Memorandum from Professor A H Halsey,
Nuffield College, University of Oxford (HE 57)
I have read a transcript of the hearings of
Wednesday 3 July 2000 and have the following comments in addition
to three articles in the Oxford Magazine (Nos 152, 158 and 171,
1998, 1999) by Dr N G McCrum and myself.[1]
1. There is strong accord as to aims in
admission. Oxford must compete for the highest possible intake
of students with the most potential merit, irrespective of religion,
nationality, gender, ethnicity or class of origin.
2. Before the Test Acts of 1870 Oxford was
marginal to the economy and almost entirely a finishing school
for Anglican gentlemen destined for careers in the Church of England,
the state and landowning. After the Act of 1870 Jews, women, atheists,
proletarians and other suspect social categories began to be admitted,
meritocracy moved slowly upwards, the sciences gradually extended
the classical and theological curriculum, junior and senior common
rooms grew. Between 1900 and 1987 matriculates increased nearly
five fold to just over 4,500 per annum. Before World War I Oxford
had about 3,000 undergraduates and about 100 graduate students.
By 1997-98 these numbers had grown to 14,500 and 6,000 approximately.
3. As a rough generalisation we can say
that in the 20th century equal opportunity has been established
formally for entry into Oxford from any religion, nation, race,
gender or class. Substantively the one remaining inequality is
that of class.
4. Class inequality for Oxford admission
is usually presented as school background—93 per cent of
births become less than 50 per cent of Oxford matriculates, meaning
that 7 per cent of us are privately schooled with, subsequently,
over 50 per cent Oxford admissions. Dr Lucas wants the committee
(paragraph 824) to endorse his views that these figures are "just
not relevant". As advice about the limits of Oxford's benevolent
competence the Committee would be wise to heed it. As advice about
the dire state of the country it would be foolish to do so. Oxford
must seek high talent in the world as it is. It cannot directly
abolish the conditions in which a rich society chooses to bring
up a quarter of its children in poverty.
5. Government too is limited in its potency
but much less so. The figures in question tell me that we pay
a very high price in inequality for our citizen freedoms. Preparation
for university entrance begins, both genetically and environmentally,
in the womb. Schooling goes far beyond schools: it is fashioned
in the kitchen and the street and it is influenced by the media
and the peer group. Much of it is beyond politics in a free society.
6. But much remains for both Government
and Oxford. Both applications and admissions still need reform
along the lines recommended by Dr Lucas, if with more urgency,
and further along the lines recommended by Dr McCrum and me.
7. In paragraph 730 it is said (and the
authorship is not clear) that "Professor Halsey's argument
on the statistics is that students from the state sector do better
than students from the private sector in their degree". This
is not true. Before the Franks Commission (1966) it was true.
But by the early 80s (Dover Report 1983) it was not true. My account
is in Chapters 22 and 26 of The History of the University of
Oxford, Vol VIII, The Twentieth Century, edited by
Brian Harrison, OUP 1994: see also p 753. table 27.4 of that volume.
The latest figures produced by Ms Minto and Dr Lucas (para 731)
do not tell a new story compared with mine of nearly 20 years
ago!
8. Finally may I stress the growing importance
of graduate admissions. These are largely ignored by both the
Committee discussion and by the Report of the Vice Chancellor's
Working Party on Access, Oxford, May 1999. The Warden of Nuffield
College, A B Atkinson has affirmed that over two thirds of British
admissions to this College come from State Secondary Schools.
Is this the case for all colleges? If so and given the expansion
of graduate students as a proportion of all Oxford students (paragraph
2 above), it would follow that extrapolation into the future would
solve Oxford's problem of class exclusiveness. For the Government
and for society at large the problem of class inequality is likely
to remain stubbornly unresolved. It could, however, be significantly
reduced.
Professor A H Halsey
July 2000
1 Not printed. Back
|
