A degree of snobbery
For an institution that clearly sees its future in the more financially lucrative and academically productive graduate market, Oxford is failing its students. In January of this year the university's Green Paper proposed an increase in graduate numbers. Yet this week its graduate recruitment programme for medicine has been under attack, while problems with graduate representation continue to plague the Student Union.
Criticisms were levelled at Oxford by the national press following evidence showing the university favours graduates from Oxbridge for its medical programme over applicants from other universities – including some it proceeded to describe as “second rank” institutions. Given the university's frequent claims to choose undergraduates on merit alone – rather than personal background or schooling – it makes no sense for it to take an opposite stance for post-graduates.
At the centre of this issue lies the question of how to measure academic adeptitude. It could be argued that different universities attract different ability levels – something that may be empirically proven by comparisons of original entry requirements – or that teaching is conducted in a different fashion from institution to institution, leaving some students better equipped to deal with the style of study required for the Oxford post-graduate course.
Yet using either of these arguments to justify the university's policy is plainly ineffective. If level of ability is the measure by which universities judge undergraduates, this is the yardstick they must also employ with graduate applicants – assessments such as interviews and entrance exams set by Oxford University are needed.
The way medical graduate admissions currently work provides a greater opportunity for an Oxbridge student or member of a more ‘prestigious' university to prove themselves worthy of a place. If a sixth-form student from a private or grammar school was given any such advantage over other applicants for an undergraduate degree, there would be uproar. The same should be true regarding graduates from supposedly more esteemed universities.
Secondly, the argument that students from certain universities might be more suitable for the teaching style of Oxford is entirely spurious. Intelligent individuals are capable of adaptation to any learning environment. Graduates applying for any course at Oxford must be given a fair chance to prove themselves on the basis of academic merit, displayed under exam conditions or in interview – nothing else.
The intense spotlight focused on undergraduate admission and provision at this university by media and politicians alike is crucial in ensuring Oxford acts responsibly. Yet this same degree of scrutiny has not been deployed in protecting the position of graduate students, and with an absence of representation for this growing, silent population within the university – and a lack of media furor without – there is little hope that it ever will be.
Representation within Oxford would evidently be a step in the right direction for graduate provision. Yet the up-coming election for the Student Union position of VP (Graduates) will be a farce. The current candidate – a fourth-year chemistry student from Magdalen – is being allowed to run uncontested, despite the fact that his very eligibility was previously removed by the Returning Officer.
It is only due to the fact that OUSU President John Blake stepped in and made a ruling (later ratified by OUSU Council) that deemed the nomination of this non-graduate valid that this election is being permitted to proceed. We believe nominations for the post should be re-opened.
This is not a view founded in the nature of the candidate's personality, but the simple fact that other fourth-year undergraduates should be given a fair opportunity to stand, accompanying their right to vote – two things that until the recent alteration they were unable to do.
If the current candidate gets voted in it will be unfair, undemocratic and unprecedented; it will leave an important section of the university population unrepresented – a section that, as recent developments have shown, is in need of a voice.
24th Feb 2005