A first-year student at Lady Margaret Hall, who forged parts of his UCAS application to secure a place at Oxford, has been discovered and sent down.
The student won a place at Oxford in 2009 to read Economics and Management. He claimed to have graduated from Langley Grammar School with at least 10 A grades at A level, and subsequently faked relevant documents.
These included a forged reference from a teacher. However, the teacher who supposedly wrote this reference had left Langley Grammar School years ago.
The identity of the student was not revealed until near the end of Michaelmas term, when Magdalen College noticed some academic discrepancies in his personal record. These concerns were later followed up by LMH.
Both Colleges spoke to Janet Jamieson, Deputy Headmistress of Langley Grammar School, who confirmed that the student’s thirteen As at A-level were entirely fabricated. “He certainly did not achieve those A-level grades, nor did he achieve the GCSEs that he claimed from his previous school. This boy was a student here but that is where it ends,” Jamieson said in a statement to Cherwell.
“The college should have checked it up right from the start. It would be impossible to get thirteen A-levels, and this should have gained attention,” she said. “I imagine Oxford will want to try and keep this as quiet as possible, this sort of thing does not happen often.”
The LMH Admissions and Academic offices refused to comment on how a student with an entirely faked application could have gained a place at the college. The proctors also refused to comment.
The student attended Langley Grammar School for sixth form, from September 2005 to June 2007. After sitting a number of retakes during his gap year, he eventually achieved As in his three A-level subjects of Economics, Mathematics and Religious Studies. He applied to university through UCAS in 2009 as an independent candidate.
Jamieson commented, “Normally the UCAS form is sent from the school, so the Headmistress endorses the application, as do form tutors, subject teachers and the Head of Sixth Form, who sends it directly to UCAS electronically. This means that all academic information is verified; universities are in general depenedent on schools for sending the proper documents to UCAS. This student applied to university two years after he had left school, so we never saw his application.”
When students apply to university as independent candidates, they often attach references and documents from their school, but ultimately, the school does not see the final package that is sent to UCAS. The information is passed straight on to the universities, without final verification from the school. This makes it the responsibility of the university to check the facts.
Jamieson added, “[He] did not achieve the results he would have needed for admission to the top universities that he aspired to attend. He came to Langley with GCSEs in the range of A*s, As, Bs and Cs; strong, but not outstanding. [He] was a very enterprising young man, and very ambitious, but he did not always fulfill his potential. We advised him not to apply to university immediately, as frankly his grades were too poor.
“We’re very concerned about the whole affair, and have considered speaking to the school’s legal team. However, we have been assured by UCAS that [the student] entered an individual contract with them, and we as a school are not party to it. Even if we had offered references, it remains a private agreement between the student and UCAS.”
A first year student at LMH described how people felt at College about the affair. “His tutor called his old school… with 13 A-levels we thought he’d be dealing a bit better with the work load. [The tutor] called his references and found out he didn’t exist. Everyone thinks it’s hilarious. It is quite unfair for people who interviewed to get in and were turned down, as now there is a spare place. [He] took the place at Oxford from someone else who probably deserved it more.”
Another student at the college confirmed fresher’s struggle with academic work. They said, “He didn’t come to that many [tutorials]. He used to say he had conferences in London or that he had meetings with the entrep soc. Out of eight tutorials he probably only came to about four.”
Mbombo Kaomam, the First Year Representative at LMH, revealed that members of the JCR Executive Committee and other E&M students have recently been briefed by the College that the student will not be returning to Oxford this term.
Rory Tierney, a third year PPE student at LMH said, “People are really surprised, nobody thought he was making it up. But then again, thirteen A levels does look a bit suspicious. It’s pretty remarkable that he got through the whole admissions process without anyone checking the facts.”
The student was contacted by Cherwell, however refused to comment on the situation.
Genevieve Clarke, JCR President of LMH commented, “I’m sure the College administration take things at face value. I don’t think its any fault of the academic staff at LMH, as they are obviously very competent.”
The Principal Secretary of LMH, Mrs Janet Wardell said, “The case is out of the hands of the LMH staff.”
