Oxford still lags behind other leading universities in terms of specific ethnic minority representation at undergraduate level, despite £4million spent on outreach programs each year.

The statistics published by the University show that percentage of BME (black and minority ethnic) domestic students admitted to the University was just over one in ten in 2009.

A report published by Race for Opportunity last year showed similar findings at Cambridge, while across the country the average is closer to one in six.

With the cap on fees having now been lifted, some students have warned that Oxford’s elitist image could worsen.

Although many ethnic minorities are well-represented in Oxford, others are not. Black Carribean students acount for only 0.04% of the undergraduate population, compared to 1% of the population as a whole.

David Lammy, a Labour politician who criticized Oxford when the study was released, said it “reveal[ed] a system in which getting a place remains a matter of being white, middle class and southern.”

The University, along with many students, has disagreed with this comment, but there are some who feel that Oxford remains an institution which could do more to appeal to minorities.

A spokesperson for Oxford said, “The university is concerned to ensure it attracts and recruits the best students, whatever their background.”

However statistics show that ethnic minorities tend to enjoy a lower success rate than white students when applying to Oxford.

Only 2.9% of African Caribbean students who applied were accepted compared with 27.6% of white students.

Subject choice may partially account for this, as BME students tend to apply disproportionately for the most oversubscribed courses. 44% of all black applicants to Oxford, for example, apply for the three most popular courses: Economics & Management, Medicine and Mathematics.

29% of all black applicants applied for Medicine alone, while only 7% of white applicants did.

Sean Stevens, a second year Geography student, said, “Race is absolutely not an issue. But there is a great misconception of Oxford being traditional, with low numbers of ethnic groups.”

Asked why there were larger numbers of ethnic minority students at universities such as LSE and UCL, Sean added, “Ethnic minorities tend to place less focus on arts, whereas Oxford is seen as quite arts-based. That doesn’t appeal.”

Ron Hann, writing for the website virtualeconomics.com, called upon politicians to focus on the root of the problem, which he believes to be the poor quality of some secondary education.

He said, “If politicians are concerned about the level of admissions amongst applicants who have gone to state schools, or from outside the south-east, or even from specific ethnic backgrounds, the solution is […] to provide all of the children of this country with an education that would fit them for higher education.”

Arnold Ayoo, a second year Law student, agreed that the educational background of students was of greater significance.
He said, “Oxford is a friendly place in that I feel no differently here than I do at home. I find that differences between me and others are only more notable because of my northern and state (albeit grammar) school background rather than the colour of my skin.”

He added, “The proportion of ethnic students in Oxford is merely a reflection of the proportion of ethnic minority students in the places Oxford recruits from – leading grammar schools and top public schools. It cannot be criticised for ‘failing’ to admit a higher proportion if there simply aren’t the numbers in the better schools.

“It is a reflection on the general social structure of the UK where many black students are in the more deprived areas and predominantly comprehensive schools. The situation will stay the same as long as the distribution of black students amongst these kinds of schools stays the same.”

Previous coverage of representation in Oxford has been criticised for focusing on under-representation of specific ethnic groups.

A spokeswoman for the University Admissions Office said, “The coverage has largely focussed on one small subset of the Oxford population – those that are black (or even black Caribbean), British and undergraduate. This gives a somewhat narrow picture of things.”

They added that the poor representation of some ethnic groups at the University is a problem only likely to get worse if the negative image of Oxford in the press continues.

“We are obviously concerned that one side effect of all the coverage will be to discourage BME students who might otherwise make a competitive application to Oxford but might now think that there is no point because Oxford ‘doesn’t want’ someone like them, or actively tries to exclude students from certain backgrounds. This would be a terrible outcome for those students, and for Oxford.”

The spokesperson added that Oxford does not specifically target ethnic minorities with their outreach programmes.

They said, “Oxford’s admissions work is targeted at schools rather than specific groups of students (demographic, ethnic or otherwise), and this is because our admissions team believes that working with schools and teachers is the most effective way to ensure that many cohorts of student have access to the right information and are encouraged in their applications.”

University students from ethnic minority backgrounds commented that Oxford is still perceived by some to be an elitist institution.

Hasan Ali, a second year student at Christ Church, said, “I think it is undoubtedly the case that if you are an ethnic minority student in secondary education thinking about which universities to apply to, there is plenty of material out there to dissuade you from applying to Oxford.

