Oxford disputes claim that Harvard is cheaper
1 of 1The poorest Oxford students would pay £3,500 towards their fees and living costs Image Source
Oxford university has clashed with a leading education charity over research claiming that its degrees are much more expensive for poor students than studying at Harvard.
It accused the Sutton Trust of using data based on small samples out of context and said it risked confusing parents and students.
The dispute broke out after the trust published a study comparing the costs of studying at elite universities in Britain with similar colleges in the United States.
The Sutton Trust has criticised the higher fees levied by English universities and last year began running summer schools at Ivy League universities for poor bright British teenagers to encourage them to consider studying in the US instead.
Ahead of a two day summit on access to leading universities, which starts in London today, it published research analysing the costs to poor students of studying at elite universities in Britain, the US and Australia.
While Harvard has much higher tuition fees, of £24,200 a year plus living costs of £13,133, the actual costs were much lower for students from poor and middle-income families due to generous means tested grants, the report said.
This mean that the very poorest students would pay only £865 a year, students from lower income families would pay just £2,019 a year. Even students whose parents were higher tax rate payers, earning up to £41,000, would pay only £3,155 while those whose family income was up to £65,000 would pay £8,243, it said.
In contrast, the study said the poorest Oxford students would pay £3,500 towards their fees and living costs, undergraduates from lower income families would pay £11,300 and those from wealthier families £16,000 a year, it said.
The research, led by a respected academic Dr John Jerrim of the Institute of Education at the University of London, prompted an unusually robust counter-attack from Oxford.
“Unfortunately in this material the Sutton Trust is in danger of confusing students and parents by reaching some large conclusions on small samples without the relevant context,” a statement by the University of Oxford said.
The lower costs cited for Harvard were from a work-study programme, it said.
“It fails to acknowledge that students can also work here during their vacations, or to make any distinction between a US system where fees have to be paid up-front, and the loan-based system here that requires no tuition fees in advance and repayment is only according to income after graduation. Simply, like is not being compared with like,” an Oxford spokesman said.
Directors of admissions from both Oxford and Harvard are due to attend today’s conference, which should make it a lively event. Vince Cable, the Business Secretary who is responsible for universities, will make an opening speech.
The London School of Economics, for which costs of studying were cited in the report, also said the comparison with Harvard did not take into account how England’s student loan repayments work.
The Sutton Trust rejected the criticisms saying that, by finding term-time work for poor students, top US universities such as Harvard helped them minimise or avoid student debt.
Its report found a similar pattern in Britain, the US and Australia with teenagers from middle class families around three times as likely to attend a leading university as those with working class parents.
While most of the difference was due to children of professionals achieving higher exam grades, a significant amount or so-called “access gap” was due to other factors that discouraged poor teenagers with good grades from applying to highly selective universities.
In Britain 27 per cent of the “access gap” between poor and better off students was not related to exam grades. But figures were much worse for elite private US universities, with middle class teenagers six times more likely to attend that working clas students and an access gap of 52 per cent.
It accused the Sutton Trust of using data based on small samples out of context and said it risked confusing parents and students.
The dispute broke out after the trust published a study comparing the costs of studying at elite universities in Britain with similar colleges in the United States.
The Sutton Trust has criticised the higher fees levied by English universities and last year began running summer schools at Ivy League universities for poor bright British teenagers to encourage them to consider studying in the US instead.
Ahead of a two day summit on access to leading universities, which starts in London today, it published research analysing the costs to poor students of studying at elite universities in Britain, the US and Australia.
While Harvard has much higher tuition fees, of £24,200 a year plus living costs of £13,133, the actual costs were much lower for students from poor and middle-income families due to generous means tested grants, the report said.
This mean that the very poorest students would pay only £865 a year, students from lower income families would pay just £2,019 a year. Even students whose parents were higher tax rate payers, earning up to £41,000, would pay only £3,155 while those whose family income was up to £65,000 would pay £8,243, it said.
In contrast, the study said the poorest Oxford students would pay £3,500 towards their fees and living costs, undergraduates from lower income families would pay £11,300 and those from wealthier families £16,000 a year, it said.
The research, led by a respected academic Dr John Jerrim of the Institute of Education at the University of London, prompted an unusually robust counter-attack from Oxford.
“Unfortunately in this material the Sutton Trust is in danger of confusing students and parents by reaching some large conclusions on small samples without the relevant context,” a statement by the University of Oxford said.
The lower costs cited for Harvard were from a work-study programme, it said.
“It fails to acknowledge that students can also work here during their vacations, or to make any distinction between a US system where fees have to be paid up-front, and the loan-based system here that requires no tuition fees in advance and repayment is only according to income after graduation. Simply, like is not being compared with like,” an Oxford spokesman said.
Directors of admissions from both Oxford and Harvard are due to attend today’s conference, which should make it a lively event. Vince Cable, the Business Secretary who is responsible for universities, will make an opening speech.
The London School of Economics, for which costs of studying were cited in the report, also said the comparison with Harvard did not take into account how England’s student loan repayments work.
The Sutton Trust rejected the criticisms saying that, by finding term-time work for poor students, top US universities such as Harvard helped them minimise or avoid student debt.
Its report found a similar pattern in Britain, the US and Australia with teenagers from middle class families around three times as likely to attend a leading university as those with working class parents.
While most of the difference was due to children of professionals achieving higher exam grades, a significant amount or so-called “access gap” was due to other factors that discouraged poor teenagers with good grades from applying to highly selective universities.
In Britain 27 per cent of the “access gap” between poor and better off students was not related to exam grades. But figures were much worse for elite private US universities, with middle class teenagers six times more likely to attend that working clas students and an access gap of 52 per cent.
No comments:
Post a Comment