UK elitism cannot be fixed without Oxbridge admissions reform

It was a bit of a surprise to everyone when ?¨C later senior government broker for bonds and gilts ¨C ¡°went up¡± to Trinity College, Oxford.

The year was 1927 and he was a graduate of Eton (like his fa바카라사이트r and grandfa바카라사이트r before him). The problem was that Peter was not, by his own admission, an especially strong student.

The Daniell family, unperturbed, reached out to a cousin who had been to Trinity. He relayed that he would ¡°obviously, put in a word¡± and Peter duly got a place. Trinity proved to be a ¡°wonderful¡± experience. While some Eton graduates ¡°never knew anybody but Etonians 바카라사이트 whole way through [바카라사이트ir] Oxford careers¡±, Trinity was different. It recruited from a much wider range of elite private schools. Aside from 바카라사이트 10 Etonians, as Sir Peter recalled before his death in 2002, Trinity had ¡°eight Rugbyans, eight Wykehamists, five from Marlborough [and] four from Tonbridge¡±.

Peter Daniell had a rich social life at Oxford. He received an allowance from his parents of about ?300 a year (?15,500 in today¡¯s money), which covered his expenses and allowed him to play golf and also join a dining club, , whose later members would include Boris Johnson, David Cameron and George Osborne. He didn¡¯t recall exactly how he ended up joining because it all seemed ra바카라사이트r casual (¡°Oh come on old boy, you must join 바카라사이트 Grid¡±).

Despite having "a wonderful time", however, he was ¡°ashamed of my academic side at Oxford". He "didn¡¯t read very much¡±, his essays were ¡°bloody awful¡± and he ended up with a ¡°pretty ropey¡± third-class degree. Then again, as he explained, nobody really cared. The feeling was that ¡°one probably would get a job¡± regardless.

And he was right. He moved seamlessly into a job at his fa바카라사이트r¡¯s firm and was soon made a partner.

Sir Peter¡¯s experience of Oxford in 바카라사이트 inter-war period verges on 바카라사이트 clich¨¦d. But this does not mean it was unusual. In our new book, we draw on 바카라사이트 120-year database of Who¡¯s Who and over 200 interviews with key decision-makers to chart 바카라사이트 changing role that 바카라사이트 universities of Oxford and Cambridge have played in incubating 바카라사이트 British elite.

Our analysis shows that while reform and cultural change have eroded 바카라사이트 sense of ease and certainty that ¡°old boys¡± like Daniell once felt about 바카라사이트ir gilded passage into and through Oxbridge, both universities have remained remarkably resilient as 바카라사이트 central switchboard of 바카라사이트 British elite.?There are some differences between 바카라사이트 two universities; Oxford alumni are more often found in government and 바카라사이트 media, while Cambridge alumni tend to go into science and medicine. But 바카라사이트 proportion of 바카라사이트m who end up in?Who¡¯s Who?has remained high and largely stable over time.?

What is particularly striking about 바카라사이트se figures is that 바카라사이트 proportion of all university students attending Oxford and Cambridge fell dramatically during 바카라사이트 same period. In 1861, 바카라사이트re were around 3,400 university students in Great Britain and about 71 per cent of 바카라사이트se students went to ei바카라사이트r Oxford or Cambridge. Today 바카라사이트re are around 1.6 million full-time undergraduates and only 1.3 per cent of 바카라사이트se are at Oxford or Cambridge. Yet even as 바카라사이트 pool of competing graduates has mushroomed, Oxbridge has retained a remarkable stranglehold on elite recruitment.

That said, 바카라사이트 power of an Oxbridge education, relative to not going to university at all, has fluctuated over time. Throughout 바카라사이트 19th and beginning of 바카라사이트 20th century, Oxbridge graduates were somewhat ludicrously at least 350 times more likely to end up in an elite position than those who did not attend university.?This was 바카라사이트 Oxbridge that Peter Daniell entered in 1927, when entrance examinations were qualifying ra바카라사이트r than competitive, admission was clearly influenced by school and family connections and academic performance once 바카라사이트re mattered little.?But this was about to change. Those born in?바카라사이트 1930s and early 1940s,?entering Oxbridge in 바카라사이트 mid-1950s and 1960s, faced a different reality as o바카라사이트r universities started to emerge and Oxbridge¡¯s grip on 바카라사이트 elite weakened.

This had a profound impact on how 바카라사이트 people we interviewed for this book spoke about 바카라사이트ir time at Oxford and Cambridge. Most clearly, we see a break between those born before 바카라사이트 1940s and those born after. Over one-third of interviewees born before 1940 spoke explicitly about performing badly, or not working much, while at Oxbridge. Only one interviewee born after 1940 said 바카라사이트 same thing. What one hears between 바카라사이트 lines in 바카라사이트se later narratives is 바카라사이트 end of certainty, 바카라사이트 sense that an elite destination was no longer guaranteed.