“It is worth bearing in mind that students from minority groups tend to apply to do very specific courses in quite a narrow spread of applications. I think with time this will change as second generation immigrants become third generation immigrants and so on and so forth.

“I mean, it was difficult to convince my parents to let me read English at university but my children, if I ever have any, will have no such problems.”

When students of all nationalities, and across all years, are taken into account, the percentage who are BME is 22%.

It is unclear yet how Oxford University access schemes will be affected by higher education funding cuts in 2012.

Some commentators have already suggested that Oxford must do more in the way of social responsibility to justify its likely fee rise to £9000.

Standard conditional A-Level offers from Oxford for 2012 entry onwards will now require one or two A* grades in certain subjects.

The university had previously stated that it would employ a trial period in which to monitor the effects of the new grade. However, following a review of 2010’s A-level results, some departments’ offers will include A*s.

The move will affect courses in Mathematical, Physical & Life Sciences (MPLS). Students applying for Mathematics will now be expected to achieve A*A*A. Biology, Chemistry, Engineering and Physics courses will require A*AA for entry.

A* offers are already routinely made at other top universities.

Other departments will continue to use the standard offer of AAA, but the situation remains under review.

The university emphasised that “A-level grades are far from the only selection criteria for Oxford” and that the initial decision to postpone the introduction of A* offers was not due to the university’s already low state school intake.

Alex Bulfin, OUSU Vice President for Access and Academic Affairs, warned that A* offers “may act as a deterrent to applicants from low socio-economic backgrounds”.

Julia Paolitto, a spokesperson for Oxford admissions, told Cherwell, “Oxford’s policy on the A* grade was to wait two years as teachers indicated that they were uncertain about predictions.

“It is now clear that many students in the sciences get the A* grade, and that it would be reasonable to ask for an A*. By 2012 Oxford believes teachers will have two years of running the syllabus and therefore be able to predict those getting the A* with more confidence.”

OUSU have raised concerns about the impact the new offers may have on access. They emphasised OUSU “will not support the introduction of A* offers where the projected impact on the student body will be negative and where such use of the A* will harm Oxford’s work on access and widening participation.”

However, in a joint statement with OUSU President David Barclay, Bulfin said there was “less scope for negative impact of an A* in MPLS admissions and potential for some positive consequences”, citing Oxford’s competition from other universities.

“There is a risk that as more and more institutions start asking for the A*, the perception to prospective students is that Oxford’s courses are not as good.

“In some MPLS courses last year 100% of those who were offered places and came here to study already had an A* in their A-level results.”

Some students have responded positively to the changes. Carl Bootland, a first year Mathematics student at Exeter, achieved four A* grades in his A-levels.

“I would not be put off from applying to institutions wanting an A*, but it would certainly have changed my second choice university via UCAS.”

Charles Hardwick, President of the OU Engineering Society, said, “making A*AA a standard offer for MPLS is simply falling into line with the competition… As for access, in comparison with the upcoming fee increases, the effect of requiring an A* as a prerequisite will be minimal.”

Students who are privately educated received considerably more support when applying to Oxford than those from state schools, a Cherwell survey shows this week.

Private school students are are far more likely to receive support in the form of mock interviews and exams, personal applications tutors, advice on college choice and past interview questions.

The results come in a week when Lib Dem deputy leader Simon Hughes called on universities to drastically reduce their intake of state private school students.

Some students who were state educated commented that in fact they were actively discouraged by teachers from applying, being told that it was a waste of time.

Despite the disparity in support available to students, the University says that the application process enables academics to only pick the best candidates irrespective of how much support they have received.

The results show that over 50% of students whose education cost more that £10,000 per year had access to a database of past interview questions from which to revise for their Oxford interviews.
These questions are collected from past applicants once they have taken their interview.

93% of privately educated applicants took a mock interview and 40% were advised which college to apply to. For state students, 63% took a mock interview and 14% were given advice on which college to apply for.

A large proportion of state school pupils felt that their school failed to provide them with adequate support and preparation.

The added support in some private schools comes at a price however, as private school students tended to expreience more pressure than state school students during their Oxford application process.

16.5% of students from private schools said that they felt under pressure ‘all the time’ while no students who attended state schools said the same.

