Talk by Danny Dorling given to Widening Participation Team, University of Sheffield, April 20th.

1. No longer just for the likes of them? University access Danny Dorling, Department of Geography, University of Sheffield Talk to University WP team, Octagon, 11am, 20 April 2010. I suggest that the way we currently allocate university places will, in a few decades time, to come appear as perverse and haphazard as entry to elementary education prior to the 1880s now appears and as secondary education places were allocated prior to the 1960s. Perverse here means harmful to almost all, from the poorest to richest. Start with HEFCE’s revelations of spring 2010:

2. Recently a narrowing in inequality occurred Slight viewed in some ways, remarkable in others, but not even those in ‘pole-position’ are happy.. I’ll consider those at the ‘top’ with a typical ‘Times’ Newspaper story of spring 2010 (in five slides time) – but first what of that 15% to 19% going increase for young people (aged 18 and 19) in the worse off fifth of areas. An extra one in twenty five going in just five year. A 26% access increase…. (19-15)/15. The source here is HEFCE’s 2010 Trends report

3. Considering that 15% to 19% rise: It was predicted given earlier GCSEs

4. It looks as if it reflects ‘investment’, when a “lag” is put in, as below

5. But it is uneven. For the worse-off fifth: Women +5%, Men +4%. A slight widening of the gender gap

6. However, geographical differences in the trend are much more important. The overall rise in Yorkshire for all groups is just 4% in the last five years. To those regions and sexes that have, more is given. But – we have managed to create a system that still causes great distress – possiby most distress to those at the top…

7. “ Bright pupils are rejected in scramble for university” 26/04/10 © The University of Sheffield The Times Newspaper on April 10th reported on Florence MacKenzie who they described as “upset and angry”. Their reported continued: ‘Universities would have fought over Florence MacKenzie, 18, in previous years. On course to achieve A and A* grades in her A levels, she has straight A*s in her nine GCSEs, plays hockey for her school, and is Grade 8 at piano and violin. She and her parents were baffled when she was rejected by three of her five chosen universities. Florence, from Banbury, is happy with her place studying English at University College London, but was turned down by Edinburgh, St Andrews and Durham. All are popular universities, hugely oversubscribed for her chosen subject, allowing them to be extremely picky. Edinburgh allocated 70 per cent of places on a points system that favoured teenagers from poor schools, those whose parents did not go to university, or those from Scotland or northern England. Florence goes to an independent girls’ school in Warwick so did not qualify. It set a hurdle of 11 GCSEs at A* to qualify for the remaining 30 per cent of places, but many schools (including Florence’s) do not set this many. She said: “I was very keen on Edinburgh and upset when rejected by them — angry as well after I found out the reasons why. I don’t think it’s a fair way of doing it, they should interview like other universities.” As many as 25 candidates are pursuing each place on popular courses at leading universities.’ http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/education/article7093817.ece

8. So, what is happening? Consider a very crude map of inequality in access S. Yorks. Banbury Source: http://www.sasi.group.shef.ac.uk/hguk/chapter1.htm 26/04/10 © The University of Sheffield

9. Crude models predicting access You can predict how many you people will go to university from each area by knowing their social class background. However there are geographical effects above this. Living in an area where it has become usual to go to university, for from which youngsters want to escape more increases their chances of attending beyond the effects of social class and vice versa (Latin also puts children with usual backgrounds off places that reveal in using it…) http://www.sasi.group.shef.ac.uk/hguk/chapter1.htm

10. Consider a crude indicator of access inequality beyond class S. Yorks. Banbury Source: http://www.sasi.group.shef.ac.uk/hguk/chapter1.htm 4% - -4% = 8% gap “beyond class” For every 12 children 1 extra in S. Yorks. .does not go to uni.

11. Consider South Yorkshire and in particular Sheffield – why that gap? And why the dramatic reduction???

13. 26/04/10 © The University of Sheffield Educational divides for the lucky may be narrowing but other gaps growing

15. By home location at age 15

20. Geography matters: Look at the proportions attending private schools at age 15 2% in S. Yorks. Banbury: 9%+ Source: http://www.sasi.group.shef.ac.uk/hguk/chapter1.htm Low participation ridge