Oxbridge umbrage

November 28, 1997

Why should you suppose that when I say that there ought to be more universities properly funded to teach the bright people Oxbridge cannot squeeze in, as well as those who do not apply, I really mean Oxbridge takes all the clever students (THES, Leader, November 21)? And why should you suppose that when I say that it is not the tutorial system but the overall intensity of teaching that makes the difference and costs the money, I really mean that only our students can benefit from tutorials?

Ought you to try one of David Blunkett's summer reading courses? Certainly, I think that students with three As are more educable - in the relevant areas - than students with three Es. So does everyone; otherwise they would not set minimum A-level standards for courses as high as they dare.

I am also curious to know why David Halpern supposed that anyone in Oxbridge is under pressure to avoid suggesting the government privatise us. It is the obvious way out for everyone: it gets the anomalous institutions out of a system that cannot cope with them, it saves public funds, allows people to be charged for benefits they will receive and will encourage UCL, Imperial and LSE to follow. I had hoped these ideas would be fed to the government back in the spring. But I cannot think who has been putting pressure on any of us not to think such thoughts.

Alan Ryan

Warden, New College, Oxford

Please login or register to read this article

Register to continue

Get a month's unlimited access to THE content online. Just register and complete your career summary.

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments