Fair Admissions Shock
OXFORD ADMISSIONS GENERATED headlines once again when a prominent Trinity fund-raiser resigned after the college sent a rejection letter to his son.
Philip Keevil, Head of Mergers and Acquisitions for Schroders Salomon Smith Barney, had previously donated £100 000 to the college, and was co-chair of the Trinity appeal committee. At the time at which his son applied to read PPE, he had promised another £100 000 to the College.
When Mr Keevil's son was sent a standard rejection letter, he wrote to the college announcing his resignation and the cancellation of his promised donation. Michael Beloff, President of Trinity, told the Oxford Student that he "regretted the fact of Mr Keevil's resignation" but emphasised that equality in admissions could never be set aside.
Mr Beloff stated that "access is the friend of intellect but the enemy of income", and admitted that "a college can sometimes pay a high price for the pursuit of the path of virtue". Trinity is not one of Oxford's poorest colleges.
Many have welcomed the decision of Trinity and the publicity it has generated, especially in contrast to the Laura Spence saga two years ago. John Craig, OUSU VP- Access and Academic Affairs, said that the incident was "further evidence that you cannot buy a place at Oxford". Outspoken professor Valentine Cunningham, of Corpus Christi, however, stated that some colleges are still swayed by the prospects of donations, but he refused to name any names.
Mr Keevil later explained the reasons for his resignation, saying that "people may say this is just sour grapes and pretty obviously I am very sad". He claimed that a lack of money from benefactors is contributing to the decline of British universities in contrast to the American Ivy League. At Harvard, the donations of alumni, who would expect their children to automatically gain places,, are used to fund bursaries for poorer students.
Mr Beloff rejected this argument, however, saying that Oxford had "fewer resources, less space, strict government quotas and substantial dependence on public money". John Craig agreed, emphasising that, in contrast to Harvard, Oxford is a public institution and that an unbiased admissions procedure is "a principle which we can't compromise on".
Whilst regretting Mr Keevil's decision, Mr Beloff said that he had "raised important questions about university funding and has a legitimate point of view". Debate has ensued within the media, with many different views expressed. The Times suggesting top-up fees as a possible solution to Oxford's dilemma.
Others have been more concerned by the means by which Mr Keevil's resignation became public knowledge: the family are said to be very distressed by the impact which the publicity could have upon the son. The university denied that Mr Keevil's letter had been leaked, stating that "As a matter of course, we do not discuss the applications of individual students."
10th Jan 2002