Leadership and Worcester College

In my last article, I set out the opportunity for true leadership in a time of crisis. Sadly, few have taken that opportunity during the pandemic. The government’s policy decisions appear to be made on the hoof, based on shreds of the latest data, with no clear strategy or plan. Big businesses have mostly been (uncharacteristically) silent, protesting when their sector is threatened by the latest rules, but rarely setting out alternative ideas for a way forward as we juggle risks to both health and wealth. 

Her Majesty the Queen was an early notable exception: her special broadcast on 5thApril was an exemplary example of leadership in a crisis. Her speech was a mere 530 words long but packed a punch, reassuring the 24 million who watched in the UK. She was honest, acknowledging we were living through “A time of disruption in the life of our country: a disruption that has brought grief to some, financial difficulties to many, and enormous changes to the daily lives of us all.” She gave praise to those who were helping us through the challenges, she offered real hope and finally she gave heartfelt thanks. A few weeks later in her VE Day anniversary message she urged us to ‘Never despair, never give up’, reminding us that “We will meet again.”

Now you might think, it’s easy for the Queen. She can speak in generalities. She can talk about us succeeding, of winning, but she doesn’t have to set out the roadmap as to how. And that’s true. Much of our challenge over the past few months is that we’ve wanted specific answers, answers that have not been forthcoming. If anything, our uncertainty and sense of turmoil has increased. 

But while so much swirls around, we still know what’s important to us, what our values are. This week, in the midst of the storm around A-level results, we saw a wonderful example of true leadership and moral judgement from Worcester College Oxford. While arguments raged nationally over the exam regulator Ofqual’s algorithm that downgraded nearly 40% of predicted results, Worcester rose above the fray. The day after results were published, the college announced that it would give a place to every student it had made an offer to. What’s more, the Tutor for Admissions, Laura Ashe, explained that the college had decided to do this in advance when it found out – along with every other college and university – that A level exams were to be cancelled. Speaking on LBS Radio she said, “we took the view that there wasn’t going to be any new information there that could justify rejecting someone to whom we’d made an offer.” The college had decided it was “the morally right thing to do.” They recognised that since they ‘over offer’ they would ‘need to find a way to make places for all these people’ but felt they had a duty to do that. 

Professor Ashe added “And, of course, when we did get the results … we discovered something much more disturbing, which was quite how much already disadvantaged students were being further disadvantaged by the way these grades were being given.” 

Worcester saw that nearly a quarter of their offer holders from state schools had their results downgraded compared with a tenth of those from private schools. It made 83% of its offers to pupils from state schools this year.

Worcester’s decision – and the process behind it – shows great leadership. Oxford University as a whole had already warned students successfully appealing their downgraded A-levels that they still won’t be eligible for a place this academic year, citing ‘ongoing social-distancing restrictions’ as a reason. Worcester decided it was going to work out how to cope with those restrictions. Other colleges emulating Worcester (although often with caveats) include Mansfield College which has accepted 10% more students than ever before. Two tutors have given up their rooms to help create space. 

There’s always a reason to get out of doing the right thing, always a reason to dither or water down a decision.  Worcester made up its mind based on its own judgement, it didn’t seek to build a consensus, it didn’t water down the ‘moral rightness’ of its decision by, say, awarding places only to state school pupils. It took a higher stance and did something that it believed to be right, just and moral. Meanwhile a campaign from Oxbridge alumni to ‘Honour the Offer’ has quickly reached an estimated 8,000 supporters. 

Let’s look at why Worcester felt so confident to take the lead. Last year, four of my children were studying at Oxford, three as undergraduates. All had been through a rigorous entry process before they received an offer, with the interviews being considered more testing (and more competitive) than the exams themselves. (My son actually applied to Worcester and didn’t get an offer – but was passed along to Christ Church, where he enjoyed a great four years and got a First.) One daughter didn’t get an offer at her first attempt before her A levels so reapplied the following year and was successful second time around. Notably, all her other university choices made her offers, but none of the others interviewed her. 

We discussed their experiences this week in the light of the A-level fiasco. Full disclosure: we’ve been lucky this year – no one in our family was due to sit either GCSEs or A-levels (our first break in six years although just a short reprieve as next year we’ll have the pleasure of both). Our two university finalists sat their exams remotely and that all went fine (which begs the question why that wasn’t attempted for A-levels). My children think it’s surprising that more universities don’t interview – even if only by Zoom –and not just to explore academic issues in more depth. A good ‘fit’ means that students are more likely to benefit from their environment and the teaching, and to contribute more to life on campus. Yet beyond Oxbridge, interviews are held only for the most competitive subjects at other top universities. A lack of insight into their would-be students’ potential has made it hard or impossible for other universities to respond in a more compassionate way to those who’ve missed their predicted grades. A lesson learned, surely, is to interview applicants. I have to confess this is personal: no one from my state school had gone to Oxbridge for many years and I was keen to try but realised I wasn’t going to be properly prepared for the ‘Fourth Term’ or ‘Seventh Term’ exams set at the time. Fitzwilliam College Cambridge offered ‘matriculation’ places to those who impressed at interview: my offer was two Es. I did much better (!), but the interview was the real test. As Fitzwilliam says in its own response to the 2020 admissions challenges, ‘As in every year, we have balanced academic grades with contextual factors…. In assessing candidates who have not met their offers, we have considered their academic record and reference, personal statement, performance in any written assessments, contextual data and performance at interview.’ This, they say has allowed the college to confirm places for a significant number of students with A-level grades below their original offers. 

But I’m asking them to go further. I’m adding my voice to those urging Fitzwilliam and other colleges to follow Worcester College Oxford’s clearcut moral leadership, simply committing to honour places for those who received an offer. No ifs, no buts, no deferrals. In the meantime, let’s celebrate a rare example of great leadership, all the more welcome in today’s hedging-our-bets climate. Bravo, Worcester!