Non-deprived Scottish students barred from uni places

[Sorefootouch]

The only Scottish students taken by Edinburgh university last year to study law came from deprived neighbourhoods, regardless of grades. Is this a good thing? If my child wants to go to University of Edinburgh and study law do we have to move to a deprived neighbourhood before applying? Is this fair? My child goes to an average Scottish state school and is predicted to get all A’s at higher.

www.scotsman.com/news/politics/students-from-less-deprived-background-have-door-closed-to-university-due-to-snp-funding-approach-3983059

Two kids going to the same school, sitting the same exams, getting same results should be equal.

Nope a friend of mine was told he lived in the wrong postcode to get into Strathclyde. If he stayed 300yds away in a different postcode they'd have given him a place.
The fact he'd had a tough time in secondary and been bereaved of his Dad didn't matter. You have the wrong postcode.

Where is the fairness in that?

The system has become a literal postcode lottery!

What next, quicker chemo for kids with leukaemia if they live in certain postcodes?

Utter nonsense.

Yes it is complete and utter nonsense that two kids going to the same school but the kid in the 'deprived council' estate can get in with lower grades than the kid from the private estate. 300 yards away.

Postcode should not come into the equation.

@Staggie it isn't utter nonsense that the point!

Have you read different Scottish universities widening access policies?

They all have lower entrance requirements for pupils in the bottom 20% SIMD postcodes.

It's very tricky to design a system that really achieves fair aims - I'm guessing they use school and post code based on an assumption that children in the 'worse' post code have had less parental help...

I suppose it depends if you are politically motivated to prioritise selected postcodes. Afterall, it is nothing to do with deprivation of the students themselves.

It would at least make some sense if it was bases on the bottom 20% of schools. Which often have a higher level of deprivation anyway and the kids are getting the same teachers.

But they seem to be taking the logic if you live in a private estate then your minted had have been blessed with lots of opportunities and tutors etc. Which just isn't the case.

Is this the first year (2023 entry) that EU applicants don’t count as ‘home’ students?

@Flossieflamingo it's the second for new students

Thanks @Calmdown14

“This smacks of 'please wont someone think of the middle class kids.'”

Absolutely. There have been decades of entrenched privelige and worsening prospects for poorer people to get decent jobs. It needs dramatic intervention, as far as I’m concerned this is a good move. I was the first person in my family to go to university, so that perspective is a big part of why I feel this way.

I don't know who your quoting with the this smacks of 'please won't someone think of the middle class kids'.

Just because a kid lives in a privately built house doesn't mean their parents are university graduates.
Many have scrimpped and saved to afford the house but because of the postcode their kids are being denied the opportunity. Even if they have been deprived in other ways.

Postcode definitely should not enter the equation.

But the majority of poorer kids will miss out because they don't live in certain postcodes.

A poor kid in a well off street is more disadvantaged than a rich kid in a poor street.

Not to mention the swaths of rural poor who are completely excluded by this policy.

It's much easier to get out of poverty in any city than it is in a remote area.

But if they both go to the same school one has two parents, one has one living parent who's most deprived?

My DC are at a historically low performing school, the widening access grades apply to everyone at the school. DC have good grades, we live in the least deprived SIMD band and DC have parents and (a bit more unusually) grandparents who went to uni. I think is ridiculous that my DCs could get into a course via widening access under our circumstances and a child who really needs it might not. I agree postcodes aren’t great (especially rurally) but targeting specific schools isn’t ideal either. Much too broad brush.

my dd also goes to a sink school but not every uni will consider school in their WP criteria

Yes what I've noticed from looking into this is that all the different unis have different widening access policies.

They all say write about how you fit their criteria on your UCAS personal statement/ references but there's only one form for all the unis!

Even if a child does not live in a deprived SIMD area, that doesn't mean their parents understand how poor a school experience they are getting or have the knowledge or hours of time every week to support their children to consistently plug the huge disparities throughout their entire time at school.

ds(18) was at a low progression school in Ayrshire as the same time my work colleagues son was a year above at a well regarded Glasgow school and we talked about what was happening in their schools daily. Being able to so closely compare the astounding differences in their school experiences was a real eye opener.

I do believe the kids that manage to do well at these low progression schools do deserve a medal (extra consideration), but at the same time kids at great schools shouldn't have university doors entirely shut to them - there should be a way for them to fairly compete for the places available.

