PM 'wrong' on Oxford black intake

11 April 2011 Last updated at 19:32 GMT Mr Cameron was answering questions from members of the public Oxford University has hit back at the prime minister after he said only one black UK student began a course there in 2009 and called it "disgraceful".

The university said David Cameron had been "incorrect and highly misleading", and that at least 26 black British undergraduates started that year.

Mr Cameron was answering questions about the effect of raised tuition fees on poorer students.

Downing Street said the figure of one black Caribbean student was accurate.

Mr Cameron was answering questions from the public at a "PM Direct" event in Harrogate in North Yorkshire.

"I saw figures the other day that showed that only one black person went to Oxford last year," he said. "I think that is disgraceful. We have got to do better than that."

The university said that it was true that only one British undergraduate from that year's intake identified him or herself as "black - Caribbean".

But this failed to take into account another 26 who identified themselves as either "black - African" or "black - other".

Continue reading the main story Jo Coburn BBC political correspondent

It is always important to get your facts straight when challenging the record of a high-profile institution.

Perhaps even more so when you are the prime minister accusing Oxford University of a "disgraceful" record on admitting black students.

During a question-and-answer session in Harrogate, he said: "I saw the figures the other day that showed that only one black person went to Oxford last year. I think that is disgraceful. We have got to do better than that."

The university has accused the prime minister, an Oxford graduate himself, of being misleading because he missed out the word "Caribbean".

A spokesman for the university said that, in the year in question, Oxford admitted 41 British undergraduates of black origin and mixed black descent, but that is out of a total of about 3,000 students.

Downing Street aides admit the prime minister made a mistake but strongly defend what they say is a crucial question: why does Oxford have so few black students?

The answer may have something to do with the fact that just 452 pupils from a black background got the grades necessary to make a successful application to Oxford.

So the problem seems to be one that starts well before pupils get to university.

The prime minister's argument might have had even more impact if he had got his numbers right.

Another 14 described themselves as mixed race with some black heritage, a spokesman said.

And these figures do not take into account postgraduates, non-British undergraduates, or undergraduates who preferred not to identify themselves as belonging to a specific ethnic group, he added.

In total, in 2009 22% of Oxford University students were from ethnic minorities, the institution said.

A Downing Street spokesperson said: "The figure the prime minister used was from a response to an Freedom of Information request submitted by David Lammy - which clearly states that only 1 black Caribbean student was admitted to Oxford in 2009.

"The wider point he was making was that it is not acceptable for universities like Oxford to have so few students coming from black and minority ethnic groups."

Mr Cameron was also criticised by the Russell Group of leading universities for saying that the numbers of state-school students had gone down in the last 20 years.

He had said: "That is a terrible record."

But Wendy Piatt, the group's director general, said it was "simply not true", as the proportion of state-school students at Russell Group universities had risen by 9% since 1997.

"This rate of growth exceeds the growth in the proportion of state school students across all UK universities, which was 8.6% in the same period," she said.

Mr Lammy, the shadow higher education minister, said Oxford University "needs to show more humility about its woeful admissions figures".

Continue reading the main story

This is an issue that is as much about the class and north-south divides as it is about race”

End Quote David Lammy Shadow higher education minister He said: "It is not acceptable that only one black Caribbean student entered Oxford in 2009. Nor is it clear that Oxford University is really committed to outreach work.

"They targeted private schools for 770 'outreach' events in 2008 and 2009, including 11 at St Paul's and 9 at Eton. This is an issue that is as much about the class and north-south divides as it is about race.

"Oxford is taking more students from Richmond-upon-Thames than they are from Birmingham, Britain's second largest city."

Elite universities are under increasing pressure to boost the numbers of students they attract from disadvantaged backgrounds.

Universities wanting to charge more than the basic £6,000 tuition fees under the new regime, which begins in 2012, must commit to measures to attract poorer students.

Both Oxford and Cambridge failed to increase their share of students from state schools last year, according to data published by the Higher Education Statistics Agency last month.

Both institutions, along with numerous other universities, have said they will charge the maximum tuition fees possible, of £9,000 a year.

View the original article here

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

Oxford heads towards maximum fee

8 February 2011 Last updated at 22:31 GMT By Sean Coughlan BBC News education correspondent Oxford University will now have to make a final decision on how much to charge students Oxford University appears to be paving the way to raise fees towards the maximum level of £9,000 per year.

Academics and students took part in a university meeting about how much to charge in tuition fees from 2012.

Pro-vice chancellor Tony Monaco said Oxford needed to charge at least £8,000 to replace cuts but students said poorer applicants would be put off.

Cambridge University's working group on fees has already recommended charging £9,000 for all its courses.

The move raises the prospect of other leading universities setting maximum fees.

The debate held by about 100 members of Oxford University's governing body was staged in the historic Sheldonian Theatre, with the closing speeches accompanied by shouts from protesters gathered outside the building.

Speeches from gown-wearing academics, below a ceiling painting depicting truth expelling ignorance, examined the financial, moral and social consequences of raising fees.

'Lost income'

There were senior university figures who argued that increasing fees to the maximum £9,000 per year was an inescapable necessity when the university faced substantial budget cuts.

Protesters outside the meeting in Oxford called for a strike against cuts and raising fees

Professor Monaco's presentation of the financial position suggested limited room for choices.

Cuts to teaching and capital budgets meant raising fees to £8,000 to replace lost income, he said.

If there were ambitions to offer fee waivers for poorer students, raising fees to £9,000 would provide a further £14m per year for the university.

Bursar Roger Boden then suggested that even this increase would not be enough to cover the university's funding shortfall.

Paul Madden, provost of Queen's College, outlined how funds could be used for fee waivers. He suggested a £3,000 fee waiver for the least well-off students.

With concerns about pressures on middle-income families, Professor Madden said another approach could be to spread a lower level of support among a wider number of families.

'Overwhelmed by debt'

But there were strong arguments from academics and students against raising fees.

Hannah Cusworth, from Brasenose College and a student union representative, told the university congregation that she was able to study at Oxford because of financial assistance.

She warned that talented young people would turn away from even considering going to university because of fears of being "overwhelmed by debt".

She said there would be families in which parents would reject the chance of going to Oxford, saying: "You're getting into more debt than I earn in two years. It's not worth it."

David Barclay, president of the Oxford University Student Union, argued the whole debate needed to be reconsidered - and to reject the "miserly voice" which accepted the downward spiral of budget cuts and higher fees.

A series of academics also argued that there was a lack of courage within universities about defending the values of learning and pursuing knowledge.

David Norbrook, from the English faculty at Merton College, said universities should "stop apologising" for themselves.

Robin Briggs, from All Souls College, attacked the "preposterous nonsense" and the "intellectually vacuous" ideas underpinning changes to higher education funding.

Patrick McGuinness, from St Anne's College, denounced the "crass and materialistic values" driving the funding cuts and challenged university leaders to reject the small-minded mentality of "tick-box English".

Although there were few voices showing enthusiasm for raising fees, the debate outlined what will have to be considered in the final decision making process in the next few weeks.

And this will include the university's argument that fees of at least £8,000 will be needed to break even and raising funds for fee waivers would push this figure up to the maximum.

Such arguments did not impress peaceful protesters gathered outside the congregation meeting. They called for a strike against the budget cuts and fee increase and offered flowers to academics leaving the meeting.

?

View the original article here

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.