Social mobility and the professions
So the government is on a drive to promote social mobility, with particular focus on apparently "elitist" professions. I'm in favour of this in principle. In some cases, the statistical bias towards those who are privately educated means that the profession in question cannot possibly reflect the diversity of the available raw talent.
My concern, however, is that we will lose sight of the primary function of each of the sectors in question. The main function of the bar, for example, is to provide high-quality legal services to the public. Of course, in doing so, it should ensure that there is a genuinely level playing field for those who aspire to be barristers, and certain allowances must be made for those whose talents have not had the opportunity to manifest themselves fully. Social mobility will of course be a beneficial side-effect of this.
The problem comes if there is a noticeable drop in standards as a result of a disproportionate focus on social mobility. I don't necessarily think that this will be the case, but I think it's something that we should be vigilant about if we are going to use entry to the professions to serve wider social goals in a utilitarian manner. The same can be said of universities. Admittedly, this is true to a lesser extent since universities serve a legitimate and important social goal, and provide vital opportunities for social mobility as well as striving for academic excellence.
But the fundamental point is that neither the professions nor the universities can or should be expected to compensate fully for deficiencies (i.e. governmental failings) in the education system or other areas of social policy. This initiative could easily turn into an exercise in buck-passing.
My concern, however, is that we will lose sight of the primary function of each of the sectors in question. The main function of the bar, for example, is to provide high-quality legal services to the public. Of course, in doing so, it should ensure that there is a genuinely level playing field for those who aspire to be barristers, and certain allowances must be made for those whose talents have not had the opportunity to manifest themselves fully. Social mobility will of course be a beneficial side-effect of this.
The problem comes if there is a noticeable drop in standards as a result of a disproportionate focus on social mobility. I don't necessarily think that this will be the case, but I think it's something that we should be vigilant about if we are going to use entry to the professions to serve wider social goals in a utilitarian manner. The same can be said of universities. Admittedly, this is true to a lesser extent since universities serve a legitimate and important social goal, and provide vital opportunities for social mobility as well as striving for academic excellence.
But the fundamental point is that neither the professions nor the universities can or should be expected to compensate fully for deficiencies (i.e. governmental failings) in the education system or other areas of social policy. This initiative could easily turn into an exercise in buck-passing.