This article is more than 2 years old

PODCAST: Deferrals, clearing, research, access

This week on the podcast we’re discussing the possibility of students deferring, and consider what the clearing period might look like.
This article is more than 2 years old

News, analysis and explanation of higher education issues from our leading team of wonks

This week on the podcast we’re discussing the possibility of students attempting to defer as we approach September, and consider what the clearing period might look like.

We also look at a new report on the regional imbalance in research and development expenditure, and have a read of the Russell Group’s plan for widening access.

Hosted by Wonkhe’s CEO and Editor in Chief Mark Leach, with David Sweeney, Executive Chair at Research England; Jenny Shaw, Student Experience Director at Unite Students and David Kernohan, Associate Editor at Wonkhe.

Items this week:

Get involved

To get involved in The Wonkhe Show, email


The town of Barnard Castle in County Durham is a beautiful place, noted in particular for easy access to opticians. But is there a higher education infrastructure that supports this local economic need? DK has plotted the distance in miles as the crow flies to Barnard Castle from each UK higher education provider against the number of students studying Ophthalmics in 2018-19. Yes, but does it correlate?

Surprisingly enough there is no correlation. R squared is 0.048, though I reserve the right to go back later and edit that to make myself look smarter. Cardiff University has the greatest number of students studying ophthalmics, at a distance of 219 miles to Barnard Castle.


(Please note this is auto-generated and un-edited)

[00:00:01] It’s the Wonkhe show. We talk to deferrals, plus research, sustainability and a big plan for widening participation. It’s all coming up.

[00:00:08] I don’t think we live in a world where you let your children do things. I think we’ve got to encourage them to take big decisions for themselves.

[00:00:17] I would be encouraging my children who have all been to you to actually six of them, actually six universities to grab opportunities that were available now that weren’t available before. I think some of my kids did not so well in their first go at university. But in those cases, universities offered them second goes actually to two masters courses that have transformed their lives. I think that there are so many opportunities for people who are willing to grab them. And this is a time for looking for exactly that. So I think I scheme that narrows down student choice. A potential student choices is not so great as one which opens out new opportunities.

[00:01:05] Welcome to The Wonkhe Show, your direct way into this week’s higher education news, policy and analysis. I’m Wonkhe’s editor in chief, Mike Leach, stuck at home like everybody else who doesn’t need to get their eyesight checked. And as usual, we have three brilliant guests. Terreros gently across the peaceful koi ponds of higher education policy in Chepstow. We have Jenny Shaw, Student Experience Director for Unite students. Jenny, give us a moment of Zen.

[00:01:26] Oh, well, my main lesson is we found a little walk through the woods that no one else seems to know about, which is is you know, it’s like gold dust because people just flock to every lovely walk there is in this area. So we’re keeping it secret. And that’s our quiet, peaceful moment of Zen and the Maidenhead.

[00:01:43] We have David Sweeney, executive chair of Research England. David, you’re my witness.

[00:01:47] And my treat over the lockdown is watching all of the episodes of Bergen, the Danish political drama, which I missed first time round.

[00:01:55] And events happen in that program that are so real and similar to visits to Barnard Castle. It gives you a moment of complete alternate reality.

[00:02:04] And in a really small farm outside of Bala Castle, it’s David Kernohan. That’s DK to you and me. Well, he’s associated, sir and correlation. Tzadik, your boater’s and plays.

[00:02:14] Well, I’ve been working on a lot of music, a lot of kind of musical and recording projects with my band. I’ve also been arranging stuff for orchestra, which is something I’ve not done for about 20 years. It’s been lovely getting back into that.

[00:02:28] When someone says I’ve been working on the music, I think it was from friends with his keyboard. Boom, boom, boom, boom, boom. So let’s dive right in. We’re seeing increasing amounts of interest in whether students are planning on showing up in September. And we’re also learning more every day about the new clearing plus system. Jenny, what’s going on?

[00:02:44] Well, I think we all want to know how many students are going to come to university this year. Just tend to focus the mind, doesn’t it, around issues of financial viability. And there’s been polling on it. So London Economics have done some polling with you site, and they’ve found that the vast majority, 86 percent of I think it’s UK and EU students will still come to university in September. Things are normal, but there’ll be a 17 percent drop off if there are still some restrictions in place. So in other words, if we’ve still got an active pandemic and of course, that’s something that none of us can control, which is a little disempowering. They’ve also found that a quarter of students would consider switching their course during clearing. And this this is something that, of course, does give students some control back a little bit nearer to the time. So you could see how attractive that would be as students now have access to clearing. Plus from early July, which is a super sophisticated, personalised approach which uses an algorithm to help them find the most suitable and relevant course. Now, whether or not you think that’s sinister. Probably depends on how old you are. And actually, if you’re a student, it’s going to be the sort of technology, I think, that you probably understand quite well and navigate around quite well.

