What’s just happened?
Cambridge University has introduced a new foundation year scheme, designed to give disadvantaged young people a more realistic and obtainable avenue to the university. The scheme reduces the usual entry requirement of A*AA to BBB for students who had their education ‘disadvantaged or disrupted’ and are from lower-income households. [1]
What does this mean?
New students would be able to take part in a foundation year in arts, humanities and social sciences that would allow them to eventually transition to a full degree. The scheme is being paid for by philanthropists Christina and Peter Dawson with their five-million-pound donation. This move is in response to criticism that economically disadvantaged students are not well represented at Cambridge, with only two per cent of their students being white and working class.[2]
While going in the right direction, Cambridge still has much to do to ensure that they do not continue the perpetual cycle of higher education exclusivity. It is well documented that the biggest precursors to being accepted into red brick universities are wealth and having parents who also went to such institutions.[3] This is why for generations higher education has been reserved for the upper and middle classes, as the precedent for them to go had been set by the structure of higher education. It is only by acknowledging and acting on these systematic failures, as Cambridge is doing here, that the working class would be able to achieve full social mobility.
However, even in this example Cambridge have not included STEM courses which are the highest grossing careers and most prestigious degrees at the university. They claim that they do not want disadvantaged students to feel unwanted yet deny them the opportunity to go into a foundation year for these courses, ones that would provide the most economic advantages. Furthermore, this scheme is not being funded by the government or the institution itself but instead through philanthropy. Such schemes cannot be sustainable and truly successful if they do not gain the government subsidies they so rightly deserve. Creating new avenues for disadvantaged students to flourish and meet their full potential is the best way for nations and governments to combat generational inequalities. By relying on personal donations and payments Cambridge risks the potential future collapse of the scheme, it is not the responsibility of individuals to assist the disadvantaged but the state.
Written by Henry Fisher
Assessing firms:
#EvershedsSutherland #SimpsonMillar #VWV #Holland&Knight #StoneKing #CartwrightKing
References:
[1]‘Cambridge University starts new foundation courses for “disadvantaged” students’ (BBC, 13 January 2021) <https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-55635300>
[2]Sean Coughlan, ‘Half of universities have fewer than 5% poor white students’ (BBC, 14 February 2019) <https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-47227157>
[3]Emily Rauscher, William Elliot III, ‘The Effect of Wealth Inequality on Higher Education Outcomes: A Critical Review’, Sociology Mind (Kansa: 2014) 4, pp 282-297.
Disclaimer: This article (and any information accessed through links in this article) is provided for information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.