Degrees of equality

THE thorny question of varying admissions criteria to universities according to applicants’ social background continues to be debated.

Giving preference to those from poorer areas with lower grades can be only a sticking plaster. This will privilege a relatively small group of young people from poorer areas while the remainder are left to their fate.

This issue is connected with various others – the attractiveness of our ancient universities to English and overseas fee-paying applicants and to better-off Scots who have their fees paid at Scottish but not at English universities.

Both of these groups are ‘over-represented’ in our ancient universities while those from poorer homes are ‘under-represented’. But the most important issue of all is that of schooling. As a recent report showed, divergence in attainment between poorer and better off youngsters starts at primary school.

It continues at secondary school. The only sure way to ensure that children have a level playing field in terms of university admission is to improve schooling – radically – for all.

So far, there has been some tinkering at the edges: giving head teachers more autonomy is a much-vaunted change but scarcely one that will bring a radical improvement in attainment. The so-called Curriculum for Excellence has failed to promote excellence. I am sure no one in education wants more upheaval, but overhauling the CfE might be a start at improving educational opportunity for all.

The real problems lie in school education. Universities have done much ‘outreach’ work, especially in schools in poorer areas, for decades to try to encourage applications from youngsters there.

Putting the blame on universities for not admitting more students from poorer areas is akin to treating them as agents not of education but of social welfare. JILL STEPHENSON,

Edinburgh.