25th October 2019 14:54
By Blue Tutors
As the academic year starts more students than ever before from disadvantaged backgrounds are beginning life at Cambridge University, and there has been a real push to make this happen. This is true at many other top universities as well, not just Cambridge, but is this necessarily a positive thing?
There is an argument to say that that university entrance should be judged solely on ability. Of course there are students who might be more advanced if they had gone to a better school, but that’s not a university’s concern; accepting students based on their potential at birth, rather than the following 18 years is just positive discrimination.
Why is then that many top universities have decided to offer places to disadvantaged students? Oxford and Cambridge are so proud of their academic excellence, and it seems strange for them to consciously lower their standards to appear more inclusive. After all, they have always defended their selection criteria by pointing out that they are committed to accepting the very best students, no matter what their background.
The answer might lie in the details of why someone is accepted to study at one of our top two universities. Interviewers are looking for two main qualities: how good someone is at their subject and how much they will improve with the best tuition in the country. The end goal is to have undergraduates with the potential to be brilliant, go on to do research and publish papers which increase the wealth and reputation of the whole university.
A student who hasn’t had as many opportunities as others might not be doing as well academically, but they might have the potential to excel, and it’s very common at university for students to suddenly develop and realise that dormant potential. When thought about in this way, not only is it a socially appetising scheme to offer more places to disadvantaged students, it’s actually the only way to try and make sure that we’re not missing out on the next Nobel prize winner.