Last week saw another story slamming Oxbridge for being elitist. It was Labour MP David Lammy's turn to accuse Oxford of being “a bastion of white, middle class, southern privilege”. Earlier this month, there was even talk of establishing specific colleges to recruit applicants from underrepresented backgrounds.
As an Oxford graduate from a so-called "disadvantaged" background, I find the idea of creating a "paupers’" college horrific. I wanted to be picked because I was academically good enough, not because I made admissions statistics more favourable. And believe me, I met the suggested criteria. I was from a single-parent, state-school background. My mother and I were so poor that I worked two jobs while doing my GCSEs and A levels to help pay the gas bill. And when I did get my place at Oxford, I relied entirely upon the now-defunct (thanks, Tony Blair) student grant.
Yes, I did come up against the stereotypes associated with Oxbridge during my four years there, but I also mixed with students who were from a similar background to my own. And while it might not be politically correct to draw attention to this fact, not everyone from a private school or boarding school is elitist or unlikeable – my husband attended Winchester College and I can guarantee he doesn’t throw his privilege around for all to see.
'The cynicism was palpable'
After completing my degree, I worked in the University of Oxford's admissions office for two years, targeting schools with little or no Oxbridge history to encourage their students to consider Oxford as a university choice. I travelled throughout the UK to higher education fairs and talks, visited schools and arranged open days. I helped organise and run philanthropist Sir Peter Lampl’s Sutton Trust Summer School. It was exhausting, but I passionately believed in my mission and was amply supported by colleagues throughout the university – tutors, students and other staff.
When I did come up against some hostile opposition, it wasn’t from any of the colleges: it was from sixth-form teachers and careers advisers. At the various talks I gave, where I was lucky to get a smile or at least a sympathetic glance, the cynicism was palpable. They had already decided that Oxbridge would never change and that they would never encourage their students to apply. When I said that you can’t give places to applicants who don’t apply, they remained unconvinced. What they didn’t realise was that, ironically, they were helping to maintain the status quo. What could I do? What could anyone do?
There is no easy answer to the Oxbridge problem, but there’s one thing I am sure of: the answer does not lie solely at Oxbridge’s feet. We need more investment in state education at all levels to help drive standards and give every pupil, regardless of background, the best opportunities, whether at Oxbridge or elsewhere. We need schools to be more open to how Oxbridge has improved its accessibility in recent years, and we need Oxbridge to continue ensuring the broadest range of students, from all over the country, feel welcome and motivated to apply.
It’s easy to blame "the enemy" for a situation that is hard to change. Oxbridge is as married to the class system as any other old institution, and old prejudices die hard. But if we prevent our brightest students from applying somewhere because of our own hang-ups, we are as guilty of perpetuating the myth as those we accuse of applying it.
The writer is a secondary teacher in the South East of England