[00:03:58] But of course, it’s all taking place in a context of a huge uncertainty. And I think we shouldn’t cling too hard to the stats at this stage. Attitudes are quite volatile because actually all of us are still adapting to a situation and what might seem and acceptable to students right now might not do in September. Certainly, we’re doing some polling next week about the health and safety in support measures that might be reassuring to students and their parents in that decision to come back to university and actually DKA. If you’ve done some great work pointing out that actually the reason that people might choose a university is is quite nuanced. It’s got quite a big emotional component to it. And actually going to university at all is quite an emotionally loaded decision. When I was thinking about this, I thought, well, it’s probably somewhere between buying a house and getting married in terms of that way of life decision. But we do tend to default to this idea that it’s a it’s a simple cost benefit analysis for students. And actually there’s some real dangers in baking that into our response and also into our survey questions. So that’s something that could lead us astray. Thank you.

[00:05:02] Thanks, Jay. Tick, tick. Tell us what we learned about clearing plus this week that we didn’t know before.

[00:05:07] So just to kind of backtrack, to start the story, we initially heard about clearing Pross. It was released alongside the government support for universities back at the start of May and exactly the non bailout.

[00:05:24] And there was it was seemed to be pointed at an idea as, OK, we can help students get into the best courses. They don’t have to go into terrible courses anymore because of their own lack of knowledge. It’s of course, it’s not that at all. It is only for students that are in clearing, either by dint of choosing to be in clearing or by not meeting their grades and the technology effectively. The main thing it does is it will show you stuff that’s a bit like the courses you’ve applied to or are looking at.

[00:05:57] But is the entrance rates are linked to the grades that you’ve actually got. The stuff. You’re actually playing with rather than others. The just letting you look at everything.

[00:06:11] No, I actually think this is potentially dangerous, as we all know, during the clearing period, and especially, I think during this year, the grades are negotiable. You can ring up a university and you can say, OK, I’ve not quite got your grades, but I’ve nearly got your grades. I would love to do your course. I’m a great student for the following reasons and they might let you in. Exactly the same thing has happened to many, many people I know. And it continues to happen.

[00:06:39] This is why we have a clearing. In a way, it is a second chance. And the idea that students are being steered only to ask about clearing courses where they haven’t, they have definitely got the grade. That’s actually kind of limiting. It’s almost it is doing the opposite of what it’s been designed.

[00:07:04] David, it seems like I mean, there’s obviously a lot of unknowns about what what applicants behaviors can look like. I mean, would you are looking at it now? Would you. Would you be planning on letting letting your children go to a vessel, letting your kids go if if they were any age?

[00:07:18] I don’t think we live in a world where you let your children do things. I think we’ve got to encourage them to take big decisions for themselves.

[00:07:27] I would be encouraging my children who have all been to university, six of them actually six universities to grab opportunities that were available now that weren’t available before. I think some of my kids did not so well in their first go at university. But in those cases, universities offered them second goes, actually. So two masters courses that have transformed their lives. I think that there are so many opportunities for people who are willing to grab them. And this is a time for looking for exactly that. So I think I scheme that narrows down student choice. A potential student choices is not so great as one which opens out new opportunities.

[00:08:14] I mean, it’s fair to say it’s not the intention. I think behind the clarion class system, I mean, I think it’s it’s fair to say this might be that might be one of the unintended consequences. But the intention isn’t to narrow it. And we don’t know. We don’t know for sure what will what will happen. I mean, Jenny, on the on the face of it. Do you think that this will will help people get in? More. More people get into the right. The right sort of courses also. Are you also worried about the current petrol lowering effect?

[00:08:42] I think that the fact is we just don’t know. And the one of the things about unintended consequences is that they are unintended and you don’t actually get to find out what they are until after the fact. So we’re doing this in in quite a quite a strange year. And and it is a bit of an experiment. So I just don’t think I think there is a potential for its narrow choices. I think there is the potential for bias and intention later to creep into to the way it’s done. I think that there is the potential for some students to be disadvantaged by it. But I you know, obviously, it’s it has not been designed in that way. It’s been designed to be as is as good and as fair as possible. And I think one of the positives that that I’ve read is actually the the emphasis that was put on the user experience, which I think is often overlooked. But actually the feedback from students was that they wanted a better user experience. They wanted it to be easier to navigate because that would be helpful to them, whether the algorithm delivers what they need right now.

