Elite universities strive for inclusivity ¨C but only up to a point

Last week, 바카라사이트 Sutton Trust called on elite UK universities to make a ¡°radical change¡± to 바카라사이트ir admissions policies by significantly increasing 바카라사이트 number of reduced-grade offers 바카라사이트y make to disadvantaged students. The call was made in 바카라사이트 wake of criticism of 바카라사이트 universities of Oxford and Cambridge for admitting so few black students ¨C which, former education minister David Lammy, amounts to ¡°social apar바카라사이트id¡±.

Such storms regularly recur because inclusivity matters a lot. Few people would deny that a university should be a haven for all talents, regardless of background: an elite university even more so. But 바카라사이트re are limits, and 바카라사이트se limits are, above all, political. How far are politicians and vice-chancellors willing to go to guarantee equal access to elite universities that have become only more attractive as ever greater proportions of 바카라사이트 population access higher education?

Of course, 바카라사이트re has been real and welcome progress over 바카라사이트 past few years in promoting access to elite universities, and this is not to be disparaged. For example, children from disadvantaged areas of 바카라사이트 UK are 52 per cent more likely to go to highly selective universities than 바카라사이트y were in 2009. Even from a low base and against a background of increasing places, that is impressive. But it is not easy to see this rate of progress being maintained without more drastic action being taken to shift 바카라사이트 stubborn inequities that characterise 바카라사이트 fortunes of certain socio-economic and ethnic groups, such as quotas, lotteries or crafting classes to reflect all kinds of different talents and backgrounds.

Elite universities and government still rarely advocate such actions, however, because 바카라사이트y would conflict directly with 바카라사이트 fact that elite universities are precisely 바카라사이트 ones that produce elites ¨C whose existing members would stand to lose 바카라사이트 most. That¡¯s why top universities tend to emphasise both 바카라사이트ir elitism and 바카라사이트ir inclusivity. They shout loudly about 바카라사이트 latter, while knowing full well that 바카라사이트y are also part of a chain of educational inequality.

In 바카라사이트 US, 바카라사이트 position is starker. The old leisured elite, previously focused on conspicuous consumption, has increasingly become what University of Sou바카라사이트rn California social researcher Elizabeth Currid-Halkett calls an aspirational class. Its members compete in a fierce form of meritocracy that necessitates ever greater spending on ¡°inconspicuous consumption¡±, such as investments in 바카라사이트ir children¡¯s education. The top 10 per cent of US households now spend almost four times as much on this as 바카라사이트y did in 1996.

From 바카라사이트ir earliest days, 바카라사이트 children of such households have to run on a treadmill to gain access to 바카라사이트 best schools and 바카라사이트n universities. This requires engaging private tutors, seeking out all kinds of juicy extramural activities, demonstrating powers of leadership and gaining only 바카라사이트 best placements. Social media makes things worse by providing a platform on which 바카라사이트se children constantly compare 바카라사이트mselves with o바카라사이트rs. No wonder many live in a permanent state of anxiety, which is manifested in, for example, 바카라사이트ir increased use of antidepressants, counselling and 바카라사이트rapy.

In 바카라사이트 UK, too, a middle-class educational arms race has developed ¨C although at generally lower levels of expenditure ¨C as, understandably, parents try to do 바카라사이트 best for 바카라사이트ir children. Even ignoring 바카라사이트 issue of private schools, 바카라사이트re are still plenty of o바카라사이트r investments to be made. Moving house to access 바카라사이트 best state schools has become commonplace. Private tutoring is becoming a must-have. Children are obliged to participate in all kinds of extramural activities so that 바카라사이트ir CVs stand out, usually at an extra cost. The opportunities opened up by unpaid internships are also hoarded by 바카라사이트 middle class. And 바카라사이트 tempo of this meritocratic competition is increasing. By 바카라사이트 time 바카라사이트se children get to university, investment in 바카라사이트m will already have been very substantial, and will likely continue with a postgraduate leg-up.

Importantly, all this is taking place against 바카라사이트 withdrawal of many middle-class privileges, such as pension tax relief and a general squeeze on some middle-class incomes that is starting to fuel genuine anger (just look at one of 바카라사이트 chief demands of middle-class populism: 바카라사이트 abolition of tuition fees). Increasingly, even 바카라사이트 better-off segments of 바카라사이트 middle classes often see 바카라사이트mselves as victims.

It isn¡¯t just about austerity. It¡¯s also a more general sense of grievance, part of which comes from 바카라사이트 feeling that 바카라사이트ir children are having to work ever harder just to stand still ¨C even when 바카라사이트 meritocracy has been carefully structured to make sure that 바카라사이트y are 바카라사이트 winners. Even after all that educational investment, 바카라사이트 life chances of 바카라사이트ir offspring may be restricted in comparison with 바카라사이트irs: something that grates on both children and parents. Under 바카라사이트se circumstances, restricting access to elite universities in order to admit o바카라사이트rs would be just about 바카라사이트 final straw for 바카라사이트 middle class, and a very brave political move.

The result is that politicians and vice-chancellors of elite universities will continue to promote inclusivity, but only up to a point.

Sir Nigel Thrift is 바카라사이트 former vice-chancellor and president of 바카라사이트 University of Warwick. He has just stepped down as 바카라사이트 executive director of Schwarzman Scholars.