course do as well as those with top grades from the best schools.

Beingfluffy - excuse my ignorance but what is 'world challenge'?

hellsbells99, it is supposedly the "new DofE" i.e. getting skills that are claimed to help with Uni applications etc.

The kids go on a trip to a far flung place (Himalayas in DD's case), they are supposed to raise the money themselves (over £2000 each), plan their itinery and purchase all their supplies once there on a strict budget and hike and camp out in the wilderness for a week. They also spend a week working on a community project such as repairing or redecorating a school.

My cynical view would be that it seems a very expensive DofE camping trip with a bit of poverty tourism thrown in. The school were very keen for them to be involved. I wanted DD to go because I don't think we would ever be able to afford a family trip to India and she might even learn something along the way.

Thanks. Does sound a lot more complicated than D of E and possibly less available? But hope your DD enjoyed it! Not heard of it being offered around here - that is 'up North'.

That is a choice you make irrespective of your parents wealth or not whether your parents are wealthy or in regular trouble with the law.

Rubbish.

Some children can't take book home because a parent will try to sell it, or tear bits off to make a spliff.

Some children go home from school, clean up an alcoholic parent, cook a meal for younger siblings (if there is food in the house) place themselves between the parent and younger siblings.

Some children live in houses with no books, no carpet (or other floor covering) and share a room with two others. Often there is no table to eat or do homework.

Imagine you are 14, the oldest of three. One morning the police knock on your door and arrest your mum. They then start a search of the entire house. Because they have arrested the only adult they call in social services. Do you go to school? If the police let you have your school bag and uniform, or do you stay until the search is over and social services arrive? Do you really think this doesn't impact on your ability to get good grades? What if you are 16b and it is the day of your English GCSE?

sashh is right, children don't live in the genteel poverty that OP imagines.

Imagine if you had to hide your possessions or birthday money you got from relations in case your dad stole it to spend on drink. You can't do homework or have your friends round because your parents are rowing or your dad is snoring drunk in a chair. All the carpets and soft furnishings have holes, the good furniture has been sold to buy drink as well as your mum's wedding ring and sewing machine and the record player someone gave you out of pity. Most of the lights don't work, there is only one heater in the house and no hot water. The gas and electricity are regularly cut off because of non payment.

You can't sleep at night, dreading the sound of the key in the door and another drunken row starting. You have 1 pair of jeans - no other clothes apart from school clothes. You are constantly tense. You jump whenever an adult speaks to you, you are constantly in trouble at school for not being able to do your homework because of the screaming and shouting at home. You worry because the neighbours have got together to raise a petition to have you evicted because they can't stand it either.

That was my childhood. I was clever and got my O' levels, but had to leave school before doing A' levels as I couldn't carry on the charade any more. I was easily clever enough to have gone to Oxbridge at 18. Later as a mature student I did A' levels and went then.

Don't you think kids like me deserved a break? Or do you prefer to bleat on about how unfair it is to "middle class" kids.

The world challenge offered at our school cost £4,500. The ones who went didn't manage to raise half of it each so a very expensive DofE for parents. Mine wanted to go but I thought it was a rip off tbh and couldn't have afforded it anyway. School made a massive thing of it with a special awards night. I think the students who went enjoyed the challenge, not sure if it was life changing though.

You clearly have no idea, OP, precisely because I suspect you're from the middle class background you speak of.

BeingFluffy and Sashh have explained it well.
It's not media headlines "poor" it's about poverty of experience and support.

One of my 6th form girls, who could easily have applied for university with her grades, couldn't because right about the time UCAS applications were being done, she was dealing with the inquest into her mother's death, and the very real concern that her father would be found responsible. She would then have had to leave school completely to care for her younger brother, who is autistic.

Another had to leave in the middle of Yr 13 because she, her mother and younger brother lived with their Gran, who was diagnosed with an aggressive cancer. She had to leave school to care for her Gran, as her mother is an alcoholic and couldn't cope. Sadly, Gran died and then my student had to deal with the fact that the council house they lived in was Gran's and the family potentially faced eviction. Fortunately, they were allowed to stay. She came back to school and repeated Yr 13.

On paper, both these girls would have been university candidates - good grades, prefects, leading roles in the school play, work experience in relevent fields etc etc. But their home lives made it, at best, unlikely that they would apply. Perhaps they will in the future, but for now, finding the £22 for UCAS entry is not at the top of their priority list.

OP, actually you can 'buy' qualifications. If you have the resources you can buy your child 1-1 tutoring which can make a difference to grades. If it didn't why would people bother?

BeingFluffy - I sympathise with your situation but the difference is YOU cared about your work and didn't fall into the trap your parents did. I had a not dissimilar struggle as a child, not with police and antisocial parents but nevertheless.

What made me post this is how we define 'poor' is very open to abuse. In the modern day people are not the architects of their own problems they are victims of circumstance - well sadly some still are and they undermine genuine cases. I hope the policy makes the distinction clear.

I did mention the ability to hire tutors but this is hardly a necessity.

Sidress, the widening participation is aimed at those who are bright but with low aspirations, from schools who don't send many to higher education, this generally means those who are basically poor in terms of money and experience. Can you really not see how middle class kids have privileges that poor kids don't? Frankly, I do not feel threatened by it although I have a daughter who will apply to Uni next year; she has a clear advantage over most other applicants.

Incidentally I wouldn't have fallen into the definition of poor school/council estate/no family history of higher education; my extended family are wealthy and titled (not that they have ever helped me). I didn't work hard because I was unable to work at home at all. I empathise with those in poverty though, because I have been there and the measures used for widening participation at present are probably as good as it is going to get.

Does anyone know where you can find the list of disadvantaged postcodes that I read about somewhere? Is it published? Thanks

Possibly this, via google, haven't tried it out...
www.lsc.gov.uk/LSCGOVUK/Templates/Standard.aspx?NRMODE=Published&NRNODEGUID=%7BC5C2D65F-B8CB-412C-B0FD-C54950F6E717%7D&NRORIGINALURL=%2Fproviders%2FData%2FSoftware%2FDisadvantageduplift&NRCACHEHINT=Guest

For the widened access scheme for vet school, as an example, you have to go to a non-selective state school (can't remember if it also has to be lower-achieving - maybe) AND have a family income of less than 25K AND neither parent have been to university. If anyone who ticks all three of those boxes wants to be a vet, I think they absolutely deserve a lower offer than someone who comes from a background of greater privilege. My daughters work hard and get good grades, and deserve places at good universities, but of course they've had their paths smoothed inestimably by the luck of where they were born; how could they not? Nobody gets into a good university without working hard, but those from disadvantaged backgrounds have to go so much further on their own before they even reach the start line - giving them a bit of a helping hand isn't giving them a place undeservedly.

Sidress I work for a university. Our WP work has had all government funding cut from it, but we are working with 2 other local universities to provide support to students to consider university - at age 11. By the time they are 16, most students who would have ruled out university, like the examples up post, will have done so. The bursaries that students now get for WP when they start university are allocated seperately to the allocation of places. You get the place then you get confirmation of a bursery to support you on the course. These are for every year of the course and require a minimum grade achievement each summer to get the next year's bursary.

You say "In the modern day people are not the architects of their own problems they are victims of circumstance - well sadly some still are and they undermine genuine cases" so people who are victims of cimcumstance, (children of drug addicts?) should not be eligible for support at unversity over genuine cases (the real poor?). The students with these bursaries who get to university are capable of working at this level and deserving of their places - they won't get next year's funding if they don't make the grade. I think you have to look again at your post about what constitutes poor.