[00:09:39] I just don’t think we know there is a provider angle to all this as well, because providers are offering courses can change settings in such a way that their courses can target particular students that they’ve been having trouble recruiting in the past. So, I mean, obviously, the obvious example, the student, the providers would use this to target students have got the right grades, but they can also use it to target students that come from Paula quintile number one. So the people that are least likely to go to university, this, of course, is a requirement for many providers in their access and participation. Planning was all a face to recruit more and more of these students so they can actually use this scheme to make sure that the cause gets in front of the students from those particular disadvantaged groups that otherwise wouldn’t be considering it. We don’t really know, as everyone said, really, we don’t really know exactly how this is going to work in practice, but it is one to watch. And I for one, in next the back end of next January, at which point we will probably still be in lockdown. I will be looking very closely at the application data for evidence or where this might have had an impact.

[00:10:58] So I think that’s really interesting, actually. If he diversity’s can set the parameters for contextualised admissions because. Something that hasn’t been done that way before. Be interesting to see whether people do that and what the impact might be.

[00:11:11] And I mean, I’m also interested. I mean, this is perhaps it’s not the conversation so much for today, but the like so many things. How how did this whole crisis will change long term policy and also behaviors and expectations? And it seems to me that the government has made its mind up, that U.A. is the right way to go. And I wonder if this this situation will kind of give them a kind of a hook to hang that policy on. I mean, David, you’ve been around these arguments for well, look for a long time, in different cycles, as you know, as as it’s going to fallen in and out of favor. Could you imagine us ending in a peculiar type system in the next couple of years?

[00:11:53] Well, yes. Yes, I certainly could imagine that. I, I, I think it’s very tricky issue because you’ve got to look at it from the point of view of the applicants. And I think there are certainly some who are significantly disadvantaged by the way it’s done. No, they’re also quite a lot. I think who have more time to think and plan in the current system. So I think there’s no right or wrong. I think we are. So is that things that were considered unthinkable and impractical are now worth thinking about? And although the disruption, the sheer will will be immense. I think we will get through that to see disruption and things that were thought impractical will turn out to be possible. So I think it just resets the decisions around BQE. And I think we can have a much more informed discussion and lay aside some of the the strong views we have about practicality that perhaps are not now justified.

[00:12:49] Well, feel your lips to God’s ears. I like the sound of a more informed conversation about SPQR rights. Let’s see who’s been blocking for us this week.

[00:12:58] Hi, I’m Claire Taylor, working for Summers Consulting his a consultancy owned and run by universities. I’ve been working with university timetables to understand the art of the possible for September 2020. We’re ready. No lectures are out, replaced by asynchronous online broadcasts available to students on demand. But what should universities do about small group teaching? I think it’s two key questions. Timetable’s is asking, which will help them decide what to do about face to face teaching for September. Is about the rooms. How many rooms are still usable under social distancing rules? One university we spoke to estimated a reduction of 30 to 40 percent. And question two. What’s your occupancy of these rooms likely to be? We think perhaps 15 to 25 percent of their full capacity. What’s this going to mean for face to face small group teaching? We’re going to see multiple instances, double, triple teaching, much longer teaching days, recording MCS or senior leadership teams are going to have to make some difficult decisions about which cohorts to prioritize for face to face learning SEP. Check out our longer blog. On the one key site for more details on this.

[00:13:57] Right, Nestor’s out with a new report about the missing four billion. That sounds like a lot of money. David, what is going on?

[00:14:03] Well, I think this report has been some time in the gestation. And as Tom and Richard say, they’ve talked a lot of people and and I am one of those those people. I think it is a fantastic report with some great data attached. Either Orton’s Out Things provides, in fact, the informed basis for discussion that I was just referring to on on PKU. It provides a chance to have a debate about where we’re going to get to in what I. I’m afraid I’m willing to call the new normal. I think we have a system that has served us very, very well at delivering some very strong outcomes. I think probably we need a slightly broader set of outcomes. And certainly we need outcomes that mean that, for example, you can I can put into practice its mission as being research and innovation agency for the whole country. I we have had constant research concentration. There is a very strong investment in parts of the country who have delivered on that investment. I think we want to provide an opportunity. According to Fourth and jawans, to look at that opportunity being available right across the country.