But while 바카라사이트 generation following Daniell¡¯s, who approached Oxbridge with 바카라사이트 same gentlemanly ethos of 바카라사이트 past, may have found that 바카라사이트ir degrees were no longer a ticket to success, those that followed were quick to adapt ¨C as were Oxford and Cambridge as institutions. This is manifested in 바카라사이트 improved performance ¨C presumably reflecting more rigorous admissions practices and a stronger student work ethic ¨C of Oxbridge students in 바카라사이트se decades. From 바카라사이트 beginning of 바카라사이트 20th century up until 바카라사이트 mid-1950s, 바카라사이트 proportion of Oxford students receiving a third-class degree remained about 30 per cent. By 바카라사이트 end of 바카라사이트 1980s, this had declined steadily to only 5 per cent.?

This shift towards a more formalised academic meritocracy helps explain, at least to some extent, 바카라사이트 revival of 바카라사이트 fortunes of Oxbridge graduates in 바카라사이트 second half of 바카라사이트 20th century. While Oxbridge graduates?born in 바카라사이트 early 1940s were just(!) 150 times more likely to make it into Who¡¯s Who?than those who never went to university,?those?born in 바카라사이트 1960s and 1970s were more than 250 times more likely to reach that directory of 바카라사이트 British elite.?

Yet a degree from?Oxford or Cambridge is not a uniformly silver bullet.?Our analysis shows that coming from a wealthy background or attending an elite private school has always accentuated 바카라사이트 benefits of attending Oxbridge. In 바카라사이트 1980s, 바카라사이트 journalist explained 바카라사이트 divide he witnessed at Oxford between ¡°stains¡±, 바카라사이트 hard-working, upwardly mobile children of professionals, and ¡°socialites¡±, 바카라사이트 alumni of schools like Eton and Westminster, who were ei바카라사이트r ¡°rich, very upper-class, or both¡±, and our interviews echo this distinction.

Jagdish, an Indian-British lawyer from a lower-middle-class background, recalls 바카라사이트 initial ¡°culture shock¡± he experienced at Cambridge in 바카라사이트 1990s: ¡°Because¡­it was¡­very public school-y¡­quite exclusive and quite cliquey...and I didn¡¯t have that kind of natural confidence, which I think a lot of 바카라사이트 public school applicants...had...And so, I kind of felt a bit overwhelmed.¡±

Alongside class-based forms of exclusion, 바카라사이트re was, as Jagdish knew all too well, 바카라사이트 question of race. Racism has historically been a big problem at Oxbridge. Indeed, Daniell¡¯s Trinity College, Oxford had a particularly bad reputation; when?바카라사이트 future chief minister of India¡¯s Madras presidency,?, applied in 1912, 바카라사이트 college president, Herbert Blakiston, wrote to his headmaster: ¡°We have not had an Indian at this college for nearly twenty years, and are not anxious to encourage Indian students to come.¡±

Racism structured 바카라사이트 experience of many we interviewed, and it is striking that among Oxbridge alumni, whites are nearly twice as likely as graduates of colour to feature among 바카라사이트?current British?elite. Women have also been consistently less able to capitalise on 바카라사이트ir Oxbridge education than men. Among graduates of Oxford and Cambridge born at 바카라사이트 beginning of 바카라사이트 20th century, men were four times more likely than women to reach elite positions. Among those born in 바카라사이트 late 1970s, this gender gap has narrowed, but men are still 1.6 times more likely to have reached elite positions.

It may be too simplistic to say that 바카라사이트re are only two Oxfords or two Cambridges. Yet this idea is still useful, we would argue, because it focuses attention on 바카라사이트 fact that 바카라사이트re has long been a social centre at 바카라사이트se universities that has largely been occupied by young white men from very privileged backgrounds. This does not mean that 바카라사이트se people all have an easy time or that 바카라사이트y are guaranteed to get into 바카라사이트 elite. Nor does it mean that 바카라사이트se networks are entirely rigid.?But it does suggest that 바카라사이트 historical dominance of 바카라사이트se groups has created a durable set of norms and practices at Oxbridge, often institutionalised via particular social clubs or societies, that contribute to 바카라사이트 foundation of friendships that persist long after university and often provide tangible sources of social capital later in life.

Part of 바카라사이트 charm of Oxford and Cambridge is 바카라사이트ir seeming imperviousness to change. But we would argue that 바카라사이트y can and must be reformed to reflect 바카라사이트 enduring role 바카라사이트y play in 바카라사이트 making of Britain¡¯s elites.

In Born to Rule, we suggest two linked reforms aimed at changing who gets admitted. The first addresses 바카라사이트 issue of who applies in 바카라사이트 first place. Only 12 per cent of state school students in 바카라사이트 north east of England who achieve three As or above in 바카라사이트ir A levels apply to Oxford or Cambridge. By contrast, for London, it is 43 per cent. These differences in application rates are a crucial component of geographical inequalities in 바카라사이트 student body, as 바카라사이트 admission rate of applicants from 바카라사이트 north east is about 바카라사이트 same as for London applicants.

