Universities may be told to favour bad schools

 

ADVISERS to Charles Clarke, the education secretary, are to recommend that all universi­ties in England and Wales should give preference to appli­cants who come from schools that achieve poor exam results.

The move, which is certain to provoke complaints from leading independent and state schools, is designed to compen­sate bright candidates who suffer the disadvantage of a poor education.

The proposals are being drafted by an advisory commit­tee on university entrance ap­pointed by Clarke.

It was set up following a row over admissions at Bristol Uni­versity which earlier this year was revealed to be turning away highly qualified students from independent schools in favour of state school pupils with lower grades.

The group, headed by Profes­sor Stephen Schwartz, vice-chancellor of Brunei Univer­sity, is expected to hold up the example of America, where public opinion is "open to the view that merit is judged not by where one stands but on how far one has had to travel to get there".

Bernadette Porter, a member of the committee and rector of Roehampton Institute, part of Surrey University, said she believed that admissions tutors should take into account the type of school attended by pupils.

"Maybe universities should consider the context in which a candidate has got their exam results and the obstacles they might have had to overcome," she said.

However, moves to encour­age British universities to favour candidates from poor backgrounds or from badly performing schools would be controversial.

At Bristol rejected applicants included Rudi Singh, a pupil at King Edward's school in Birmingham, who failed to win a place at the university even though he had 11 A grades at GCSE, five As at A-level and an exam board award for being among the top five candidates in the country. This summer, another well qualified independent school student has also been turned away. Owen James, head boy of Warwick school and who has four A grades at A-level, was turned down by Bristol but was accepted by Jesus College, Oxford.

Clarke set up the advisory group following the Bristol row to draw up a set of principles to guide university admission tutors, although they would not be compulsory or tied to funding.

Labour backbenchers are pushing for universities to be allowed to charge the government's planned "top-up" fees only if they take higher proportions of pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds.

The committee's recommendations, to be delivered next month, are likely to include the suggestion that all university applicants sit American-style scholastic aptitude tests, multiple choice papers that are intended to test general intelligence. The scores would be considered alongside A-level grades. Some members of the committee also believe that admission tutors should be given formal training and that, in the longer term, A-levels should be replaced by a baccalaureate covering a wider range of subjects at 18.

Further rows over university admissions are likely this autumn when MPs debate Labour's plan to allow universities to charge as much as £3,000 a year in "top-up" fees for degree courses.

(From the Sunday Times)

 

VOCABULARY

suffer the disadvantage – иметь помеху, препятствие

obstacles - препятствия

background - происхождение, окружение

admission - прием в учебное заведение

grades - оценки

A-level (Advanced Level) - экзамен по программе средней школы второго уровня сложности (на повышенном уровне); результаты этого экзамена учучитываются при поступлении в университет

university applicants – абитуриенты

labour backbenchers – рядовые члены парламента, состоящие в лейбористской партии

scholastic aptitude test – отборочный тест для проверки способности учащегося с целью определения целесообразности соответствующего курса обучения

scores – очки, баллы

MPs (Members of Parliament) - депутаты

 

2. Answer the questions:

• Who wrote the article? Does it express the opinion of an individual or of the newspaper? How do you know?
• What key words in the headline or first paragraph let you know the opinion expressed in the article?
• What is the issue discussed in the article?
• What is the opinion of the newspaper or the writer about the issue?
• What are the reasons the newspaper or writer gives to support the position taken?
• What is your opinion on the issue?

 

3. Split up into four equal-sized groups (groups of two, groups of three or four), but work on your own. Read the text with these tasks in mind:

• Group 1: Pick out 8-1 2 key words or phrases from the text.
• Group 2: Summarise the main content of the passage in one sentence.
• Group 3: Summarise the main content in one paragraph (maximum four sentences).
• Group 4: Notice their own reaction to the text and express this in 5-10 key words.
• Group the students in fours, with one person from each of the above groups.
• Share the work you all have been doing.
• Now talk on how you felt about the different tasks.