Posts Tagged ‘admissions’

Higher education ‘cuts’ are actually an increase

Of the supposedly punitive “cuts” announced yesterday by George Osborne, al fresco in the Treasury courtyard, few will provoke more howls of outrage than the alleged reduction in the higher education budget. Expect a procession of vice-chancellors through television studios, warning that Britain is being plunged into intellectual darkness and that our competitiveness will be destroyed.

All of which is fantasy, because these “cuts” actually disguise an increase in expenditure that betrays a Liberal-Conservative administration deeply in denial in the face of economic meltdown. The headlines shriek about a £200m cut in higher education spending and a reduction of 10,000 university places. But the reality is a £70m increase in spending and the creation of 10,000 new and completely superfluous student places.

more over at telegraph

Cambridge University ‘rejecting more state school students’

Official figures show 1,675 undergraduates were from state schools or colleges – a fall of five per cent in just 12 months.

At the same time, the number of teenagers admitted from fee-paying schools increased by three per cent, in a disclosure that threatens to reignite claims of elitism at the ancient institution.
Data also showed almost 6,000 straight-A applicants were rejected in 2008/9, but those from the independent sector or state grammar schools were far more likely to secure places than students from comprehensives.

The figures come just weeks after it emerged that half of the universities belonging to the Russell Group, which represents leading research institutions, missed Government targets designed to boost the number of students recruited from state schools.

It comes despite the fact that some £400m was spent nationally on schemes to attract and retain students from poor backgrounds and state schools last year.

The Russell Group warned that low aspirations, underachievement and poor advice at many schools remained a barrier to higher education, suggesting universities could not “solve” the problems alone.

But Cambridge insisted that last year’s drop was countered by a significant rise in the proportion of state school entrants recorded 12 months earlier.

According to the latest figures, 3,479 students were admitted to the university in 2008/9. Entrants from state schools and colleges dropped five per cent to 1,675, while those from independent schools increased by three per cent to 1,318. Some 486 undergraduates were from overseas – a slight fall on a year earlier.

Among British students, 58 per cent of undergraduates were from state schools and 42 per cent were from the fee-paying sector, even though fewer than one-in-10 children nationally are privately educated.

It represented a one percentage point fall in the proportion of state school students at Cambridge compared with a year earlier.

We must not make some students less attractive than others

The guardian reports

One the most sacrosanct features of university admissions in the UK is that they are “needs-blind”. Students’ academic ability and potential dictate whether they are offered a place. Their family income and any need for student financial support are, rightly, irrelevant in the decisions of admission tutors. This is not the case in the US. And there is a risk that this will no longer be the case in England either, if the current Independent Review of Higher Education Funding and Student Finance – headed by Lord Browne – proposes inadequate government-funded student support, and instead opts for an enhanced role for institutional bursaries given directly to students on top of their government-funded student loans and grants.

Admission to Ivy League universities, the most selective and prestigious universities in the US, is usually “needs-blind”. At the other end of the hierarchy, there is normally open access to community colleges. But, for the majority of good public and private US universities, those just below the very highest rank, the offer of a university place may depend upon both a student’s academic ability and their family income, and specifically the amount of financial support the university has to hand over to the student. These universities’ admission policies are “needs-aware”.

Put simply, the more financial aid a university has to give, the less attractive the student. So when a university has to choose between two equally qualified people, but one student comes from a poor family and requires a high level of financial help, while the other comes from a wealthier family and has no call on the university’s bursaries, it is the wealthier student who will be offered a place.

20,000 more university places – science, technology, engineering and maths

Telegraph reports

Additional places will be aimed at undergraduates studying subjects such as science, technology, engineering and maths – seen as vital to the economic recovery.

Mr Darling said the expansion would be funded from a one-off £270 million modernisation fund being made available to universities this year.

The disclosure will ease some of the pressure on higher education places following an unprecedented increase in demand for courses.

Applications are up by almost a quarter this year – fuelled by demand from European teenagers and mature students returning to higher education in the recession – but the number of places was expected to fall by 6,000.

The Conservatives estimated that it would leave as many as 275,000 students without a course.

The extra places will include 10,000 full-time degrees, 5,000 part-time degree courses, and 5,000 places on two-year “foundation” degrees. The £250 million cost will cover courses for three years.

A further £20 million will be used to improve efficiency in the higher education sector.

Mr Darling added: “These extra places allow us to strengthen our offer for young people and ease parents’ concern that their child’s first taste of life after school or college will be a prolonged spell in the dole queue.”

Universities will now be invited to bid for a share of the funding for extra places.

Although it could still leave thousands of applicants without places, the announcement was welcomed by student leaders.