Bridging the Oxbridge gap

Apparently, state school teachers are not encouraging their students to go to Oxbridge. I attend a comprehensive - so why did I apply?
  • Jump to comments ()

"We had a guy from Canada two days ago, someone from eastern Europe yesterday and now a kid from south-east London, whatever next?" As I sat nervously waiting for my interview at Cambridge last month, unable to block out the sound of a Sloane Square accent trying to explain how they talk with a Jamaican accent in London nowadays, I couldn't hold back the hostility I naturally felt towards some of these people. Thankfully, I managed to sustain conversations with the amiable ones - including the author of the aforementioned sarcastic, yet telling comment.

As a state school Oxbridge applicant, I was drawn to a recent Sutton Trust survey claiming state school kids are being discouraged from applying to the UK's two foremost universities by their teachers. Out of the 500 teachers polled, 45% admitted to rarely, if ever, recommending their students for Oxbridge. This figure forced me to contemplate how and why I had applied to Cambridge.

Having a solidly middle-class family with relatives, as well as a brother, currently at Oxford, unquestionably helped. However, I wouldn't say Oxbridge had ever been overtly advertised by my parents. Indeed, my school, Pimlico, had three students last year who made it to Oxbridge, as well as several others in years gone by, and these were not exclusively the middle-class children who sadly still seem to dominate academically in many comprehensives. If I was unconsciously advantaged by my relatively privileged background, consciously my encouragement came from teaching staff and students at my school. The story was the same for anyone else at Pimlico who wanted to apply.

The Sutton Trust survey was, I felt, overly harsh on teaching staff. Two teachers in particular at Pimlico managed to gallantly advise and help all of about 10 applicants in the autumn while simultaneously dealing with the spectre of Ofsted and a chaotic restructuring programme. It was by no means coincidence that the teachers who offered the most advice and encouragement were ex-Oxbridge students who could offer insight into the many myths that dog the two universities. Indeed, the trust's report seems to support this as state school students claimed teachers sometimes failed to push students towards Oxbridge because they felt they may fail to fit in socially.

Although I earlier claimed that, before I applied, my parents never consciously pushed me towards either Oxford or Cambridge, when I applied, this swiftly changed. Classic middle-class parenting skills tantamount to playful bullying (and, at times, extortion) led me to a £235 Oxbridge application course. Ironically, it was run by friends of a schoolteacher who, in her words, had set it up "to make a bit of money out of the whole thing". Despite the nice people, I couldn't help thinking this course was more designed for monkeys trying to act human; sit up straight, smile, shake hands. All the time, the figure of £235 kept flashing up in my head; immoral as well as bloody expensive! All I wanted was my parents to stop bugging me.

Salt was rubbed into the regretful wound as I left my interview in December, realising I had not used a single technique taught to me on the course; I had spoken quickly, not answered in a structured way and had, at times, forgotten what I was rambling on about. By the end of it all, I was left thoroughly exhausted and questioning whether it was even worth all the effort.

One obvious yet commonly overlooked fact is the classification of state schools and its relevance to arresting disadvantage. There is a huge difference between the Blair's London Oratory and a standard inner-city comprehensive. In terms of "fitting in", from anecdotal evidence anyway, posh grammar school kids act worse once reaching Oxbridge, as they are allowed to "spread their wings". Whereas, to quote my brother, "at least the Eton kids know they're Eton kids". To tackle the problem of disadvantage and discouragement of gifted and potentially gifted kids, we must go further than setting targets for state schools applicants or else we'll inevitably end up with just more of the middle classes at Oxbridge. We must address the issue within a wider social context and realise that the systemic inequality that persists in the UK cannot be blamed on a few overworked teachers.

With higher levels of three-A students (because, as we now know thanks to the Daily Mail, even a toddler could get a Maths A-level), it's become harder for admissions tutors, too. Yet it would be bad enough of you were only equally likely to get in to Oxbridge with the same grades as a private school kid. However, a Sutton Trust report last September showed not even this to be true - and that you're more likely to be getting in if you have three As from an independent school rather than any of the elite maintained schools. This doesn't just defy logic (three As are ridiculously easier to achieve at independent schools), it also points to a glaringly obvious conclusion. The reason that the proportions are all wrong is because private school kids get the expert coaching for the all-important interview process. Unlike their state-sector counterparts, a high proportion of teachers in private schools attended Oxbridge. The result is that many private-school kids head to Oxford or Cambridge every December having been pushed towards it for at least two years, practising several mock interviews beforehand and, in some cases, having skimmed through their interviewer's doctorate. Personally, my choice not to wear a suit (or even dress smartly) seemed to startle my two ex-Oxford teachers. My thinking was there's nothing worse than someone who looks uncomfortable in a suit; as if they were made to wear it by their mum. Plus I don't actually own one.

Oxford wants 62% state school applicants by 2012; Cambridge wants 61-63% by the same date. Moreover, the government's valiant aim to get 50% of the UK through higher education seems to be failing after last year's figures showed that the number of applicants has fallen (in the most part due to the introduction of tuition fees). The government must look past targets and ask itself what it really wants out of having an outstanding choice of universities in the UK. If education really is such a high government priority, then selling hundreds of schools away to private individuals with the academy programme is not the right way of effecting change. What incentive is there for an academy sponsor to improve the rates of children going to Oxbridge, as long as the results improve?

As Wellington College's headmaster and Blair biographer Dr Anthony Seldon is reported as saying today, education has such an ability to enforce equality and justice. Regrettably, too many facets of Britain's education system still perpetuate injustice and inequality. I was recently asked by a friend why I applied for Cambridge; a surprisingly difficult question to answer. I replied that it was because of the course. But, in all honesty, it's mostly about the prestige of the place and the life opportunities it offers; opportunities still unavailable to too many.

Latest posts

Today's best video

Today in pictures