Macquarie University

Vice-Chancellor's Office

University access: why the good Lord is wrong

Written by Steven Schwartz on October 2nd, 2008

Lord Patten of Barnes, former Conservative MP and Britain’s last governor of Hong Kong, was in the news this week for a comment he made about his old alma mater, Oxford University.

Speaking at a meeting of the UK’s Headmasters’ and Headmistresses’ (school principals as we’d call them in Australian) conference, Lord Patten, who is now Oxford’s Chancellor, ruminated on the notion of widening participation in higher education – that is, encouraging more people from non-traditional backgrounds to go to university.

Widening participation in higher education can be justified in terms of first, the obligation to give all young people the right to as full an education as they can achieve, second, the redress of disadvantage, and third, the utility for the future of tapping the potential of the whole community.”

All that sounds good, and he goes on to say that universities are a crucial part of civil society.

However, he then takes a different tack: Universities have to account for their use of taxpayers’ money:

But they should not be treated – or behave themselves – like local social security offices.”

Many universities, says Lord Patten, sense that they are being asked to make up for the deficiencies of secondary education.

If this were the aim, it would be a fool’s mission.”

Now Lord Patten probably has the role of Oxford University in mind in framing this talk. Oxford is one of the very best universities in the world, and it has become that by focusing on high level research and excellence in teaching and learning.

Although Oxford does engage in outreach and will continue with that work, he says, “we are never going to tell those who would like to study at the university that we are content to take the second best. That would be bad for them and suicidal for us.”

Oxford has carved out a distinctive mission for itself, and I believe universities should have the freedom to do that. However, I think in principle Lord Patten is wrong.

It is not about universities taking “the second best”, but making sure that we don’t miss hidden talent.

In Australia, and indeed in the UK, one persistent unresolved problem in higher education concerns the continued under-representation of students from low-income backgrounds.

Unless we believe that students from low-income families lack the ability or motivation for university-level study, the absence of talented students from our campuses represents not only a loss to them but also to society, which will not benefit from their full contribution.

I do believe it is not fair to expect universities to make up for poor schooling, but there are some things that universities can do to make the system fairer.

In my submission to the Bradley Review of Higher Education I detail how we can increase opportunities for participation in higher education.

To read my “Six Steps” for improving the system go here.

2 Responses to “University access: why the good Lord is wrong”

  1. Congratulations VC for identifying some of the factors that separate the “haves” from the “have nots” when it comes to gaining access to university. University entry is definitely not a level playing field when those students fortunate enough to be “in the know” use the full gaming experience of their parents and schools to gain entry over others. This is not only unfair but means that many students with real talent never reach their potential, and universities become ever more homogenous.

  2. University is not the place to level the educational playing field. Its should never be its role in society. Social inequalities do impact on students abilities to attend university however poverty in itself is not a reason not to succeed. There are numerous examples of individuals who have come from disadvantaged backgrounds who have overcome this and succeeded at university nonetheless. Universities should promote merit without prejudice. I myself live in commonwealth housing and have very little financial support. I receive an equity scholarship but I would think that perhaps it was also based on an excellent academic record.

Leave a Reply