THE increasing dominance of young women at university was revealed yesterday in a report examining social class differences in higher education.

Teenage girls of all social classes entered university in much greater numbers than boys, with the rate of increase greatest among those from the poorest backgrounds.

They were only 6 per cent more likely than young men to go to university in 1994 but the advantage tripled to 18 per cent by 2000, research by the Higher Education Funding Council for England (Hefce) showed. Once drop-out rates at university were taken into account, women were 27 per cent more likely than men to get a degree.

The growing inequality of the sexes was most stark in the poorest areas, where working-class girls were 29 per cent more likely than boys to enter university. The findings emerged from a study by Hefce that showed that Tony Blair has failed to narrow the class divide at university.

Youngsters from the wealthiest 20 per cent of homes were six times more likely to go to university than those from the poorest 20 per cent.

The gap between the classes remained “deep and persistent” despite major expansion of higher education and government demands for universities to accept a broader range of candidates. Working-class boys, in particular, formed an increasingly isolated rump with little prospect of a degree.

“If you want to go to university, choose your mother carefully,” Sir Howard Newby, the chief executive of Hefce, said. “This report highlights just how entrenched the divisions are between advantaged and disadvantaged areas.”

The study mapped out the geography of undergraduate entry to university in minute detail for the first time. It examined participation rates by 18-year-olds in individual council wards and parliamentary constituencies, using child benefit data to establish how many teenagers lived in each area.

Less than one in ten youngsters began degree courses in constituencies with the worst records, compared to two-thirds in those with the best. Many cities were “highly polarised” with teenagers enjoying radically different prospects while living in areas that were literally next to each other.

Mark Corver, the researcher who conducted the five-year study of entry rates between 1994 and 2000, said: “This deep inequality seems very consistent.” The number of students going to university would have to double if participation rates among lower social groups were to reach the level of the wealthiest 20 per cent. Mr Corver said: “That is how far we are from having that sort of equality.”

The study did not include data after 2000, but a Hefce spokesman said that there was unlikely to have been any change in the class divide since then. The abolition of grants and the introduction of tuition fees in 1998 had made no difference to students’ willingness to go to university.

The research showed that teenagers in Sheffield Brightside, the former Education Secretary David Blunkett’s constituency, have the lowest chance of going to university. Just 8 per cent of 18-year-olds go into higher education, a record shared with those living in Nottingham North.

By contrast, Sheffield Hallam had one of the best records, with 62 per cent of teenagers going to university. Only the London boroughs of Kensington and Chelsea (69 per cent), and Westminster (65 per cent) had a higher proportion of university entrants.

Children in low-participation areas typically lived in rented council homes with parents on benefits or in poorly paid manual jobs, who did not have a car and were unlikely to have taken a foreign holiday. The nearest secondary school had only a small proportion of pupils passing five good GCSES.

Those from the highest- participation areas were “frequently near schools, often fee-paying, where very nearly all the pupils gain these grades”. They lived in large detached and semi-detached homes in affluent areas, with parents who had professional careers and had usually been to university themselves.

Kim Howells, the Minister for Higher Education, acknowledged that the report showed “how difficult it is to encourage and stimulate young people from disadvantaged backgrounds to take part in higher education”.

“The Government is working hard to ensure that everyone with the suitable qualifications has the opportunity to go to university — regardless of their background,” he said.

TEEANGERS AT COLLEGE

TOP TEN CONSTITUENCES

Kensington & Chelsea 69%
Cities of London & Westminster 65%
Sheffield Hallam 62%
Brent North, London 60%
Eastwood, Scotland 59%
Richmond Pk London 59%
Enfield Southgate 55%
Finchley & Golders Green London 55%
Wimbledon 55%
Western Isles 54%

BOTTOM TEN

Nottingham North 8%
Sheffield Brightside 8%
Bristol South 10%
Leeds Central 10%
Kingston upon Hull East 11%
Dagenham London 12%
Salford 12%
Tyne Bridge 12%
Birmingham Erdington 13%
Birmingham Hodge Hill 13%
Kingston upon Hull North 13%

Times recommends

• Students to rate lecturers online
• Students face big rise in university fees
• Queen’s English Society boss’s poor spelling