Should increasing social mobility be a remit of universites?

[mids2019]

Entered an intriguing discussion about reasons for falling numbers of pupils entering Oxbridge from elite schools and the debate seemed to be on meritocracy in a general sense with some very powerful views on ensuring fair access to all education.

The question is will social mobility improve significantly given successive governments have tried to solve this issue with varying levels of success?.

Universities should be about the best research and education.

Getting the right students onto the courses that are right for them is important.

So yes, contextual offers matter. As does outreach work and the role of organisations such as the Sutton Trust.

But it is the role of secondary schools and sixth form colleges to educate pupils well and support their aspirations and encourage them to aim high. And I think that getting all sixth forms to that standard is the single most important step.

Probably, IMO.

It's honestly not always easy to pinpoint the exact 'point' of undergraduate degrees given that so few courses teach anything much that gets used in later life.

In the light of this conundrum it doesn't seem at all reasonable to throw in some very mild social engineering into the mix. Not to the extent of allowing social class to be more important than exam results in applications, but certainly using it as a tie breaker to distiguish between equally academically qualified candidates.

Social Mobility is part of a universities remit. In order to charge 9K+ fees a university must have an access and participation plan.

There are entire teams employed by universities who work with schools, colleges and the community in order to widen participation.

Universities play an important part in social mobility but they are only one part of the jigsaw.

@AnguaResurgam

I agree with that. The outreach work being done by elite universities (including Oxford and Cambridge) seems to be achieving its goal in that there is an increasing number of excellent state candidates applying.

Indeed someone posted a league table of the proportion of private educated students at various institutions and Cambridge was plummeting down the table.

State school applicants should be encouraged to aim high and a significant proportion of 6th formers are now achieving A and A star grades leading to opening of opportunities.

I noted some university aims are to increase the number of students from disadvantaged families but should the focus be on contexualisation or longer term support to improve the educational environment?

I wonder if the meritocratic goals of such schemes will see progress in wider society?

State school applicants should be encouraged to aim high and a significant proportion of 6th formers are now achieving A and A star grades leading to opening of opportunities.

It's not as simple as this. It's quite a nuanced and complex subject. I teach and research this topic and this particular issue was the focus of both my masters and PhD.
We still see students from low socioeconomic backgrounds or those that are first generation students apply to middle to low ranking, local universities even when they have the required entry requirements for more elite institutions. I've lost count of the amount of times a student has told me ' people like me don't go to places like that' when discussing attending elite universities.

longer term support to improve the educational environment?

@OP, can you give an example of the type of support you have in mind?

@Tonty....basically more funding for schools and improving the social fabric of society so contexualisation wasn't required.

@TheJerkStore

It is interesting to look at the motivation behind institution choice. Could this be a combination of not going out if a social comfort zone and not being aware of the professional opportunities that await by applying to high tariff institutions?

It may ba a case of very bright state educated pupils not aspiring to professional/lead roles due to lack of appropriate role models in their lives.

If you are going to attract disadvantaged pupils to more of our elite establishments would broadening the curriculum at say Oxford to include career options that are more vocational e.g. nursing, production management so a link can be seen the degree and immediate employment?

I think coming from a working class background myself the idea of direct link between degree and employment was important.

I think a general intriguing question is whether broadening opportunities at university level will lead to broadening opportunities in high profile positions. Will relative wealth/education type still be an important factor in the make up of senior roles in society?

It is interesting to look at the motivation behind institution choice. Could this be a combination of not going out if a social comfort zone and not being aware of the professional opportunities that await by applying to high tariff institutions?

It is mainly due to feeling like they won't fit in.

It may ba a case of very bright state educated pupils not aspiring to professional/lead roles due to lack of appropriate role models in their lives.
This can play a part definitely. There is a huge emphasis on encounters with employers and stereotypes in careers education at the moment.

If you are going to attract disadvantaged pupils to more of our elite establishments would broadening the curriculum at say Oxford to include career options that are more vocational e.g. nursing, production management so a link can be seen the degree and immediate employment?

