History aptitude test prompts class complaints
Oxford University's new History Aptitude Test has been criticised for discriminating against working-class candidates.
John Dunford, General Secretary of the Secondary Heads Association, was reported in the Daily Telegraph as saying he was "very concerned" that the tests could discriminate against state school pupils.
The test has been designed to be challenging, in order to "differentiate effectively between the most able applicants, including those gaining the highest possible grades in their examinations", said John Watts, History Admissions Co-ordinator.
Next year the history test will be used to reduce the proportion of candidates interviewed from 85 per cent to 50 per cent.
Many of the teachers who were consulted agreed that the University does need to take further measures in order to differentiate between high-achieving candidates.
Some teachers, however, have expressed concerns over the wording of the test.
Jo Davey, Head of History at Parliament Hill School, a multicultural school in Camden, North London, told The Oxford Student: "My main concern is about the use of language in the History Aptitude Test. Middle class students have the advantage as this is the language used at home. Students from working class backgrounds need to learn the language as well as the skill. Maybe a few less Latinate terms and a few more rooted in Anglo-Saxon?"
A University spokesperson denied the History Aptitude Test was weighted towards middle class applicants. She said the exams were "considered a way of fairly testing the aptitude of candidates from all different backgrounds", and wished to emphasise that the test: "is very different from the old entrance exams, and has been designed with the issue of class discrimination in mind."
14th Oct 2004