[00:15:17] What are your key takeaways from from that from the report and its recommendations?

[00:15:22] Well, I think there’s a lot of recommendations, some of which are practical and simple, but nevertheless challenging, some of them aimed in the direction of my organization. I’m not going to comment on those, but I do appreciate the case that’s being made. I’m not. I think the key take home is that research and development is at the heart of economic growth across the whole country. That’s, I think, what we believe and the government believes. But we have given undue attention to some parts of the country for a series of reasons that are being clearly set out. I know the Take-Home message is why should we not invest in research and development right across the. Country and demonstrate that the benefits that follow will available be available to all, you’re a member of the Research Sustainability Task Force.

[00:16:14] And it’s been you know, it was a bit of a lie about who was on it. And, you know, naming naming the names. But it does seem it does seem like a fairly broad and sensible group. But my guess my question is, do you think that the government is taking seriously what you and other experts about research and innovation are bringing through at this point?

[00:16:34] Oh, I do. I do think the government’s taking seriously inputs of of all kinds. I think the discussions that are happening around how we handle the immediate situation, because the government aspiration for recession developing, which I’ve already described in the place context remains. I articulated very strongly and I’m sure we’ll look and see if it is articulated strongly. Again, the government’s got an aspiration. We’ve got to ensure that we have the research capacity and capability to deliver on that and indeed broaden it so that it’s available in more places. And so really, the task force is about how we do stuff now, but also research. Sustainability is clearly an issue that has been brought into sharp focus by the shock the system has had. And part of the agenda, therefore, is looking ahead. Again, being slightly trite to look at what the new normal might be and how we might get there. So Richard and Tom have produced a great set of proposals for one element of the new normal. I’m sure the others will emerge and I’m sure the government wants to listen to all of those and develop concrete plans to deliver decay on the political sides.

[00:17:48] It feels like the research innovation side of what goes on in the landscape inside universities and around the ecosystem is the bit that the government is keen on protecting and and shoring up to a certain extent. It doesn’t feel the same, doesn’t feel like there’s the same attention to the rest of universities, you know, the teaching and learning and the and the experience. Why? Why do you think that is?

[00:18:14] Well well, first of all, I don’t agree. I just think I think the government is very concerned that they ability to deliver high level skills and provide us with a workforce. That’s right. For the jobs of tomorrow is is very strong. I think actually the view of universities goes way beyond the economic approach. At the heart of regeneration in huge parts of the country is, say, culture, and our universities are major centres for that. So I think this is a balanced approach. However, the government’s always been very clearly involved in in research. It’s very, very major funder and we have national plans. I think the government is not in is not dictating how teaching is carried out. I think that’s very much responsibility in the universities. And I think it’s admirable that they are not getting in to some of the fine detail around that. And it’s an opportunity for universities to take some new directions, as we’ve been talking about, because they work with students and identify collectively opportunities that are available to them. So I don’t see it at all as the government not interested. I just think the nature of their interest is is different and rightly so decayed.

[00:19:34] Tell us about the next reports. Q Our recommendations.

[00:19:38] Yeah. Now this is the bit that I imagine raised most of the sector eyebrows this morning. A lot of a lot of what’s in the report is we need to get better funding R&D in the regions. And that, I think a largely uncontroversial. We’ve been saying now for a long, long time. But I’m going to read you the actual text of this recommendation, nine block grant funding for research and knowledge exchange and universities.

[00:20:06] It should be regionally weighted to reflect current regional public underfunding of research and development. The longstanding explicit preference to London in the quality research funding formula. That’s the key to our funding we all know and love. Thank you, David, for that funding. That should be removed. So this is a big, big shift. There’s long been the expectation. I mean, QR primarily pays for staff. It pays staff salaries. And those salaries cover staff living costs. Living costs are simply higher in London. And as much as we might like the idea of spending less in London and more elsewhere, the problem is for the spend we make in London, we’ll be getting less tippity per pound of spending simply because it’s more expensive to do pretty much anything in London. So there are a lot of other stuff in there aimed at Yukari, which obviously we can’t expect David Swinney to talk about at this point.

[00:21:01] But there would be a high level. Well, advisory committee of the nations and reasons to look at the overall spread of project funding and there’d be expansions to existing funds like the strength in places. The other thing I spotted in this report, which I thought was interesting, was figure 10, which is a lovely block diagram of all of the different players in the UK’s R&D funding.