I don't think this is a solution. While evidence shows us that working class and first generation students are more likely to pick a vocational courses due to this feeling like the least risky way to approach HE and the cost involved but 80% of graduate jobs don't specify a particular subject. We should be encouraging young people to look at the wider benefits and opportunities that HE can give which will often lead on to jobs.

I think coming from a working class background myself the idea of direct link between degree and employment was important.

There is a quite a bit of evidence to support this. Working class students are more likely to pick vocationally linked courses.

I think a general intriguing question is whether broadening opportunities at university level will lead to broadening opportunities in high profile positions. Will relative wealth/education type still be an important factor in the make up of senior roles in society?

I have been working in widening participation for nearly 20 years. Unfortunately, parents income, occupation and education are still the biggest predictors of a young persons future career and earnings.

@TheJerkStore

Really interesting field of study.

I think for a lot of degrees at older universities the some if not most of academic information acquired is redundant in terms actually doing a given job In a sense there is over education unless considering academia or intensive vocational roles such as medicine

To an extent employers are therefore picking graduates partially (though not fully) on the reputation of the university. This is particularly significant given that there is no standardised way of comparing degrees across institutions.

The point of wealth/parental background still being a major determinant in the eventual career destination I think is really relevant.

The previous thread I referred to noted the reduction in privately schooled children at Oxbridge (and increase of pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds) . Cambridge is now moving down the private school ratio rankings.

Will this mean elite employers may cast their net wider than oxbridge in terms of recruitment. Will wealth/schooling still allow success independent of oxbridge access.

Will the potential uncoupling of elite society roles with elite universities will they maintain their prestige (nebulous concept!) and still remain as attractive?

I think for a lot of degrees at older universities the some if not most of academic information acquired is redundant in terms actually doing a given job In a sense there is over education unless considering academia or intensive vocational roles such as medicine

This depends what you think is the main function of a university. Is a university's job just to train people to do jobs? I don't think so....and I teach careers and employability! I don't think there is such a thing as over education.
Some university courses are vocational so are training you to do a job but it still important to have a broad knowledge base.
Interestingly , the top graduate accountancy firms specifically target History students because they like the transferable skills they develop.

To an extent employers are therefore picking graduates partially (though not fully) on the reputation of the university. This is particularly significant given that there is no standardised way of comparing degrees across institutions.
Yep. this is an issue unfortunately. However, we are slowly making progress in this area. I work at a post 92 uni but we happen to be a centre of excellence in my subject and employers in our sector understand that.

Will this mean elite employers may cast their net wider than oxbridge in terms of recruitment. Will wealth/schooling still allow success independent of oxbridge access.

Many already do. It varies between sectors. .

Will the potential uncoupling of elite society roles with elite universities will they maintain their prestige (nebulous concept!) and still remain as attractive?
We're a very long way for this happening!!!

@TheJerkStore

I understand your point about History graduates making good accountants but from a technical level interpretation of historical facts lends itself to exacting numeracy (though definitely softer skills)

Does accepting a history graduate allow companies to target higher tariff institutions that have history courses? (At the expense of possibly more technically relevant courses at newer universities?)

E.g. KPMG taking a Durham History grad instead of an accoutancy grad from UWE?

I think part of what employers also look for is resilience and the ability to think outside the box. I think older universities are particularly good at this. Many would argue that the ability to think on your feet under pressure and give a good argument or ability to analyse complex information is something an Oxbridge graduate will be well versed in regardless of subject.

Does accepting a history graduate allow companies to target higher tariff institutions that have history courses? (At the expense of possibly more technically relevant courses at newer universities?)

It really depends on the employer.
There are entire teams at universities who deal with employer engagement and it's part of their job to convince employers to work with their university. It's an area of university work which is growing.

@Tonty

But does one set of universties have a monopoly on these qualities? Qualities like resilience would I be expect to be seen from those that are relatively disadvantaged as upbringing might have necessitated this

Thinking out the box and under pressure seem to be particular qualities that are inherent and can be learned or enhanced in a variety of environments.