Some students commented that they had been advised not to apply to Oxbridge. One student said, “The main issue for me was that I was actively discouraged by some teachers at my school from applying.”

Another student commented on the lack of support at her school. She said, “In fact they forgot to register me for the entrance exam, so I had to drive up to Oxford on the day in order to take it.”

The survey also revealed that proportion of students were asked questions during their interview that they had prepared answers for in advance. 20% of private school students admitted to doing this, whilst 10% of state school students said the same.

A University spokesperson said that University outreach programmes are designed to help people who receive little support from their schools.

The spokesperson said, “We understand that there are differences in resources between schools, and that is why the University goes to so much effort to make information about our admissions process as clear as possible, making freely available online videos and podcasts giving information including how to apply and choose between colleges.”

When asked if schools that kept databases of past questions for Oxbridge applicants, the University spokesperson said, “There are no tricks to being accepted by Oxford, and it isn’t possible to ‘cheat the system’. The University’s rigorous selection system scrutinises candidates so that only those with the best academic ability and potential are accepted.”

Andrew Grant, Vice Chairman of The Headmasters’ and Headmistresses’ Conference (HMC), said that it was only fair that all students received a high level of education and university application support.

Grant, who is also the Headmaster of St Alban’s in Herts, added, “It is schools that don’t provide enough support that are treating their students unfairly and of course more should be done to remedy it.”

The Headmaster of Eton College, Tony Little, said that students at Eton weren’t forced to apply anywhere. He commented, “The decision to apply and choice of subject and college are entirely down to the boy: help with preparation is given through individual departments.

“When it comes down to it, self-motivation and enthusiasm for the subject are the determining qualities.”

This week, LibDem deputy leader Simon Hughes sparked criticism when he said, “If you’re really going to be radical about these things, then you have to say ‘access’ means you seek to reflect society in your recruitment policy.

“And most people in society go to local schools, not to private schools, and therefore most people from all universities, including Russell Group universities, should do that. And it doesn’t mean lowering standards.”

He pointed out that in Oxford, 46.6% of the undergraduate population attended private school, whilst this is only true for 7.2% of the population at large in England.

The state/private divide in Oxford is still felt, according to Cherwell’s survey, with 35% of students from state school saying that they feel there is a divide either ‘all the time’ or ‘quite often’ whilst only 23.5% of privately educated students saying the same.

One international student who was educated in Hong Kong explained how little help was available for students wanting to study in UK. She said, “[at school] there was brilliant support if you were applying to the US and practically none if you were applying to the UK… after all, who wants to apply there?!”

The results were based on 190 responses from colleges across the University.

Plans to build student accommodation on part of St Clement’s car park have sparked controversy in East Oxford, with local businesses claiming that the area would become a “ghost town”.

The private accommodation, proposed by developer Watkin Jones Group, would consist of 141 bedrooms and ancillary facilities over 4 blocks. Its location just off St Clement’s roundabout means that the site is a prime location for students from both Oxford University and Oxford Brookes.

Oxford City Council is expected to make around £3.5 million if the development takes place.

Sale of the land was agreed at a council meeting last May, after which a 10% non-refundable deposit from Watkin Jones was sanctioned.

The accommodation is to be built on stilts, but it is still likely that around 40 of the 115 spaces in the car park would be lost, raising questions about the future for businesses in the local area.

The six storey student block will be constructed in a conversation area and obscure the view of two listed buildings.

At the beginning of December a petition against the plan, signed by over 2500 people, was handed in to the council. Alan Grosvenor, owner of Sevenoaks Sound and Vision, described the development as “morally wrong”.

Despite the fact that the proposal dates back to 2005, Grosvenor claimed “local businesses knew nothing of the proposals until late August”.

He said that without sufficient nearby parking, the area would struggle, with shops and restaurants unable to survive in an area populated by students.

The Watkin Jones Group own independent accommodation across the country. On their website, they promote their buildings as “all well-appointed, and designed with the needs of today’s students in mind.”

The modern study bedrooms, placed in flats with a cluster of communal facilities, would provide additional choice for Oxford students living out.

The convenient location may prove popular in light of the queues every year outside North Oxford Property Services when student lettings are released, and complaints over the variable standards of Cowley’s privately rented housing.

However, Magdalen College, one of the closest colleges to the accommodation, has the space to offer a room to all undergraduate students for the duration of their degree.