[00:21:32] Now, I looked at this and I was reminded back at the start of Joe Johnson’s first period as universities minister. He talked a lot about a PowerPoint slide of doom, which showed an incredibly complicated system of things which was quite hard to grasp exactly what was going on. Now, this diagram to me looks exactly like that kind of a slide is a complex system. And although I think that the government’s instinct to make R&D work by devolving it regionally is probably the right one. Who is to say that in a few years another minister will come along and we’ll do what? Joe Johns and we’ll look at a complicated picture and say, this is ridiculous. We haven’t got any levers. We haven’t got any controls. We can’t do any national planning. So I kind of slightly fear that the seeds of this reports on dung fall are actually in the complexity of the systems that it is proposing.

[00:22:28] Fascinating, I think. Well, you know, stepping back, research and science is having a bit of a moment. I mean, it’s clear that, you know, this is where the fact the frontline of the fight against the pandemic is taking place is taking place in university labs. And that’s where, you know, that’s where largely, you know, we’re going to find a way out of this crisis. You would’ve thought, Jenny, do you think that it’s undercut through with the public or do you think we’re still going to end up in a distrusting of experts place when it when the dust settles?

[00:23:00] Well, I’d like to hope that the current trust in experts will be sustained. I do think it’s it’s a moment not just to get us out of the current crisis, which will involve huge amount of research and science, but actually to to build back better, which I think that there is still a will to do. So, you know, we want to avoid future pandemics. We want to avoid an adverse climate events in the future. Well, we’re going to have to science our way out of this. There’s a huge amount of research and innovation to be done. And not just the science, but people sense it, economic and social policy as well. So I think it’s a great moment for UK and international research really to to take that moment before everyone forgets what we’ve learned and what we’ve come to value through the current pandemic.

[00:23:47] Yeah, I mean, I completely agree with that. But I would say it’s not just about elements of the research agenda in universities. This is an opportunity for them, albeit facing plenty challenges to grab the broader role of contribution to their communities and regions beyond just research done in labs. It’s an opportunity, I think, that there are some some challenges. I appreciate David setting out what I will write in response to the report. Q Are you? I yes. I always appreciate David. Sir. David’s wisdom actually is it seems really, really helpful. Well, I would say though is that there as well as costs, additional costs from being in some parts of the country. There are also additional benefits from being in some parts of the country. And I think we do need to look hard at the method by which we do our funding to take account of how we will deliver the best outcomes across the country.

[00:24:45] Welcome to. Yes. But does it correlate the podcast segment, the tech sector data, and drives that 200 miles up the A1 without stopping the town of Barnhardt Castle in County Durham is a beautiful place and is noted in particular for easy access to Optician’s.

[00:25:00] But is there a higher education infrastructure that supports this local economic need? I’ve plotted the distance in miles as the crow flies to Barnard Castle from each UK higher education provider against the number of students studying ophthalmics in 2018 19 at each institution. Yes, but does it correlate?

[00:25:23] I would have thought that there was no correlation and that the provision of optical coast is not mix was not correlated with distance.

[00:25:36] I’m going to go with a weak correlation. I think there might well be.

[00:25:41] Surprisingly enough, there is no correlation, R-squared is nought point nought for eight. So obviously I reserve the right to go back later on and edit that to make myself look smarter. Cardiff University has the greatest number of students studying ophthalmics at a distance of 219 miles to Barnard Castle. Data is taken from the 2018 19. He’s a student data set and from Google Maps. And where the data does not exist or is equal to zero.

[00:26:11] I have not plotted it. See you next time.

[00:26:16] The Russell Group has released a plan to offer opportunities, this vantage underrepresented students a big plan. The WP, D.K., talk us through it now.

[00:26:24] Every now and then, the Russell Group, which is the group of which originally was the group of universities that had medical schools, but is now the group of universities that think that they offer something distinct and higher quality that others will be say is released, a plan to more consistently offer opportunities for disadvantaged and unrepresentative students. Now, you might think that’s the kind of thing that the Russell Group comes up with quite a lot. And you’re right, it is a problem that needs fixing. And the approach in this report is that although members of the Russell Group need to make a commitment, as they say, to delivering on their responsibility to diversify their campuses and support their students to reach their full potential, because, of course, otherwise they would not be doing that. It’s also calling on government to make changes in the way and the opportunities at schooling and other other adult education to support students to the extent that more students might be able to benefit from the marvelous education that only the Russell, the Russell Group can offer. And so you might have picked up from that.

