Is it time to scrap the Academic Scoring system for the DClinPsy that values A-levels over BSc & MSc?

I’m a mixed-raced woman (Black Caribbean & White), in my mid-to-late thirties who has experienced a multitude of diversities throughout life. I have applied for the Doctorate in Clinical Psychology four times. For the 2022 entry, I received three interviews and subsequent offers but a straight rejection to interview from the Oxford DClinPsy course.

One might think I should be grateful to have received three interviews when many deserving peers won’t get one… One might think that I have a place secured and had multiple offers to consider the best fit when many deserving interviewees won’t get one… One might wonder why I would write a letter when the system has worked for me finally. But this is not exactly the point of my letter to you. I am so grateful to be in the position I am in finally, but as I embark on my clinical training journey, I feel the need to start as I mean to go on: reflecting and challenging systems that are unfair. The intention of this letter is to share one story that I hope the course can consider and reflect upon within a lens of the underpinning values and the placement of esteem that has created the current system and the beneficiaries of it.

Through the course of this letter, I will be reflecting on the esteem placed on an individual’s educational background and its subsequent discrimination. This is within the context of courses such as Oxford using A-levels to assist in selecting individuals for interviews (and potentially not even reading a candidate’s personal statement).

Reflecting on my own background, I do not have A-levels or an equivalent level of education. My educational background did not follow the route seemingly stipulated to be an entry requirement by Oxford. My story goes that I went from finishing school at 16 (with GCSEs) to completing an undergraduate degree that I started in my early twenties. I proudly hold a First-class BSc Psychology Degree (Honours) from the Open University, which I received after ten years of study, alongside becoming a mother to three beautiful children. In addition, I attained a Distinction in my Master’s Degree from Royal Holloway, University of London and was awarded a prize for the highest-scoring MSc dissertation across all the Psychology programmes. I also hold a PG Certificate in Low Intensity CBT. I personally feel that what I have achieved, despite the circumstances and the cards dealt to me, is nothing short of success and nothing less than proving that I am academically competent to complete doctoral level studies.

The Oxford course states that their essential criteria is to “ hold […] a 1st class or 2.1 in an undergraduate psychology degree…”. I meet this criterion, so one might ask why my application may have never been read. One might answer that it is the scoring system that ultimately gets you an interview or not.

For the purpose of the potential audience of this open letter, the points for A-levels (or equivalent) for Oxford’s 2023 entry are as follows:

A or A*: 6 points

B: 4 points

C: 2 points

D or below: 1 point

A maximum of three A-levels or equivalent are considered, and the maximum total A-level score is 18. There are 20 additional points that can be awarded; a first-class BSc gets you 10 points (zero points if you do not meet this standard and get a 2.1 or below), a distinction at MSc gets you five points (zero if you don’t meet this standard and get a Merit or below), two years or beyond for a PhD gets you five points, and a completed PhD gets you 10. The Oxford course state that a maximum of 38 points are awarded for the 2023 entry. (oxicptr.web.ox.ac.uk/dclinpsych-entry-requirements....)

I would have received a maximum of 15 points (for the 2022 entry, I believe the maximum score was 40). Despite a first-class degree and a distinction at Masters, I am missing the potential of 18 A-level points because my journey wasn’t the standardised journey Oxford sets. Reflecting on this, I would argue, however, that a BSc degree trumps A-levels. That an MSc degree trumps a BSc. The calibre of candidates getting interviews at Oxford presumably have high scoring A-levels, First Class degrees at undergraduate level, a Distinction at MSc, a PhD (as these candidates will score highly by the system set by Oxford, thus securing their application to move to the next stage: having their application read).

My experiences this year have left me thinking about why then was I declined an interview while receiving three from other programmes. As far as I understand, all courses received the same application form and the same references with the same personal information. The differences perhaps could be seen as the things given importance to. For Oxford, perhaps the grading system and my lack of A-levels meant that my application never got to someone’s desk. Still, for the other three courses, they seemed to accept the highest level of education and deduced that I had the academic competence to complete doctoral level studies.

I have no idea if my application was read at Oxford, and perhaps there was another part of my application that had it disregarded. However, it doesn’t sit quite right that it was perhaps my A-levels or lack of them that meant the end of the story for me regarding Oxford.

Where it leaves my view is that Oxford places importance on people having particular journeys. It suggests that there is a right way to complete your educational journey: that you should have A-levels, a degree, a Masters and a PhD. This is not to say that this isn’t a journey for many peers and peers that have barriers, but what it possibly further perpetuates is the discrimination of those who have more barriers in life and where these things are not possible within reasonable expectations. People that have to care for relatives, people that have to work rather than study, and people that don’t have foundations to afford Masters and PhDs alongside paying for the cost of living.