Andrew Antoniades, a Magdalen student, remarked that “it is quite rare for someone to live out.

“After already spending our first year across Magdalen Bridge, most students jump at the opportunity to live on the other side, closer to town, and normally within college walls.”

Scarlett Benson, another student at Magdalen, also said: “I wouldn’t personally choose to live out of college when we have the opportunity to live in such a beautiful and historical building”.

Annabel James, a second year at St Hilda’s, commented, “[The development] sounds like something that would be very popular. Everyone at Hilda’s has to live out in second year so it would great to be that close to college.

“Cowley is generally seen as livelier but St Clements does actually have some nice places, and it feels safer than Cowley does at night. I imagine noise levels are less as well – so I think I would prefer it to Cowley, yes.”

It is understood that Oxford City Council had consulted the public about the principles of development on the car park on several occasions before it was adopted into the Local Plan in November 2005.

A spokesman for the council said that “a planning application was submitted for this site and the public were able to comment on it during the consultation period.”

Controversial flirt site FitFinder has been relaunched as Floxx after an “angel investor,” former BBC Dragon Doug Richard, backed the venture.

The website, which allows users to anonymously post descriptions of “fitties” they spot in libraries, cafés or JCRs, relaunched on Monday 3rd January under its new name Floxx.

The website originally launched as FitFinder in April when creator Rich Martell was a student at UCL.

After attracting 5 million hits from 50 different universities, the founder received a message whilst on his way to the LMH ball in Oxford informing him that the LSE had advised its students to avoid the website.

UCL accused him of “bringing the university into disrepute,” fined Martell £300 and threatened to expel him from . He chose to close the site down in order to save his degree.

However the project was saved by former panellist on the BBC’s programme Dragons’ Den Doug Richard, who tweeted, emailed and posted a letter to Martell in the hope of joining as an investor.

Martell said, “It was very quick. I was told this guy from Dragons’ Den wanted to get in touch, give him a call. So I did.”

As a result the site has launched ready for the new academic term, receiving over 1000 hits per day.

Martell, a former computer scientist, told Cherwell that the name as changed to Floxx because, “we’re looking at the US. And over there FitFinder might mean something pretty different. People might log on looking for their local gym.”

Martell’s team is preparing for the Floxx app to go live on Apple’s istore within the next week, making it easier for iPhone, Android and BlackBerry users to access the site.

“It will add to the community feel, and cool things are coming out next week,” said the founder.

The website has proved popular with Oxford students. A student at Univ posted anonymously a week ago, “Male, Brunette hair. Jack Sparrow, I would surrender to your seamen.”

However, not everyone is a fan of the website. St John’s Women’s Officer, Evelyn Jackson, said, “There was a good reason FitFinder got banned. I cannot see the benefits of the objectification of either sex. The founder says it’s like receiving a Valentine’s card, well isn’t that a bit sad?”

Doug Richard said in response, “This is pretty innocent, amplifying what people do all day everywhere, just like other social networking sites. If checking people out is a crime then I’m afraid I’m guilty.”

Martell is keen to stress the difference between Floxx and other social networking sites. “The unique thing is that it’s based around a location,” he told Cherwell.

“You can be at Bridge in Oxford, check in anonymously on the website, and then get notifications whenever anyone else posts. You can have a dialogue with people. It’s about location and connecting people.”

Investor Richard stressed his hopes for the project, saying, “I’m very ambitious for Floxx. Between the US and Western Europe there’s tens of millions. We can broaden our user base because we’re a moment in time. That’s very powerful.”

The creator and his team have high hopes for the website which is already available in twelve countries. As new features are added to the site, the founder hopes to develop further, with the USA and Brazil as the next targets.

“This opportunity doesn’t normally come along to 21-year-old students. It’s worth a shot,” said Martell.

Balliol College has temporarily reversed the decision to introduce a controversial ‘domus charge’ to all students, meaning that no incoming freshers will be affected.
The decision to put the charge on hold, pending a review at the end of this term, was taken in the final weeks of Michaelmas term.
In a meeting with the College executive, Balliol JCR and MCR presented a joint document detailing potential flaws of the domus plan, which would have seen a blanket charge of up to £500 imposed on all students.
Students proposed alternatives to the charge and in response Balliol officials agreed to reconsider the levy.
JCR President Stephen Dempsey told Cherwell that possible alternatives include “changing the system we currently use with domestic staff, revitalising our Hall, looking into managing Balliol’s off-site accommodation to improve efficiency and, although not yet approved or fully investigated, maybe even finding ways of utlising our extensive archives to make up the deficit.”

