Gatekeeping and linguistic capital: A case study of the Cambridge university undergraduate admissions interview

Abstract

The Cambridge University Admissions Interview is a gatekeeping encounter in which academic staff members question, and evaluate, prospective undergraduates on the subject they have applied to study. It is politically controversial as admittance to Cambridge brings unparalleled educational and professional advantages, yet privately-educated candidates are disproportionately successful, and thus appear to have greater “linguistic capital” at interview, when compared with their state-educated peers. Using the techniques of interactional sociolinguistics, the following paper details the shifting interactional requirements of six admissions interviews in English Literature. It finds that a successful interview performance is, in fact, determined by a candidate's ability to manage the (sometimes opposed) requirements of being both a responsive student and a convincing peer academic. Such requirements are shown to cut across, and problematize, the direct relationship perceived to exist between socio-educational background, linguistic capital and success at interview. The results from this study are used both to draw out the differences between the admissions interview and other types of interview setting, as well as to suggest research pathways for research.