I always wanted to learn. I was always pushed back. That's all I remember of it.

And when I did fight tooth and nail to get into Uni through cleaning, I simply found a university that gives a brief lecture around the subject, you get given a course-sheet, and you get on with it.

No tutoring, No over-the-shoulder Guru, No meetings available BEFORE work was due in, just not possible.

Then, after realising what a fake of a journey it all was, find myself in bad accommodation, unable to sleep, unable to afford an environment where I can concentrate and be. Only the cheap for a reason properties are rentable.

This, I fear, is all proving to be a game for the prestigious feelers to remain feeling prestigious and for industry to gain pre-packaged trainees ready for their business, rather than any attempt to introduce independant thinkers into the community.

I shouldn't have had to go through all that to find out who I was and what I could do. I shouldn't be in any debt for it.

simon, Oxford, UK

This is yet another expression of the policies of policies of political jealousy that are sweeping this country. Where those who come up with them want to hurt the better off fifty per cent as much as they want to help the less well off. In this day and age there is one barrier to achievement. Knowledge. I know of many individuals who would send their children to private school 'if i could afford it' but when I try to tell them about assisted places and scholarship schemes run by many very good private and public schools, they seem to show little or no interest. This lack of knowledge couples with a culture amongst some socio economic sections of society that aiming at higher achievement assumes an attitude of superiority over their peers. Additionally, by creating the conditions whereby the rewards of achievement are diminished, then the incentive to achieve and progress will be reduced. If achievement benefits your peers, then how can achievement by your peers not benefit you?

Mark Anderson, hinckley, England

I agree with Will, Cambridgshire. I’m a working class man who left school with virtually no qualifications. After 20 years working as a coachbuilder I did an access course at my local college and then went on to do (read for) a degree in Computer Studies. Whilst there my lecturers informed me that the number of working class students remained consistently static at 6 to 8%. I was intensely proud to graduate with a 1st class degree which gave me a tremendous amount of self worth. I’m the only member of my family to have attended university (most of them are builders) and currently work in middle management in IT. Should my daughter be fortunate enough to qualify for a place, will they be asking her whether any of her parents attended university?

Gary, The Home Counties,

How will this help? Will somebody please tell me! I have 2 degrees - does that mean my grandchildren will also not be allowed into university?

Why push people ino further education if they don't want to go? All they will do is take the places from people who actually want to learn.

Bring back grants and interviews and it will (mostly) all be fair again - it is very easy to tell if someone has potential to do well by simply talking to them, and if you don't make them pay then you can't be accused of discriminating against the poor. I don't interview well and would have struggled with this, which is an unusual thing for me and would have been worth it.

But then again, here's a thought: why not let the universities decide?

Golly, that sounds a bit subversive, almost as bad as letting the NHS be run by actual real life doctors....

Liz Scott, Gutersloh, Germany

Personally, my parents left school at 14 and 16 and had no formal qualifications. I have studied through to PhD level, so is the qualifications my parents have a predictor of intellegence? Or the social situation in working class, post war britain?
The continual tinkering with the education system has left it in such a state that god alone knows how much further down we can go. If A* A-levels come in then in ten years will we need A** to determine who are trully the brightest of their generation.
Leave well alone and reduce the grade inflation to determine who are the brightest, then asking whether your parents have a degree will be unnecessary

Will, Cambridgshire,

"Perhaps this would be the best way of ensuring that the children of educated parents are sent to schools with a poor record of achievement!!!"
Why? How is that fair? It's discriminating against children with educated parents!

About A levels being devalued. It's simply because more and more people are being herded into college, even if it's not suited to their educational needs. I mean the age for leaving compulsory education is being put up to 18, all that is going to do is force the exam boards to lower their standards as they are bombarded with less academic students. Sooner or later exactly the same thing is going to happen with universities.

And how is refusing places to teenagers whose parents went to uni going to help the country in any way AT ALL? I ask you!