@WeAllHaveWings that's why I believe if you are going to encourage disadvantaged students it should be based on the school they attend rather than the house they live in.

Yes I accept some parents will supplement the school with tutors etc but for many, esp those who are still really working class parents, will struggle to find the money to pay for tutors.

I take your point but that’s not the case for my DC’s school. Most DCs in our area used to go out of catchment (now not possible) so previously the results of the school mainly reflected the performance of the children in the more deprived part of the catchment and it was this that the “whole school” widening access status was based on. I know out of the pupils who got straight As in their Nat 5s, at least 80% were from the primary school local to me and very few of those children would previously have gone to their catchment secondary school.

Given the teachers are all the same. All have the same qualifications, ok some better than others but generally they are the same.

The thing that really makes a school better or worse is the level of disruption in the classroom. The more kids who aren't interested then the harder it is for teachers to teach and kids to learn.

Really that's what makes the difference to the exam results. So you either accept all kids who attended x poorly performing school struggled within the disruption or you don't.

It's unfair to say that Bob struggled more than Billy because of the house he lives in.

I think the house young people live in can make a difference. When I was growing up I had a bedroom to myself and space and time to study. One of my friends was a young carer with next to no time to herself. I think this was reflected in our higher results.

Whether you look at postcodes or schools for widening access there is still the problem of rural postcodes. I looked at a rural area I know well. It is too far from the cities to be included in any of the specific widening access schemes eg Edinburgh Uni has LEAPS which looks at schools in the Lothians and Borders. Glasgow Uni favours different areas. No SIMD1 areas in the rural area. Those young folk who come from working class families in rural areas are really disadvantaged when it comes to accessing places at Uni.

Would it be better to look at household income, or would this be too cumbersome? There should also be plenty of places available for other young people who come from more well off backgrounds. Widening access schemes should not mean that access is restricted to one group of people only.

I haven't got as far as thinking about rural kids.

The one that's got on my goat is a kid being told if they lived in the council estate 300yds from their house they'd have been given a place with the same grades under some deprivation scheme.

Household income might be a way forward. But then how do you account for separated parents? That then becomes very complicated.

It is true that kids in lower SIMD areas, potentially with disruptive family circumstances have less disadvantage, but that does not mean kids in a slightly higher SIMD but a low progression school are still not significantly disadvantaged.

Just a couple of differences between ds's low progression school and my colleagues sons well regarded Glasgow school, I could probably write essays about them.

• The Glasgow school gave hours of structured homework every week, essentially an ongoing revision plan which was marked and feedback given on an app which students and parents had access to. In ds's school they could go weeks without homework and feedback was rare. In the depths of their school handbook it says pupils should self study 1-2 hours a night, but otherwise parents are never told this is an expectation. During S5 Highers ds had 1 piece of English homework, a critical essay, and despite asking several times never received feedback on it.

• Glasgow school gives pupils doing well (most of them!) the opportunity to attend a residential week long mentoring/personal development/leadership event. In ds's school we were told, unprompted, in S3 parents evening by two separate teachers he was doing great (great in this school isn't straight As!) which was good but there was not much they could do to support further as they were focussing on those pupils struggling to pick up the basics. One teacher said "I don't know what to do with kids like him, because I just don't have the time". ds had equally bright friends (that lived in our higher SIMD housing estate) that didn't do well because their parents never picked up the slack from the school as they simply didn't realise how bad it actually was until it was too late.

• Glasgow school had weekly classes on uni applications - picking courses in school time, discussing with careers advisors, lessons on how to prepare a PS, feedback on multiple drafts. Colleague said they didn't have to get involved in the process at all. ds got a 15 min presentation on key dates and an A4 sheet with the UCAS buzzword and some links and they were left to it. No follow up or support.

• In the Glasgow school they aim high and 5As at Higher is not exceptional. In ds's school only 3-5 out of over 250 kids each year get 5As at first presentation at Higher.

• In Glasgow school advanced higher Maths had 6 full face to face lessons a week and supporting homework which was marked and fed back on. Ds's school they either didn't have the resources or they were focussed on other priorities. AH maths was 10 pupils. They got 3 lessons a week where they could ask questions, the subject matter was taught via videos (with dreadful audio) of lessons taken during the pandemic - that they had to watch at home in the evenings because the only place they could go for their "study periods" was the library which was akin to a youth club.

Pupils from low progressions schools are severely impacted by the low ambitions of both the school and their peers regardless of the house they live in.