2003 University of Bristol admissions controversy

The 2003 University of Bristol admissions controversy was an argument over the admissions process for the University of Bristol in the United Kingdom. It was sparked by concerns over the fairness of the admissions system for Bristol and concerns over bias towards state school students after the rejection of a handful of students with "perfect" academic records. [http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/video/38912000/rm/_38912385_bristol22_baker_vi.ram] Bristol admitted taking an applicant's background into account in order to be fairer to students from less successful schools [http://observer.guardian.co.uk/education/story/0,,910012,00.html Whose university place is it anyway? | Special reports | The Observer ] ] but denied that there was bias in the system or that the University was compromising on its academic standards.

Bristol has one of the lowest percentages of working class students of any British university, [http://education.guardian.co.uk/universityaccess/story/0,,907273,00.html Bristol faces boycott over admissions row | Special Reports | EducationGuardian.co.uk ] ] its attempts to become more "inclusive" and widen participation led some top private schools to warn students that they may be rejected from the University despite excellent exam grades.

"The Guardian" stated that the University of Bristol's admissions policies allowed giving slightly lower offers to A-level students from schools with poor academic records [http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/comment/story/0,,907057,00.html Admission charges | comment | EducationGuardian.co.uk ] ] leading some top private schools to criticise the admissions system as biased against private school students. The system led to higher achieving candidates being rejected in favour of lower achieving ones. Bristol argued that they are trying to get the best students possible regardless of background.

The row caused intense media debate at the time in British newspapers after it was reported that top private schools planned to boycott the University. The "Daily Mail" viewed the row as an example of discrimination against middle class students whereas "The Guardian" largely welcomed the admissions policies. The dispute was largely resolved after the introduction of a new admissions policy. [ [http://www.bristol.ac.uk/university/governance/policies/admissions-policy.html Bristol University | How the University is run | Undergraduate admissions principles and procedures (Home/EU students) ] ]

Response

Independent sector

In response to the admissions row the Headmasters' and Headmistresses' Conference and the Girls' Schools Association which represent some of the top private schools in the country expressed concern that the admissions policy could lead to the "apparently arbitrary rejection of well-qualified candidates".In a joint statement they said:

In these circumstances, we must send a clear message to Bristol. We cannot recommend to our colleagues that they should encourage young people to apply to Bristol until such time as the university can assure us that its procedures are fully documented, fair, objective, transparent and consistently applied.

Head teachers

The National Association of Head Teachers stated that the "HMC and GSA are guilty of gesture politics of the worst kind... They are merely shooting themselves in the foot by pursuing a boycott".

Media

Papers such as the "Daily Mail" and the "Daily Express" criticised the admissions policies in their headlines. The "Daily Mail" greeted the story with the headline "Insidious social engineering destroying merit and aspirations" and the "Daily Express" stated "More students being turned down for being middle class". Simon Heffer writing in the "Daily Mail" was pleased that "at last the middle-class are fighting back".He went on to state the row could damage Bristol's academic reputation:

So some of Britain's top schools are going to 'black' Bristol University for the pernicious social engineering policies it has admitted pursuing. Although this news will probably be treated with glee by the tinpot Trotskyists who run Bristol's admissions policy, it can only bode ill for that university. Denied countless high-calibre students who will then go off to adorn rival establishments, Bristol can only decline,

While right leaning papers such as the "Mail" and the "Express" criticised the discrimination they state was practised, papers on the left such as the "Guardian" argued that better coaching in top-schools meant that applicants from poor state school actually had a greater natural ability. It used a Hefce report stating that state school students did better than those from private school if they both entered university with the same grades to argue this point as well as pointing out that private schools account for 20% of sixth formers, but 40% of places in most of the best universities.

Tim Hames writing in "The Times" argued that backing the background of an applicant into consideration was something which Universities are already doing implicitly and something which he did while involved in Oxford's admissions system.

The then head of the Commission for Racial Equality Sir Trevor Phillips used his high profile position to criticise the fact that his daughter who attended a top independent school had been rejected from Bristol despite excellent exam results. [ [http://education.guardian.co.uk/universityaccess/story/0,,911366,00.html Bristol rebuts bias claims by CRE head | Special Reports | EducationGuardian.co.uk ] ]

Government

Prime Minister Tony Blair became involved in the admissions row by stating that university places should be given because of merit rather than class. Charles Clarke the-then Education Secretary described independent school criticisms as "ill-informed brouhaha". He also stated that it would be inappropriate for government to become too involved in university admissions. [ [http://education.guardian.co.uk/universityaccess/story/0,,908148,00.html Clarke dismisses 'brouhaha' over Bristol admissions | Special Reports | EducationGuardian.co.uk ] ] The then Shadow Education Secretary Damian Green accused the government of trying to "fiddle admissions for political ends".

HEFCE

Sir Howard Newby chief-executive of the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE), the university funding body argued that Bristol's admissions polices were fair and accused sections of the media of becoming involved in a "moral panic" over positive discrimination.

