The nonsense of yesterday's Guardian story about university admissions

Yesterday's Guardian had a story about a review of university admissions published by Ucas - the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service.

It began:

The process by which hundreds of thousands of teenagers apply to UK universities favours the rich, the organisation that co-ordinates degree applications has admitted. 

In a review of university admissions published on Monday, Ucas acknowledges that the current system gives an unfair advantage to pupils at private schools. These pupils are encouraged by their teachers to apply to institutions well ahead of the official deadline and, for some courses, applying early gives students more of a chance of being offered a conditional place, the review admits. 

At present, too many pupils have to apply to universities before they have had time to properly research what and where they want to study, Ucas argues. This favours students whose families are familiar with the university application process and puts the rest at a disadvantage. 

The current system also assists pupils whose schools employ tutors who are very familiar with the university applications process, and do not feel intimidated about phoning up an admissions tutor to plead the case of a particular student.

It is certainly an advantage to come from a family that is familiar with the university application process, but the arguments here are genuinely puzzling.

Ucas and the Guardian take it for granted that no state school will have teachers who know the most favourable for their pupils to apply to university or who have the confidence to phone an admissions tutor.

I don't believe that this is the case. But if it is, then the fault lies, not with private schools, but with the selection and development of those who work in the state sector. Which make you wonder why the Guardian is tigerish in its defence of the status quo in that sector.