No, not at all but Oxbridge do have the reputation of immense pressure / heavy workload, hence their shorter terms to counter balance the academic workload compared to other universities, which is why they are the most selective. The reason investment banks target these universities is precisely because you've got more chance of pooling fresh graduants who exhibit these qualities than not.
I have a family member who is looking at Cambridge and from the youtube videos her mum and I have looked at, we gathered that your average Cambridge humanities student writes about 25 essays in a term (8weeks) compared to the average of 8 in any other university. Their tutorials also are quite gruelling leaving you with no place to hide, you have to be prepared to face a good debate and defend your position from an analytical point. This gives exceptional preparation for certain highly pressured careers e.g Law.

That doesn't mean other universities aren't educating their students well but I believe there's a different kind of pressure at Oxbridge.

and to add, wether this kind of pressure is necessary at university is questionannable. I think some sectors like new recruits to arrive spilling over with confidence with the ability to learn new concepts in the blink of an eye. I've probably wandered off topic a bit, I'm emailing, writing a proposal, as well as mning all at the same time.

@Tonty

Interesting. I suppose we are talking about the elite side of things in terms of numeration. However so do you advocate then other universities adopting the Oxford or Cambridge model to give their undergraduate s experience of the pressure of working under great pressure to make them more attractive to employers?

I notice that Imperial and LSE seem quite attractive to investment bankers as well. Is there a similar work load there.

Law is a strange one. Most universities in the country offer some sort of law degree and I believe (not an expert) that conversion courses are available.

If the law strongly recruit s from Oxbridge do we have to question the legitimacy of law degrees from other institutions?them

Good multi tasking by the way.....

@TheJerkStore

Mention was made of high status lucrative professions such as Law and Investment Banking. Do you think there is an initial aspiration towards these careers from those young people from relatively disadvantaged regions. Is it the case that if they have limited knowledge of these professions through not knowing anybody in them then it is harder to motivate them to get them to places where they could enter these sectors.

(Not that I would personally enter investment banking.....I value my mental health to much! )

www.legalcheek.com/2016/02/research-over-70-of-top-judges-and-barristers-are-privately-educated-or-oxbridge-elite/

Table here illustrating the link between private schools, Oxbridge and elite professions. Given the direction of travel of private school pupil number s at Oxbridge it will be really interesting to see if in future these same professions are still dominated by public school attendees. If they still are and if we have say 25% of Oxbridge students privately educated and on average state schools do marginally better degree wise what does it say about meritocracy in this country?

Conversely as Oxford and Cambridge increasingly become more diverse recruiting from a range of backgrounds is it still legitimate in the cause of social mobility to ask elite professions to recruit less heavily from Oxford and Cambridge. Seems odd to ask Oxbridge to diversify them out pressure on elite professions to reduce recruitment from there.

We still see students from low socioeconomic backgrounds or those that are first generation students apply to middle to low ranking, local universities even when they have the required entry requirements for more elite institutions. I've lost count of the amount of times a student has told me ' people like me don't go to places like that' when discussing attending elite universities.

I think there is a certain amount of 'chicken and egg' to be looked at.

I have my 3rd dc now in her first year, so have spent a lot of the last 8 years of so looking at Universities with one dc or another, and also reading the Higher Education Threads on here and the facebook group WIWIKAU (What I wish I knew about University).

You regularly get a poster asking "Is Exeter like they say - very white and full of Upper or upper middle class pupils" or "Is Bristol full of students who went to Private school" etc . Overwhelmingly, people answer 'yes'. Then a poster will come along and say 'it shouldn't matter if people are different from yourself, look at the course'. I agree with that, in theory but I also know that your dc is most likely to succeed if they are happy where they are at university.
Now a big part of me, and the way I've hoped to bring my dc up is to believe in themselves and that they are as good as anybody else in the world but 18 yr olds vary in maturity and vary in confidence. They are already leaving home and going right out of their comfort zone. If you can give them some familiarity and remove some of those concerns, that is going to help them settle in much better.

The 'chicken and egg' part comes because people are honest enough to say 'yes' to those question, then it is likely to mean that, once again, the next intake is also not very diverse, and so the problem continues.
(Apologies to anyone at Exeter and Bristol, those are just 2 I see regularly asked about)

@BackforGood

Agree with this. The stars in the social make up of unis support the anecdotal reputation.