Massachusetts in Red
Why did the election happen?
A special election was called following the death of Ted Kennedy in August 2009: Kennedy had served as senator for Massachusetts for nine terms totaling forty six consecutive years in office. Up until 2004 such an election would not have occurred; however in 2004 the Massachusetts General Court altered the law that had previously permitted the state’s Governor (then Mitt Romney) to appoint a senator should an unexpected vacancy arise. Thus Governor Deval Patrick scheduled the special election for January 19 2010; the Democratic party put forward Martha Coakely the state’s Attorney-General, the Republicans selected Scott Brown, a state senator.
Why was the Democrat loss such a shock?
When the results came in the polls demonstrated a clear Republican victory: Brown took 51.9% of the vote to Coakely’s 47.1%. This was a catastrophe for the Democrats on two fronts; in the first instance because Massachusetts is widely considered the be one of the ‘Bluest’ of the blue states, Barack Obama took 61.8% of the vote there in the Presidential Election in 2008. The state is famous for being the spiritual home of the Kennedy political dynasty; Ted Kennedy took over his seat from his brother John when the latter became President in 1960. In a broader sense the Republican win in Massachusetts is a disaster for Democrats across the country. With Brown’s victory the balance in the United States Senate has shifted to a Democratic majority of 59-41, as opposed to a previously filibuster-proof majority of 60-40. T
his means Senate Republicans can now obstruct any legislation – particularly healthcare reform – should they so wish.
How did Martha Coakely lose?
Martha Coakley was widely considered to be a shoe-in for the seat: it was almost inconceivable that a Republican senator would be elected in Massachusetts – let alone to Ted Kennedy’s former seat. This complacency is seen to be at the root of the upset, Coakley seemed to consider herself the Senator-Elect and accordingly made little effort to campaign; she even took a holiday in the middle of the election campaign. When a local newspaper asked her whether she thought she was being too passive in the campaign she responded with indignation: “As opposed to standing outside Fenway park? In the cold? Shaking hands?”. Not only was her campaign complacent, it was also incompetent: she misspelt ‘Massachusetts’ in one of her election broadcasts.
How did the Republicans win?
In contrast to the seeming inevitability of the Coakley campaign, Scott Brown was an easy target for political satirists across the country. Brown became infamous after the media got hold of a nude photo shoot he did for Cosmopolitan in 1982; in addition Brown’s daughter had been a successful candidate on American Idol. However, Brown ran an astute and dynamic campaign. He attracted populist appeal in televised debates with lines such as “this Senate seat doesn’t belong to any one person or political party. It belongs to you, the people”. He also courted anti-Obama sentiment by forging an alliance with the Tea Party Express and condemning healthcare reform: in his victory speech he committed himself to opposing healthcare reform in the Senate stating that reform “would raise taxes, destroy jobs and increase debt”.
What is the significance of the loss for healthcare reform?
In the worst-case scenario Brown’s victory could be the death-knell for Obama’s ambitious healthcare reform package. The Republicans in both houses of congresses have up until now adopted a policy of obstruction without having any real ability to actually block reform. With this one extra seat the specter of the filibuster has been raised and, should they so wish, Senate Republicans could either kill the bill or hold Obama hostage in exchange for political concessions. Some Democrats have prematurely adopted fatalist positions; Anthony Weiner a Democratic congressman from New York stated that “I think you can make a pretty good argument that health care might be dead”.
What was the reaction in the White House?
Republican strategists intentionally framed the special election in Massachusetts as a referendum on the Obama administration and in particular on proposed healthcare reform. Republicans were jubilant following Brown’s victory, now nicknamed the ‘Massachusetts’ Miracle’ which many read as a good omen for the Congressional elections taking place later in the year. The White House has reacted calmly to the Republican victory with Obama promising not to ‘jam’ healthcare legislation through the Senate before Brown can take up his seat.
The news of Brown’s victory came exactly a year after Obama’s triumphant inauguration and in an interview the President reflected that he might have become too involved in getting health care reform passed and “lost some of that sense of speaking directly to the American people”.