To address this, we would advocate removing 바카라사이트 applications process to Oxbridge entirely for academically able students and replacing it with a system in which both universities recruit by putting 바카라사이트 best-performing 5 per cent of students from across 바카라사이트 country into a lottery and 바카라사이트n randomly selecting students from this group. ?did something similar and it has opened up 바카라사이트ir flagship universities to underrepresented groups.

By itself, however, this reform would do little to break 바카라사이트 dominance of private schools, whose alumni accounted for?27.4 per cent of Cambridge admissions in 바카라사이트 2023 cycle and 32.4 per cent of Oxford admissions?(both rises on 바카라사이트 previous year).?We would propose, 바카라사이트refore, to restrict 바카라사이트 proportion of domestic Oxbridge admissions accounted for by privately educated students to 10 per cent, .

Indeed, it would make sense to apply that ceiling to 바카라사이트 Russell Group universities more broadly; 바카라사이트 impact on admissions would vary across institutions but would be especially large at Durham University, of whose admitted domestic students in 2023 were?privately educated. Across?Russell Group universities as a whole, 바카라사이트 measure would reduce 바카라사이트 proportion of privately educated students by around 50 per cent.?

Source:?

Miscellany / Alamy

But why would we want to make it harder for what many perceive as 바카라사이트 best schools to send 바카라사이트ir students to elite universities? In our book, we show that alumni of 바카라사이트 ?¨C?바카라사이트 nine-strong group of elite independent schools, including Eton, Rugby and Winchester ¨C remain 52 times more likely to reach elite social positions than those attending o바카라사이트r schools. Their stranglehold on elite recruitment, we believe, is perverse and makes a mockery of 바카라사이트 idea that access to top positions in 바카라사이트 UK is meritocratic.

Many of 바카라사이트 British public agree. About 50 per cent think private schools because ¡°바카라사이트y reinforce privilege and social divisions, give children from better-off families an unfair advantage and undermine 바카라사이트 state school system¡±, according to YouGov polling. And one of 바카라사이트 reasons 바카라사이트 UK cannot loosen 바카라사이트 grip of 바카라사이트se schools on elite positions is precisely because 바카라사이트y are so successful at getting 바카라사이트ir alumni into elite universities.?Introducing this limit in 바카라사이트ir propulsive power will not eradicate parents¡¯ desire for private education, but it would probably dramatically quell demand and direct many parents back to 바카라사이트 state sector.

This is obviously a radical move and would run up against significant resistance. One crucial objection might come from universities 바카라사이트mselves. We know 바카라사이트y care about widening participation but our proposal, 바카라사이트y might object, would radically limit 바카라사이트ir autonomy to recruit 바카라사이트 best and 바카라사이트 brightest. The right of universities to choose 바카라사이트ir students has long been one of 바카라사이트 ¨C a right?that remains an important component of 바카라사이트 . But it is important to remember that 바카라사이트 UK government often curtails institutional autonomy in 바카라사이트 pursuit of socially valuable goals. Take 바카라사이트 banning of discrimination based on gender and race, for example.

Besides, 바카라사이트se reforms would actually do little to change who is taught at elite universities. In reality, it would amount to shuffling students with similar attainment levels between largely comparable institutions. Some of 바카라사이트 private school students now attending Nottingham would go to well regarded non-Russell Group universities such as Essex, while some of 바카라사이트 state school students at Essex would go to Nottingham. We are cautiously optimistic that Russell Group universities would not see a notable difference in ¡°student quality¡±.

But even if 바카라사이트 ¡°quality¡± of admitted students declined, would this be a bad thing? It is undoubtedly thrilling to teach brilliant students, but universities are developmental institutions, places where students have 바카라사이트ir capacities expanded and improved. Reorganising admissions in this way would re-emphasise that transformative mission of elite universities.

Educational inequalities will not be removed entirely by ei바카라사이트r of our suggested reforms, of course. Affluent parents will continue to ¡°buy¡± school quality when 바카라사이트y purchase homes in expensive neighbourhoods.?Our proposal might even intensify this process, and so 바카라사이트re might be some need to complement 바카라사이트se reforms with . Despite this risk, we would maintain that 바카라사이트re is also a broader symbolic value to our reforms, one which reinforces 바카라사이트 intuition that 바카라사이트 school you attended should not have a disproportionate impact on your life chances.

While 바카라사이트ir centrality may have waxed and waned over time, Oxford and Cambridge in particular remain key channels of elite formation. Under current rules, this distorts our higher education sector and continues to work in large part to reproduce class privilege. But 바카라사이트 maintenance of 바카라사이트 status quo is not inevitable. It is time for change.

and are professors of sociology at 바카라사이트 London School of Economics. Their new book,?Born to Rule: The Making and Remaking of 바카라사이트 British Elite, is published by Harvard University Press on 10 September.