Chris Pelly, Farnham, Surrey

As an AS level student, I feel that I'm in a pretty good position to talk about this...
If the plans were to potentially refuse people from with non-university parents uni places in favour of people whose parents had gone to university there would be a massive outcry - but how is this any different?! The idea is to increase the number of people going to uni whose parents didnt, and putting whether your parents went to uni on your application form will only help achieve this if some people whose parents went to uni are refused places in favour of people whose parents didnt go. I'm going to be in the first year that has to include this information, and I'm justifiably worried that it could affect my chances of going to the uni i want to (getting the grades needed shouldn't be a problem, touch wood).
As for A levels getting easier - isn't it just possible that teachers are getting better at teaching the same syllabus they have for several years now? Just a thought...

sam, farnham, UK

I grew up in a very cash-limited upper working-class household in Hackney (Inner London). In 1962 I went to Oxford and took its own entrance exams. As a result I was awarded an Exhibition (a form of scholarship); this enabled me to enter Oxford without A-Levels. The Oxford entrance exams were a far better test of ability than A-Levels. My parental background was - of course - totally irrelevant. I never expected my children to be treated any differently - nor were they (one went to Oxford, the other to Cambridge).

Universities have no business dabbling in social engineering, and governments have no business forcing universities to 'compensate' for inadequate schooling.

Professor Geoffrey Alderman

Geoffrey Alderman, London, England

We are English living in America. The American Colleges ask for parents details on their admission forms. This may be to spot potential candidates from poorer back grounds but it is also very useful in spotting potential donors. The colleges have places for "Development cases" i.e those who could, or whose parents could, become big donors, and for the children of alumni and children of legacies.

Good universities in the UK who may one day wish to shake off the intefering yoke of government may see this as an oppertunity.

People here accept that it is not always "the brightest and the best" who get into the college of their choice. Perhaps it would be better if the Briish Government accepted that and stopped trying to engineer a not perfect but fairer system than the one here.

If they want poor people to go to University they should drop University fees and reinstate grants for English and Welsh citizens.

The Scots are, of course, free to do as they please.

Seonaid Corbishley, New Canaan, CT, USA

The government policies and targets have meant that the standards have been lowered to allow students to have a university education. The vast majority of students today would not have been accepted on university courses 20 years ago. Only 15% to 20% of A level students would benefit from a university education. The government is pacifying Middle England. The route cause of the issue is that we have a divisive education system: the private sector and the state sector. Only when we break this division can we provide a level playing field. This would allow educational standards to be raised because all parents would need to buy into the system and the natural top 20% of the brightest students would be identified as university potential and vocational training would need to be provided with the same status as a university education. After all Tony Blair has a university education but Alan Sugar does not! Who is the better business person with the innovative ideas that will allow us to successfully compete in the global economy?

John, Poole, UK

Surely part of the problem is that the A-level system has become so devalued over the past fifteen or twenty years that the proportion of school-leavers with three As has grown and grown. As this happens, it becomes harder and harder for admissions tutors at the top universities to sift out the really exceptional candidates. The fact is that A levels are no longer identifying the truly outstanding students.

Chris Thompson, Esher, Surrey

Might I suggest that if 98 percent of the applicants have 3 As at A-level, it is time to make the A-levels harder? In the same vein, it is a great shame that the Oxbridge entrance exam was abolished.

James Warren, Washington, DC, Unite

Instead of Universities discriminating against applicants on the basis of their parent's educational qualifications, surely it makes more sense to discriminate on the basis of secondary school attended? In other words, for universities to discriminate in favour of applicants from poor performing schools. Perhaps this would be the best way of ensuring that the children of educated parents are sent to schools with a poor record of achievement!!!

Nigel, Poole, UK

Shouldn't we be glad that some kids refrain from applying? Not sure whether the writer of this article wants absolutely everyone who thinks they are vaguely intelligent to apply, or whether she wants numbers to be slated. A definite ambivalence there.