I think a huge part of the university is the social experience. With all the good will in the world I think throwing young people from a diverse range of backgrounds into halls of residence and an informative (and possibly immature) part of their life and expecting a utopian community is optmistic.

In theory yes....in reality? I think this will be something to be wary of as for instance foundation courses at Cambridge. It's fantastic giving kids that have been in the care system at Oxbridge a chance but I have a feeling they may have to be thick skinned.......

I went to an RG university from a private school background, and one of my closest friends there was from state school. I remember him being very confused by all the times he got asked "which school did you go to", "where did you go for your Gap year" and those kinds of questions. The people at these places feel comfortable with others like themselves and want to be able to pigeonhole people like them. It does feel intimidating if you aren't from that background.

On the vocational/academic degrees, I know lots of lawyers and barely any studied law as a degree. Most did arts subjects like classics, philosophy, history, English even Social Anthropology, and then converted. Again I think private school people are more aware of this option as they probably have family or friends who have done this before.

Mention was made of high status lucrative professions such as Law and Investment Banking. Do you think there is an initial aspiration towards these careers from those young people from relatively disadvantaged regions. Is it the case that if they have limited knowledge of these professions through not knowing anybody in them then it is harder to motivate them to get them to places where they could enter these sectors.

Again it's complicated and not down to just one factor.
It can be down to aspiration and a fear of not fitting in. Also, entry to many elite careers relies on knowing people - either to introduce you to an organisation or to facilitate work experience. It helps massively if you know people working in your chosen profession.

In 2011 the government removed the statutory duty for schools and colleges to provide work experience and careers education meaning many young people had to arrange their own work experience. This is much easier if you have family or family friends who can help.

New statutory guidance was introduced in 2018 but successive governments have failed to properly invest in careers education and guidance. This is one of the biggest problems in my opinion.

@BackforGood

We still see students from low socioeconomic backgrounds or those that are first generation students apply to middle to low ranking, local universities even when they have the required entry requirements for more elite institutions. I've lost count of the amount of times a student has told me ' people like me don't go to places like that' when discussing attending elite universities.

I think there is a certain amount of 'chicken and egg' to be looked at.

I have my 3rd dc now in her first year, so have spent a lot of the last 8 years of so looking at Universities with one dc or another, and also reading the Higher Education Threads on here and the facebook group WIWIKAU (What I wish I knew about University).

You regularly get a poster asking "Is Exeter like they say - very white and full of Upper or upper middle class pupils" or "Is Bristol full of students who went to Private school" etc . Overwhelmingly, people answer 'yes'. Then a poster will come along and say 'it shouldn't matter if people are different from yourself, look at the course'. I agree with that, in theory but I also know that your dc is most likely to succeed if they are happy where they are at university.
Now a big part of me, and the way I've hoped to bring my dc up is to believe in themselves and that they are as good as anybody else in the world but 18 yr olds vary in maturity and vary in confidence. They are already leaving home and going right out of their comfort zone. If you can give them some familiarity and remove some of those concerns, that is going to help them settle in much better.

The 'chicken and egg' part comes because people are honest enough to say 'yes' to those question, then it is likely to mean that, once again, the next intake is also not very diverse, and so the problem continues.
(Apologies to anyone at Exeter and Bristol, those are just 2 I see regularly asked about)

This is absolutely part of the problem. And it's a really difficult issue to overcome.

@TheJerkStore

Definitiely . I would say at least from my limited experience networking is important. I think this may be important in terms of the social background composition of universities as will it be an advantage to go to universities where in general there are a high number of corrections?

@Stokey

Interesting about law conversion; we're these older universities by any chance?

My cousin many years ago did Law at Preston poly as it was wishing to pursue this as a career. I don't think his C V was particularly looked at and he did other things.

I think the question about asking about school names could just be a natural icebreaker when meeting a new fresher. However there could be the subtext of 'do I want to be in the same social group as you?'. It would be hard to tell.

It's a little rude in the work place I think to ask about school (maybe uni) and maybe it should be a little for new undergrads, at least at the beginning.

I think when you talk about state school students you are talking about those iPod socioeconomic areas in failing schools?

Because I live I live in Kent and the grammar school students are very able and confident in their abilities and would have no qualms about applying to elite universities