Learning to change

The Big Read: Professor Jonathan Jansen made some good points in his article, "Race holds us back after class" (September 9).

He is correct in saying that we must try to rectify the wrongs of the past that have led to inequalities and unfairness, and that universities have an obligation to do this. I agree that the use of race labels is undesirable. I have long argued that biological race does not exist but that racism has created "race" as a social construct with devastating consequences for society.

The University of Cape Town's admissions policy further agrees with Jansen that class, and not race, is the great divider. As a university, we also share the view that students with equal opportunities should compete for a place in university on merit alone.

While recognising the above, UCT's admissions policy acknowledges that the inequalities created by apartheid and the inadequate schooling system we have inherited has had a crippling effect on students, particularly black students.

It still disadvantages students in a fundamental way. It cripples them and erases their future. We recognise that different students applying to UCT do not step off the same equal educational platform. Our admission policy makes concession for this historical unfairness and has transformation at its very heart.

UCT's policy recognises that we do not want to use race as a selection criterion.

The question then is: what should be done? How do we select fairly, acknowledging inequalities and pursuing transformation of our classes to be representative of our society? No other immediate options are available.

There are many possible alternative indicators. Those opposed to the UCT admission policy hint at them. They suggest that we use the type of school rather than race; use parents' educational level rather than race; use access to educational facilities rather than race; build more universities. Yes, we agree with that. These are theoretical solutions at present, but are not immediately implementable.

We are researching these and other alternative indicators in the hope that we can use them in future.

No university in South Africa has them. Race is the best we have at present to give us what we are after: diverse, representative classes and fairness in selection by acknowledging historical disadvantage.

Jansen says that the UCT health sciences faculty "determines differential pass rates for Indian students versus coloured students versus African students". This is factually incorrect.

Though we use race in admissions - for the reasons named above - our students compete academically at the highest level on merit. There are no concessions. We graduate students on merit alone. The fact that students, some as disadvantaged as they are, come to UCT underprepared and then leave with a degree achieved on merit - even if it takes an extra year of study - means that we are getting there. We are transforming society and erasing stereotypes.

I disagree with Jansen's argument that black middle-class students are on an equal footing with their white counterparts and should therefore not be advantaged.

Our research suggests that the majority of these students are still disadvantaged. Furthermore, UCT is keen on well-prepared black students because they pass well, do not require extensive support and are excellent role models that break the stereotypical notion that all black students need help.

Jansen refers to the debate at UCT as a storm that has erupted. I want to put this in context. Debate is fundamental at UCT. The admissions policy has been and will be debated for a long time. We learn from these debates. We differ, speak out, come to new insights and debate further. This is a sign of a university at work.

Our admissions policy is not ideal or perfect, but, at present, it is transforming our classes. Our students leave - having competed on merit - as graduates with equal opportunities going into the future.

Dr Max Price is the vice-chancellor of the University of Cape Town