Mikail Ramsden, Ramwood, UK

Social engineering has been a disaster - whether it be foisting anti-social tenants onto law abiding teneants as they will 'bring them up to their level' and now this. It always sounds as though the person concerned couldn't make it under their own efforts so has to have it all done for them. It's almost acrime to get anywhere these days without some twit deciding to look for discrimation.

carole, lONDON, uk

Quite right! Asking about parental status is daft. So, by the way is demanding straight As. In theory 2 Es qualify anyone to go anywhere. Instead of asking for more tests, interviews, background info, why not be like the wonderfully egalitarian Dutch? Allocate places at university by a lottery -- actually a *weighted* lottery, depending onyour school-leaving grades.
For more info about this, visit www.conallboyle.com

Conall, Margam, West Glamorgan

What about the bright ones who don’t apply?
Universities should forget social engineering
Camilla Cavendish
We need all now for IRAQ. The bright and the dull. After the budget the ball has started rolling. The UK sees Robin Hood and some of them want to go to Iraq to wait till things cool down, The students are going there for "on the hand training", I mean practicals. Any problems?

Firozali A.Mulla MBA PhD, Dar-Es-Salaam, Tanzania

One of the problems with 'everyone' should go to University, is that not everyone should be at University..It has been estimated that only 15% of students can benefit from going to a first rate University. The bottom 10% at MIT is better than the top 10% at other Universities. Not that the others are bad, MIT is so demanding. A lot of factors go into one's ability to prosper at University.. Culture, previous education, attitude, ability to work unassisted, the will to succeed. Here in Texas the two main University systems are the University of Texas at Austin,and Texas A & M at College Station. A degree from these two Universities can stand up to any other University. Both of these institutions have colleges that offer degrees that cater to those who cannot stand the pace at the major campus. There are people who for various reasons, would not get anything out of a University education. I realise that this is not PC, but reality never gets into their world

Desmond Taylor, Houston, USA Texas.

The way to destroy this madness is simple. In three yearts time employers just need to look at where job applicants degrees were awarded. If from a university that adheres to these ridicluous ideas, shred the application and neuter the value of a degree from such an instituion.

Harsh,? Yes.

Graeme, Boston, MA

Even Oxford can admit every applicant with an interest in an academic subject and have places to spare. A college with ten intellectuals and the remainder of the junior members rugby players or rowers is tolerable. What is deadly is college stuffed out with ambitious men or, even worse, ambitious women who don't have the ability to advance their subject but who clog up seminars and libraries and distract tutors from philosophy in their search for the marks they require to advance their careers.

Malcolm McLean, Bradford, UK

One aspect that never seems to be mentioned in these discussions is the inequity of positive discrimination, but your title here implies it. There is considerable pressure on children of middle class parents to get to the right university, and possibly a great sense of failure if they don’t. There is little or none for children who’s families have no prior expectations. Given two children of the same ostensible ability and qualifications, one from university parents and one from parents with no educational history worth considering, applying the principles of utility theory, the loss of utility to the first child will be much greater than the gain in utility to the second, where the second child is preferred. And what exactly would you be achieving in terms of social engineering or what sense does that make? It doesn’t seem to me either to be constructive social engineering or to make any sense. If anything, I would say that in such a case, given knowledge of the parental history, the child of university parents should reasonably be preferred. If the second child was clearly more able of course that would be different, but then the parental history would equally be irrelevant.

Henry Percy, London, UK

Unfortunately this government gets a bit confused between the phrases 'Equality of Opportunity' and 'making everyone equal'. They say the latter then do the former. I had the more orthodox education going to Durham University, one brother went to technical college and one went straight from O-level to work. So my family has experienced most sides of the debate. These routes are what suited us as individuals. We have all been relatively successful and weren't forced into boxes. We are all as intelligent as each other but all have personalities suited to different ways of working. Unfortunately to a greater extent the government has removed this as an alternative for people, in the name of homogenaity. Guess it makes it easier for Gordon to measure. Lets stop trying to make everyone the same and really focus and giving people the same opportunity for success letting people's own drive and motivation propel them to success or otherwise.

Jon, London,

The division between private and state education is divisive social mechanism. Not until we break down this division can we really tackle the issue of a level playing field, raising educational standards across all income groups and providing an environment in which vocational training has the same status as a university education.

John, Poole, UK

Blair's Britain is undergoing the painful transition from a rational system of education to an American one.