The news comes despite College Master Andrew Graham claim in an email to students dated November last year that, “The simple reason we have turned to a student charges is that we have already done everything else,” and that, “if Balliol is to remain one of the best educational institutions in the world, the funding has to come from somewhere”.
One Balliol student, Chris Gross, was quick to point out that the domus charge is far from being forgotten altogether. He said, “While this is a very positive step forward, and a testimony to the ability of students to mobilise quickly and effectively, it’s not the end of the fight and students need to maintain the pressure on the college to find other ways to make up for their financial mess.
“This is an issue that affects other JCRs, and hopefully our limited victory here can be the start of a university-wide push against unfair and possibly illegal charges on students.”
Meanwhile other students are more positive about Balliol’s future. JCR Secretary David Bagg commented, “I believe that the JCR, MCR and College all have the best interests of students at heart, and any forthcoming proposal will be well-considered and fair.”
Dempsey said the decision was “not a victory for the students of Balliol alone but one for the whole college, helping us to get through a difficult financial time without endangering the qualities that make Balliol such an outstanding college in the first place. We are delighted that the College has taken this opportunity to work with the student body on an issue which is so important to all of us.”

The £132m redevelopment of Oxford Brookes University’s Headington campus looks set to go ahead after a judicial review in the High Court last month ruled that Oxford City Council acted legally in approving planning permission for the project.
Local Headington Hill resident Martin Young, a retired property manager, took the case to the High Court after questioning the legality of building a “major social and entertainment centre that borders a residential area”.
However, Judge Anthony Thornton QC ruled that “the fact that members of the public will be entitled to use these facilities for buying books, visiting the bank or patronising the cafés does not alter this ancillary use, since members of the Brookes community will predominate”.
The University’s initial planning application was rejected by the council after residents complained that the buildings would be too tall. In 2009, locals speaking to The Oxford Times expressed their concerns about the “colonisation” of parts of Oxford by “student ghettos”.
Full planning permission was finally given to a revised design in June 2010, to which Oxford Brookes said they had made “significant compromises”. This included taking a storey off the height of the building, and removing the nightclub from the proposal.
Building work has already begun on a new library, lecture theatre, students’ union and public square, which Vice-Chancellor Janet Beer said would mark “the beginning of vital improvements to our campus”.
The Vice-Chancellor posed the question, “If [students] can eat, drink and study at Starbucks, why shouldn’t they expect to do that in a university?”
The ambitious revamp has provoked mixed responses amongst Brookes students. First year Joshua Read said, “It’s okay, but it’s pretty inconvenient for everyone at the moment. It’s going to be a building site for the next 3 years.” Another student training to be a primary school teacher stated positively that, “Because Headington is the main campus…I do think it needs to have a good, up to date library due to the fact that so many courses use it.”
Oxford Brookes has been keen to emphasise that “around 80% of the building is devoted to essential facilities such as library and teaching spaces”. They also pledged to remain “committed to working closely with local residents and the Council”, and to “continue to work to address the concerns of our neighbours” after the final design was approved.
Despite Brookes’ efforts to engage with the local community, Martin Young was not deterred from mounting a legal battle.
Young explained to Cherwell that, aside from his concerns about the erosion of residential privacy, his main point of contention was that the developers “want shops, without getting permission for shops”, and that he has submitted a request this week for permission to appeal the High Court’s decision.
Young admitted that “Litigation is a capricious process, as one learns to one’s cost”, but added that “There’s a time in life when you think you shouldn’t be pushed around.”
Oxford Brookes has distanced itself from the issue, stating, “This case is between Martin Young and the City Council, not Oxford Brookes. We believe the Council has a very strong defence and we are proceeding with the preparations for the building as planned.”
When upholding the Council’s decision, Anthony Thornton QC described Mr. Young’s effort as “valiant”, though “doomed to failure”.
Oxford University carried out a similar process of consultation with the community over plans for the equally ambitious £200 million development of the former Radcliffe Hospital site on Woodstock Road. Oxford’s proposals created relatively little controversy.