However some argued that the row over admissions ignored the fact that giving lower offers to students from low achieving schools would not give such schools an impetus to improve said Wendy Piatt from the Senior Education Research Fellow at the Institute of Public Policy Research argues that "The best way to tackle the problem of the under-representation of working class students is to actually solve the problem of their underachievement lower down in schools".

Admissions statistics

The BBC have described Bristol as “one of the most competitive universities to get into”. [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/education/1768564.stm BBC NEWS | Education | Elite uni aims to broaden its appeal ] ] At the time of the row the university had the third highest private school intake (only Oxbridge was higher [ [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bristol/3022418.stm BBC NEWS | England | Bristol | Student hopefuls descend on Bristol ] ] ) with only 57% of students coming from state school backgrounds. [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/1768564.stm BBC NEWS | Education | Elite uni aims to broaden its appeal ] ] This has led some to label it elitist.

In 2003 it was reported that the University has 39,000 applicants for its 3,300 undergraduate places each year. Bristol argues that this leads to the rejection of many well qualified candidates each year.

In 2003 Bristol pro vice-chancellor Professor Patricia Broadfoot reiterated this point when she said:” We (Bristol) are also the most popular university in the country in terms of the numbers of applicants per place. [ [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/2798507.stm BBC NEWS | Education | Bristol denies admissions bias ] ]

In Bristol had 2,000 students hunting 100 places in history, and 1,500 students of English chasing only 47 places, leading "The Guardian" to argue that many well qualified students would be disappointed.

Bristol's response

The University denied any discrimination in the admissions process but reserved the right to take the educational background of students into account when assessing their A-level grades. In a written response to the Independent Schools council Vice Chancellor Eric Thomas stated that the University did not operate a quota system for students from any particular school or social background. [http://www.bris.ac.uk/news/2003/135 Bristol University | News from the University | Admissions policy ] ] Eric Thomas has stated that Bristol aims to recruit only the best students and that the university was not compromising on its academic standards. He stated that the University had been set targets by the Higher Education Funding Council for England for the numbers of state school students that Bristol should be attracting but that these are only targets and not quotas.

The University highlighted that fact that it is one of the most popular in the country with over 39,000 students for 3,000 places in 2002. In History, English, Economics and Law competition is so fierce that over 30 students can be competing for one place. In English there are 47 places and 1500 applicants of which 500 have a perfect A-level score of AAA at A2 meaning that many top candidates will be rejected.

Eric Thomas remained confident that private school students would still apply to Bristol:

The university does not practise unfair discrimination, it [Bristol] does not operate quotas and it will continue to recruit exceptionally able students from all backgrounds through a selection process that is as fair and straightforward as we can make it. Pupils, not schools, make the decisions about which universities to apply to and we are confident that they will continue to want to study at Bristol.

In response to the row the University Vice Chancellor Eric Thomas emphasised the work the University was doing to “reach out” beyond the middle-classes. In a BBC interview he stated:

a huge raft of initiatives have been implemented. Things like summer schools in which we bring students to the university during the summer to see it, we have relationships with local schools and further education colleges.

The government has stated that becoming more inclusive will be a condition the University will have to meet in order to raise its tuition fees from 2006. The concept of giving lower offers to students from non-traditional backgrounds has been controversial. The University of Bristol has stated that it is against any kind of discrimination in the admissions process. [ [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bristol/3014108.stm BBC NEWS | England | Bristol | Bristol remains firm on admissions ] ] and stated that the policy of offering lower offers to exceptional students from state schools and disadvantaged backgrounds was in order to satisy the Government and gain access to additional funding.

In response to the row the university introduced a new, more transparent admissions policy. An independent review into the system found that there was no bias in the admissions system. Recently, Eric Thomas has suggested that tuition fees should rise to £5,000, a move seemingly at odds with the universities' widening participation goals. [ [http://education.guardian.co.uk/students/tuitionfees/story/0,,1887455,00.html Increase in tuition fees inevitable, university heads warn | Students | EducationGuardian.co.uk ] ]

ee also

*Laura Spence Affair

References

External links

* [http://www.bristol.ac.uk/university/governance/policies/admissions-policy.html The new University of Bristol admissions policy]
* [http://education.guardian.co.uk/universityaccess/story/0,,907273,00.html "Guardian article: Bristol faces boycott over admissions row"]
* [http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/comment/story/0,,907057,00.html "Guardian comment article"]
* [http://observer.guardian.co.uk/education/story/0,,910012,00.html "Observer article on the admissions row"]
* [http://observer.guardian.co.uk/focus/story/0,6903,910506,00.html "Inside a university challenged: Further analysis of Bristol University admissions"]
* [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bristol/3014108.stm "Bristol remains firm on admissions: BBC coverage of the story"]
* [http://www.epigram.org.uk/view.php?id=1583 Bristol's student newspaper Epigram's take on admissions]
* [http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,907745,00.html "Guardian article: Private schools boycott Bristol over selection"]
* [http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/news/story/0,9830,908531,00.html Guardian article: Clarke attacks Bristol boycott]