Voting on an OUSU All Student Consultation on the student union’s policy on scholars’ gowns in examinations opens today at 12:30pm, after a narrow vote by OUSU Council in 7th week. Polling will remain open for two days and will be solely advisory.
OUSU Council narrowly voted to go to an All Student Consultation on whether OUSU should oppose the wearing of differential gowns in examinations during the 7th week Council meeting, in response to a motion put forward by Wadham students, Matilda Agace and Isobel Cockburn, to end the wearing of scholar’s gowns in exams.
A motion was already passed in Trinity term 2016 to ban the use of scholars’ gown in viva voce oral examinations, in order to reduce bias if examiners notice the gown.
The results of the consultation, along with the original motion, will be discussed and voted on in 1st Week Michaelmas Council. The poll is only a consultation, and the results are not binding.
The motion cites several reasons for ending the wearing of differential gowns, including that those without scholar’s gowns can feel “stressed, uncomfortable and inferior to their peers”. The motion also notes that “Oxford is the only university in the UK to have differentiated gowns in exams”.
If the motion passes in Michaelmas, OUSU sabbatical officers will be mandated to lobby the University to change the current system. It would also become OUSU policy to oppose the wearing of differential gowns in examinations.
Regarding the motion, Cockburn told Cherwell: “Anecdotally, we found that a lot of people felt much less confident and more anxious going into exams seeing big groups of people wearing scholars’ gowns, particularly women in STEM subjects.”
As a response to those who consider it ‘radical proposal’, Cockburn also told Cherwell: “subfusc is still worn and, as was argued at the 2014 referendum, it can act as an equaliser. Separate gowns act in opposition to this, creating a visual demarcation on often relatively arbitrary results.
“This is not an attempt to discourage people from celebrating their academic achievements; when you are awarded a scholarship, you are given both prizes and the title of a more academically able student.
“Of course scholars should be able to celebrate their academic achievements—but not at the expense of others.”
One student, Selma Stearns, told Cherwell: “I personally felt uncomfortable wearing my scholars’ gown because it felt showy and unnecessary. Everyone going to the exam has worked hard, and separating us based on results from another set of exams in another year seems arbitrary and elitist.”
Other arguments listed on the OUSU website in favour of the motion include the impact of the extra confidence given to scholars, and that “prelims results are more of a reflection of a student’s educational background than their grade in Finals”.
It has proven to be a divisive issue amongst students. One student, Tom Ash, told Cherwell: “I think by focusing on the gowns you’re scapegoating something which is not the most pressing issue in the system of inequality in Oxford, and getting rid of an important incentive for working in first year.”
Arguments have also been made regarding the undiscussed impact on choral and organ scholars. One organ scholar, Julia Alsop, told Cherwell: “You join the University as a scholar and student and they are intertwined—as such it diminishes us if we are not allowed to equally take our exams in the same way we experience our whole university life: as both scholars and students.”
Another student against the motion, Anna Lukina, said in a recent blog post: “Oxford [is] a place built on academic excellence—shunning rewarding it here seems absurd, especially since most current students have been accepted to this university by virtue of performing better than their peers.”
Regarding the inequality arguments put forward in favour of the motion, Lukina wrote: “The cost of gowns and disparities between different colleges in terms of scholarships/exhibitions are easier to address and will arguably make more positive impact.”
Arguments noted on the OUSU website against the motion include the impact of incentives to work hard, the long-lasting nature of the tradition, and the importance of rewarding academic excellence.
Students will have the opportunity to vote in the non-binding poll until 12.30pm this Friday.
Opposition to scholars’ gowns detracts from a meaningful discussion about inequality
It is perverse to deny those who have achieved academically the rewards of their success. Those who oppose scholars’ gowns use the rhetoric of equality and privilege, but in doing so disguise the real problems concerning examination inequality at Oxford by targeting an irrelevancy.
Broadly speaking, the argument against scholars’ gowns is three fold: firstly, there is the suggestion that the process by which they are awarded is unduly affected by privilege; secondly, that they lead to an unequal academic community, which adversely affects results; thirdly, that differentiated gowns intimidate and upset those who do not wear them during exams. Behind all of this, however, is a desire for pointless and unnecessary change for change’s sake, which does not succeed in addressing any of the real problems which exist within Oxford’s exam system.
It is undeniable that when people first arrive in Oxford their educational backgrounds vary wildly and there is a great deal of inequality. Fast-forward to mods or prelims, and it is difficult to make the same case. With the exception of some slight disparities between Colleges (which are generally removed by centralised teaching and inter-collegiate collaboration), the intense education received during the first year of Oxford levels the playing-field in such a way that when it comes to the first set of exams, it is academic ability that decides whether or not you earn an upgrade in your gown.
Gender disparities are undeniably a major problem, but this issue lies in the way students are examined, and it should be a resolution of these disparities and not simply their outward symptoms which OUSU should work on combatting. It will not solve the problems of an often archaic and hence biased exam system to remove the outward symbols of success which attest to this bias—in fact, it will only disguise the problem further.
So does a differentiated gown system belie an unequal academic environment? It is not the University’s responsibility to ensure equality of outcome, but its purpose is surely to provide equality of opportunity. Oxford does not and should not aim to make sure everyone come out at the same level, but instead should aim to erode the educational inequality of those entering the university in their first year and ensure that those who work hard and achieve academically are given the opportunities to succeed. To say this is not to deny that there are structural problems which must be tackled to ensure that privilege and bias on the parts of examiners have an undue effect, but instead reaffirm the idea that the University should be a meritocratic system. Scholars’ gowns are a symbol of this meritocracy, which despite some failings, nevertheless succeeds to a great extent in rewarding achievement.
It is surprising that an argument levelled against scholars’ gowns is that the sight of them upset people in exams, and causes those who did not own them to perform worse. Surprising, since the gowns are the part of the scholarship least likely to result in later performance disparities. The financial rewards for performance in one’s first set of exams vary wildly between colleges, but overall amount to a sizeable sum of money, and in some colleges lead to priorities in accommodation, and extensive travel and academic grants. This begs the question: why hasn’t OUSU had a consultation about such ‘rewards’, if equality is truly its aim? It would be ludicrous to remove every reward for strong academic performance, but it seems that this consultation only targets the most visible yet least offensive aspect of the scholarship system. Again, a crucial problem in the Oxford exam system is present, but it is only the most irrelevant symptoms which are being targeted.
It should be remembered that you can earn a scholars’ gown at a number of points, not just your first set of exams, as they are also awarded for subsequent examinations, specific reasons such as organ scholarships, and academic performance outside of exams. The result is that your academic performance can be recognised at any point with a mark of distinction for hard work, and to remove the right to wear these from those who have already achieved scholarships reeks of envy, rather than any real desire for reform.