1st February 2019 9:00
By Blue Tutors
There is an interesting discussion currently about the system for students applying to university in the UK. The way in which some universities offer places has changed over the last few years, probably due to the introduction of £9,000 tuition fees. The number of conditional offers has risen dramatically, and some people want to stop universities from making these offers by asking everyone to apply to university after the A Level results have been released.
Applying solely based on final results is something which seems fairly sensible, and it might have worked very well 30 years ago when A Level results successfully differentiated students at the highest level. However, the exam board race to the bottom causing ever-increasing average results means that trying to choose the very best applicants is impossible simply based on results. This is why Oxford and Cambridge interview applicants and have their own criteria for acceptance. It is assumed that whatever the A Level grade offer made by them will be achieved by the student.
In 2013 only 1% of university offers were unconditional. Considering that this has grown to a quarter of offers, we should question the point of an offer being “unconditional”. There was a time when universities would be so impressed by a student, feel as though they were a great fit for each other, and make a “minimum offer”. Typically this might be ACC compared to AAB, the idea being that the university was more accepting of someone having a bad day in an exam because they really wanted that student.
Today an unconditional offer does smack of simply wanting numbers through the door, rather than an interest in the quality of those undergraduates. It undermines the standard of our universities, and does seem to be creating a two tier system; one tier where it is competitive to win a place, and another which is a fall back university; a place anyone can attend if they’re worried about not going to university at all.
The problem of some universities valuing numbers rather than ability won’t be solved by delaying the time when a student can apply. Moreover, it will hinder the best universities’ ability to differentiate the best candidates because they will have far less time to do so. The root of the problem is that modern A Levels are not as difficult as their distant gold-star heirs, and we don’t place a minimum requirement for a student to attend university in the first place.
The cost of educating a student at university who should probably be studying a more vocational was borne by the government, but now it is students who are overpaying for their further education. The university application system works. What we need to do is make A Levels harder, and remove the difference in prestige between university and a practical course.