[00:27:41] I’m a little bit cynical about this report that there are elements to politics that if you look deep into it, it doesn’t really commit restaurant members to make any hard changes in the way they teach or the other or their admission policy. Although we do get the standard warning that if you want nothing group universities to take home more students from disadvantaged backgrounds, they would have to shock horror, lower their entrance grades. So a lot of the action is on the government. There’s a new office for tackling inequality. I don’t like that name. I reckon you could call it something like the Office for Fair Access. I think that would be much more pleasing title and yes. So as you can probably tell, I’m not a massive fan of this, but it does point to work that needs to be done. And it does once again underline the fact that a lot of a person’s success in life is defined not by the university they go to, but by their background and the jobs their parents did.

[00:28:50] I mean, this this question about that, it’s just an office for tackling inequality or, you know, off of a mark, too. I mean, what extent, though, is this actually a response to the access and participation agenda from some office to students and and the changes that all universities are gonna have to make when it comes to the WP?

[00:29:10] I mean, I think the first thing to say is I do admire the target that Chris Mayer would have set here, because actually he’s forced this debate. And I’m sure that he knows that it’s not within an individual university’s gift to deliver on this or even a mission. Great. But it’s something that needs to happen. And I also think that, you know, this may be controversial, but I do think that the Russell Group is right to say this is not something we can do on our own. It tackling inequality to this level does need a sustained political will, which is something that I don’t think we’ve seen for quite some time. And while it is about tackling educational disadvantage from birth, it’s about many more things. It’s about poverty. It’s about the causes of poverty, wealth inequality, health. It’s about community or community organizing. But I think it’s also about listening to and respecting the values of the communities that you want to attract through your doors. It’s about all these things and a university, a mission group, even the education sector can’t do this on its own. So, you know, while while we may not be happy with the way it’s worded, actually a whole government approach to tackling this with with many, many partners from across different sectors, I think is is correct. Doesn’t let universities off the hook. One thing it will do, and I think you’ve eluded to this already is actually if they do reach these goals, it will change. Russell Group universities quite fundamentally, because they do, too, you know, a greater or lesser extent reflect the attitudes and values of the people who come through their doors at the moment. And as part of that process of more representative access, I think the culture of these universities will change quite profoundly and it will feel like a loss. But of course, it is also, again, in so many ways, and it will help to break down the barriers between Russell Group universities and wider society, which is important if you want to carry on doing things like research and have a public will to do that.

[00:31:09] I’m gonna point out the Russell Crowe is not a homogenous group. Albeit they are. They share the banner. And I think the approach taken by just, let’s say Newcastle, Leeds, Liverpool is pretty different. The approach taken by Oxbridge and I think there are many very, very good things happening in many Russell Group universities. I think it’s great that they’re working together on this. I think it’s it’s not going to be a perfect answer. And they do need help. But surely it’s a considerable step forward that we’ve got universities keen to take seriously their responsibility to all of our people. I think I worked with Chris Millwood for years. He has a very challenging job with a limited range of instruments available to him, but a very down to earth and practical view of what is possible. He’s, in my view, the right person to take this forward. And it’s an area area of the office for students where I think they have the public mood. Right. They should be putting pressure on universities. And I look forward to the Russell Group work being taken forward to better outcomes.

[00:32:26] But my point is really, you know, a hugely challenging target like this forcing you to re-evaluate that, you know, you can’t you can’t get there by doing more of the same and you can’t get there on your own. So the fact that this prompts a fundamental rethink of what is needed in order to create that quality I think is is helpful. Whether it will be possible to act on that. I don’t know. But I’m hopeful. I’m hopeful it will, because the inequality that leads to the inequalities in admissions are systemic right across our society. And and no one actor can can tackle them alone.

[00:33:04] I think you’re right that this report is an encouraging light, first tentative step in a way to making those fundamental changes. But we would need to see a lot more action from government and from these universities, each of them responsive to their own areas and their own local needs, particularly that I think Woods need to take place if we’re going to make this fundamental change.

[00:33:32] So that’s about it for this week. Remember to delve deeper into anything we discussed today, you’ll find links in the show notes. Don’t forget, you can subscribe to the podcast automatically. Just search for the monkey show of our Apple podcast or your favorite Android podcast directory or find the feed you need on Warnke dot com slash podcast. And we fancy parents are guessing donkey show. Drop us an email on team at Warnke dot com and we’ll be in touch. So thanks to David, Jenny, D.K. and everyone at Team Warnke for making it happen. And until next week, remain indoors.

Leave a Reply