Britain's older system had unfair aspects and certainly needed some change to bring it up to date, but what has happened, with tests that don't test anything and grades that don't mean anything, is assuming wholesale America's worst aspects.

Many abroad do not realize the appalling state of education in America. All, not dropping out, graduate, many who can't read. Admissions at universities can't trust high-school transcripts, hence the SAT test, a gigantic, money-making institution dishing up a kind of ersatz IQ.

Anyone can get a 'degree' at the huge number of 3rd-rate universities and 'colleges,' not to mention mail-order 'degrees.'

You don't read Shakespeare to study English at many. You can get a degree in circus or playground management. The meaning of a degree is lost, despite the existence of places like Harvard.

Could say more, out of characters.

John Chuckman, Toronto, Canada

I agree that students personal circumstances are far more complex than graduate/non-graduate parents. My father, and both my paternal grandparents are university graduates. But by the way, I grew up in a council house because my father was chronically ill and on a pension, as well as being a sole-parent... so, sorry, am I posh and privileged, or part of the underclass? Does it make a difference if I tell you I am studying for a post-graduate degree at Cambridge (on a full scholarship)?

TDM, Cambridge,

Whilst I concur with Byr Barnes that Vocational training is treated with disdain and as a 'lesser' opportunity by many in the establishment, the statement that "University is a waste of time" is clearly fatuous at best.

In my last ten years of employment in the computer industry I have constantly used the knowledge I gained at University. Whilst I may have learnt those key skills without going to university, perhaps on-the-job training would have missed many of the theoretical points that don't come up very often (but still do). Perhaps I would be learning from people with bad habits rather than top-quality tutors?

I do not labour under the illusion that everyone should, or wants to go to university. For those that do it can be a very valuable experience.

Jim Grimmett, Bath,

Not everyone wants or needs to go to university. It is not a prerequisite for a successful or happy life. I agree that everyone should have a certain level of education, to help society function. But the idea that we should have as many people as possible at university is ludicrous. To make matters worse it has now been decided that all people should be in school until they are 18, if they are not doing A levels then they are doing vocational courses. This is ridiculous. People who do not want to go to university do not need to be at school after 16. They need to get a job. If you want to be in a profession that does not value a degree as a qualification. Then surely the earlier you start working as a novice in that job the better. This communist idea that the state awards you a future is madness. It does not work and is a drain of the tax payers pound.

Samuel Britten, Bristol, England

The problem is a simple one - how to select merit from the crowd. Government has tried to achieve this by using social manipulation whereas the solution lies elsewhere. If top Universities or other professional bodies really are keen to identify merit (including employers), please abolish the system of selecting on the basis of A-level results only and replace that with a form of separate entrance exams after A-level for different professions. Of course this means harder work for students but this is already a practice in many countries around the world hence this will catch on here sooner or later. Poorer students who are part of that meritorious list can be subsidised by the Government or relevant University. Less costly and merit always wins.

Prabhat, UK,

Who are we to say that the 3,000 pupils who don't apply to the "top" 13 universities are wasting their talent? Some may be, some not. The idea that a full-time university education is the only way to develop talent is a form of snobbery. For those that do chose to gain a degree, it does not have to start at 18 or be through full-time study. For example, Birkbeck College in London provides a quality of teaching and a qualification (a University of London degree) that is the equal of anything else on offer in the UK, and all through part-time study in the evenings. We have to encourage diversity of provision, because the aspirations and abilities of the potential intake is diverse. It is a surprise that only 3,000 reject this orthodoxy.

al, london,

I agree that the entire Education system is geared towards putting students into University whether that is the best for them or not. The idea of vocational training really is regarded with disdain by the Educational establishment. Having done both sorts of study (vocational then University) I can honestly say that University is a total waste of time. It is just a conveyer-belt where students get on at one end get off the other 3 years later then wake-up in the real world and have to start learning what is really required. Those receving vocational training are learning what is actually required in the real world and hence are more use. To back that up the friends of mine that went out to work instead of going to University have progressed faster in the real world than those who did the Uni route, and they get paid more.
As for Careers Guidance - what a joke! I don't know of a single person who has received any guidance at all ever.

