Welcome to the New Statesman website. Please sign in or register to participate in the conversation.

The Staggers

The New Statesman’s rolling politics blog

Syndicate contentRSS

What South Park can teach us about Oxford

The furore over black students at Oxford won’t die down until schools listen to the wisdom of Eric Cartman.

You want to know why there aren't more black students at Oxford? Watch South Park.

In the South Park episode Eek! A penis!, Eric Cartman – an obese, astonishingly foul-mouthed eight-year-old – heads to an inner-city school and teaches black and Latino students how to succeed like white people – by cheating. Cartman gives the class a pep talk:

The reason that you think you can't get into college is because you haven't been taught how to cheat properly. How do you think white people get ahead? Because they cheat all the time!

And it's true – particularly when it comes to university entry. During the recent furore over black students (or "the black student", if you're David Cameron) at Oxford, the university gave out a very thorough press release that broke down the application success rates for ethnic minorities. It made one thing strikingly clear.

The reason black applicants struggle to gain access to Oxford is that they are applying for the subjects that allow them the smallest chance of success. Take a look at these two figures, taken from the press release:

28.8 per cent of all black applicants for 2009 entry applied for medicine, compared to just 7 per cent of all white applicants.
10.4 per cent of all black applicants for 2009 entry applied for economics and management, compared to just 3.6 per cent of all white applicants.

Medicine and economics + management are the two most competitive subjects at Oxford: 12.6 per cent of applications to study medicine are successful, while a mere 7.6 per cent of management applicants get in. Black applicants struggle to get into Oxford largely because they are applying to study the most competitive subjects.

Meanwhile, the subjects that have extremely high application success rates, such as theology, classics and archaeology and anthropology, are stuffed with the pasty-faced products of Britain's public schools. Forty per cent of theology and classics applications are successful, while just under a third of archaeology and anthropology candidates get a place.

There is a game to be played if students want to avoid becoming another Laura Spence, who applied for the most competitive subject (medicine) at one of the most competitive colleges (Magdalen) and, lo and behold, failed to get a place. Black students should instead follow Nick Clegg's example.

Clegg studied archaeology and anthropology at Cambridge, despite being far from the archetypal archaeology student. Indeed, young Clegg spent his teenage years burning down greenhouses in Germany, working as a ski instructor and – according to that interview with Piers Morgan – frantically fornicating with anything female-shaped.

The typical archaeology student does none of these things. So why did Clegg study A&A as an undergrad and not, say, politics, which he did at postgrad and then chose as a career? Because it was easier to get into Cambridge that way. A&A has half as many applications as politics. He knew it, his private school knew it and so Clegg played the game. While black students claw and fight for a place on the most competitive subjects, the Cleggs of the world stroll into Oxbridge through the back door.

This isn't cheating, it's savvy. Until secondary schools wise up and start giving pupils better advice about their applications to the top universities, highly qualified candidates from unprivileged backgrounds will continue to struggle to gain access to the upper echelons of Britain's higher education system – and the headlines that have hit Oxford over the past few weeks will not go away. Britain's secondary schools need a few more Eric Cartmans.

13 comments

georgep's picture

Oxford Oxford - I'll never understand the crazy way the world is run by Oxford Alumni! Of course there are hardly any black students. The same as there are relatively few poor or otherwise lower class people.
Its the best example of parasitic, hereditery priviledge that infests society.

Hans Castorp's picture

Riddle me this:

""Because they cheat all the time!" And it's true"

and

"This isn't cheating, it's savvy."

So, is applying tactically cheating, or isn't it? Robinson doesn't say.

The main point of the article is a good and interesting one, but it's been confused in the telling.

Stu's picture

Love southpark!

Sophie's picture

surely this article is missing the point that a degree in medicine or economics from a "lesser" university will be worth to the applicant than a degree in something they're not interested in from Oxford?

Eugene N White's picture

What this says to me is that if you're of a privileged background, it doesn't really matter what you study, be it theology or ancient Greek theatre, as long as you fulfil your destiny and go to Oxbridge, you're guaranteed a top job at the end.

If you didn't go to public school then not only have you not learned much Latin or Anglican liturgy, but you also recognise that it isn't very relevant in your life and even if you were knowledgeable and interested in such studies, there's no point studying them because the careers in academia that they lead you are effectively closed to the likes of you and employers in other fields will discriminate against you for studying a 'mickey mouse degree' in a way they wouldn't if you were exactly the sort of person people expect to have studied classics.

Sophie's picture

I mean, the employment rates for degrees such as classics at cambridge cant be as good compared with Medicine at say Imperial.

Helen's picture

The statistics will skew according to the low numbers of black applicants though, for example, if there were only 20 black candidates and 6 applied to medicine then it's not unlikely that these 6 will not get a place, given the numbers applying relative the the numbers of places. It will however give us a much bigger percentage of failure (30%) than if 6 white students failed to get a place, which would look something like 0.2%.

Fat Jacques's picture

You neglected to say that once in, changing courses is quite possible.

Sam's picture

Duncan Robinson must be pretty p*ssed off that NS readers have a basic understanding of statistics.

Seenitall's picture

Hang on. Didn't I read somewhere that Oxford and Cambridge have fewer applicants per place than most other highly-rated universities? Does this mean that competition for places is less fierce at Oxbridge? Obviously not -- only the confident apply, but they will generally be very able candidates. Could the same be true of subjects such as archaeology? When I was at uni, I met a lad who was studying Egyptology -- not the most popular subject. Yet there were few places on his course, so that while you needed BBB to do medicine (this was in the mid-80s), you had to get AAA to be accepted on to Egyptology. So maybe Nick Clegg isn't a thicko. In my experience, Oxbridge graduates from privileged backgrounds are far from thick, albeit they are no Einsteins either (but who is?).

But on the subject of blacks: maybe their best strategy would be to go for the unglamorous and relatively unpopular subjects in the sciences: maths, physics, biochemistry, electrical engineering, etc. Given the national shortage of graduates in these subjects, this is surely the way forward for them.

Apropos of nothing important, my chosen screen name is not Seenitall, which came out of nowhere, courtesy of the NS. I would never claim to have seen it all, still less to know it all.

JohnBaxendale's picture

Clegg knew that once you've got in, what you study at your 'top' university doesn't matter - unless you want to be something boring like a doctor. It's the postgraduate qualification that really counts. At this level too the 'white folks' cheat: there are hardly any postgraduate grants these days, so if ma and pa can pay the fees and support you, you're even further ahead of the proles. No problem for ma and pa Clegg, I suspect. It's called doing your best for your kids.

Ed's picture

As a pasty faced public schoolboy doing philosophy and theology at Oxford..... Very good article. But it isn't just college and course, it's being prepared for the interview, knowing what to expect, and having a lot of self confidence. We need to do more to teach people outside of private schools about the admissions process.

(for the record, I applied for my course because I really wanted to do it, but I don't think I'd have got in if I'd applied for, say, English.)

Post new comment

By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.

Latest tweets