Research has said that high A-level results (i.e. A* grades) are a strong predictor of how well you’ll do at university, i.e. achieving a first or an upper second-class degree (Vidal Rodeiro & Zanini, 2015). But, other research acknowledges that there are many misunderstandings of this, with low ‘socio-economic status’ and exposure to adversity being correlated to decreased educational success (McLaughlin & Sheridan, 2016). There is no doubt that there has to be a system to evidence academic ability in order to study at the highest level of education (a doctorate/PhD). However, I can’t help wondering about the ‘evidence’ used in institutions like Oxford and the discrimination and oppression it perhaps further perpetuates.

For the 2021 entry, I attended the Oxford admission talk. The question was posed about not having A-levels, and their response was more of an encouragement to apply. When another prospective application pressed further, asking about the typical score that candidates achieve, we were informed that they couldn’t divulge this information. This was the same response at the Oxford 2022 entry talk. In a follow-up email to the course, they shared in their reply:

“Thank you for your email and your interest in the Oxford Course. As noted in the admissions talk, the academic cut off score for admissions changes each year, so it is not possible to gauge, in advance of the applications process, whether a certain score will or will not achieve the cut-off level. We do have trainees that have taken varied educational routes.”

Firstly, I think applicants would love to hear about these ‘varied educational routes’ to draw connections and possibly to understand the institution's values. In all fairness, this ambiguity perhaps is because it changes every year. However, I would refute that Oxford is unaware of what scores tend to make it. Perhaps there is also some truth that this is an acknowledgement or a personal uncomfortableness with the potential discrimination this perpetuates. What this ambiguity does, however, is prevent us from making informed decisions about where to apply. But, it was precisely this answer that made me think that perhaps Oxford may value me and my experiences. In my life circumstances, I cannot move anywhere in the UK for the DClinPsy; I can only apply to those courses local to me due to having a family that is settled in my current location. I sought lots of advice from professionals; some said ‘don’t waste your time’, and some said ‘give it a try’. I, of course, followed the latter. This takes me to my letter today; I told myself that if by some miracle I was offered three interviews and a rejection from Oxford, then just maybe A-levels might be the issue. Not my lack of, but the system itself. So here I am!

The 2022 entry was the first year the Oxford course chose to implement a mentoring scheme for those from a minoritized background. Data shows that people from a minority background typically do not get onto a DClinPsy course (and I wonder whether a larger handful of people from this group do not have A-levels compared to their White counterparts). I joined the Oxford ‘Mind to Mind’ mentoring scheme in the hope that I may benefit from the widening access and that this would help me get a foot in the door with an interview. It, however, did not support with the barriers I’ve experienced as I did not receive an invitation to an interview.

I reflect that this isn’t just about me (and the geography of a course), but it is also about increasing the number of Black people on the course, which, as I understand from the latest figures, is, in all honesty, totally abysmal at Oxford. The journey for people of colour in this profession is so challenging, even with the multiple “widening access” schemes that are running. Do they really result in more people of colour on courses? Or is it the system that continues to prevent more people of colour from being on courses? Maybe a small increase of people from minoritized groups, but people of colour (and more specifically…. Black people)?

I would also be very interested to hear how many Oxford trainees have different educational backgrounds (no A-levels, equivalent A-levels, conversions courses, different careers). Furthermore, how many mentees from their scheme (from minoritized backgrounds) received interviews? How many got onto the course? How many people identifying as Black were offered a place?

So, I write this open letter to implore Oxford to reflect on what they give value to. I believe this discriminatory system only excludes many wonderful, passionate and magnificent candidates, which I think we can all agree that this career needs. I ask one simple question: do you actually want to widen access to this career?

Finally, to any person in a similar boat to myself. If there is no significant change to the scoring system, I want to share the advice I would share with myself: do not apply. Do not waste a precious choice. Seek a course that recognises your experiences and welcomes your additions to this career.

If you agree, please sign this Open Letter and get the message out there:

#StopRatingUsByOurPast

Yours sincerely,

Tam

Neurodivergent Trainee Clinical Psychologist

Feel free to connect with me:-

Email: TamQ.Psy@gmail.com

LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/tam-queen

Twitter: @TamPsych

[I would like to take a moment to give a special ‘Thank You’ to those that encouraged and supported the development of this letter]