Bry Barnes, Somerset, Uk

I have over 20 yrs of experience of teaching in Universities. I have seen may ways that Universities have dumped down thier degrees. But this one is by our incompetent govt. This government has diluted the quality of education since it came to power. By asking parents' education it does not guarantee their children's success at University. People who went to top universities did so because they were intelligent not just because they had low 'A' level grades and let into top unis because thier parents had no education. This is a way to force top universities to intake low level students. Is this PC gone made again? Please let the top universities flourish at what they do best - produce top scientists, lawyers, politicans, engineers, etc. Let the TVUs, Middlesexs, Greenwichs, Bedfordhsires, etc produce top taxi drivers and corner shop owners. That is how they should be. Some of these new unis are still mentally polytechnics or some cases technical colleges.

Pandya, MK, UK

I have long thought children should be assessed on their parents' A-Level Grades simply because prior to 1980 the grades meant something.

TomTom, Leeds, England

"You cannot have equality of opportunity when so many students don't even apply." What a fatuous piece of nonsense! There are plenty of less academically gifted students who would be infinitely better off learning to be electricians or carpenters or members of other non-academic skilled professions. One of the UK's biggest problems is treating vocational education as second-best (except for vocations requiring a university degree, such as medicine). It is far better to have a first-rate plumber than a third-rate student. Anyone who has recently tried to have some work done on their house will agree with me.

RM, Hereford,

It's all very well to assess potential, but many subjects, particularly in the sciences, require some considerable basic knowledge as a prerequisite to their study, which should have been gained in the sixth form. It is very difficult to teach biochemistry, say, to students lacking an adequate grounding in biology, organic chemistry, mathematics, and statistics, and to pretend otherwise risks seeing many students attempting courses for which they are ill prepared. It is not the function of a university to repeat the sixth form years, which can only really be done by extending courses by a further year or two for students with potential but without knowledge.

Peter, Cambridge,

I think Mike Hills's point is that many children of graduates, who attend schools where progression to higher education is the norm, will go on the university because, well, that's what you do, isn't it? One of the more noticeable changes in HE in recent years has been that the less academically-gifted offspring of the middle and upper classes now go to university, whereas they wouldn't have done a generation ago. They see no alternative.

Someone who makes a conscious decision to go to university, rather than one who just gets swept along by parental expectations, might have characteristics that an admissions tutor would value.

Tim Footman, Bangkok, Thailand

This is the most balanced overview I have read on this tricky subject.

If mentoring were to become more widespread in schools, that could augment the existing pathway of teacher encouragement.

Perhaps there’s a need for a focussed educational charity or foundation actively to seek out, encourage and support members of this group of talent born possibly to ‘waste its sweetness o’er the desart air.’

The ‘lifelong learning’ concept which encourages the idea of higher education in age groups beyond the traditional school leaver and gap year time window could be another route to identifying and directing help to such potential candidates. Perhaps the boredom of post-industrial materialism might jump start some of those able to self actuate, if they had the necessary motivation.

dr venables preller, Warminster, UK

The Times recently published data on Oxford places offered to 6th formers last year. Of the 1495 places offered to pupils from 330 different schools, well over one in ten (160) went to children from just three – Eton, Westminster & Winchester College. A quarter of the places offered (369) went to pupils from just 12 schools – only 5 of which appeared in the Times’ lists of top A-level scoring schools for the year.

Fascinating that Oxford says parental education has no valid reference to entry decisions - they presumably do have each candidate’s school information. Could it be that in many cases that is all they feel they need?

E Highwater, Richmond, U.K.

Blue blood counts. I think I saw that King Edward I has many hundreds of thousands of descendents. The ability to speak Welsh and Gaelic must also be a prime consideration. The English have been uppity for far too long and really should go home to Germany. The ability to read and write logically is a bit out of date - look at our government! Well-trained British butlers and servants may well have a good future in India and China. We must resist promotion on merit at all costs - very unfair.

Brian Lewis, Manila, Philippines