Students might apply to fewer institutions and universities may need to stop interviewing candidates if the UK adopts a post-qualification admissions (PQA) system, a new report says.
The University and College Union has been a long-term advocate of students applying to higher education after they get their exam results – arguing that it would be fairer on disadvantaged students whose teachers are more likely to “under-predict” their grades – and that position is now the subject of a consultation being run by the Westminster government.
In a report published on 29 April, the union updates its vision of how a PQA system could work, but also seeks to address some of the issues that the reforms could throw up.
The report, written by Graeme Atherton, director of the National Education Opportunities Network, says that the current rule allowing students to apply to up to five universities means that “a lot of work is done applying and making offers which does not lead to students entering that course”. Seventy-four per cent of applicants accept the offer from the provider that is their first choice.
Under PQA, when students knew their final grades and had a much better idea of their likelihood of being accepted, “the number of applications released to [universities] could be reduced to three from the five applications, with the other two only released if candidates are not placed via their first three choices. Alternatively, they could be just reduced to three,” Dr Atherton writes.
One potential problem with a PQA system is how universities could conduct admissions interviews or practical auditions, or request the submission of portfolios of work, in a compressed admissions cycle.
The UCU report offers a range of options, such as conducting interviews and auditions before students submit formal offers, holding interviews online or introducing admissions testing.
More broadly, though, there is “voluminous evidence regarding the extent of bias inherent in interviews as a form of selection”, the report says, and “if a priority in admissions reform is to widen access to competitive courses, serious attention needs to be given to the role of interviews and they need to become part of the contextualised admissions debate”.
Admissions service Ucas and Universities UK have given their backing to a post-qualification offers system, under which students apply before their exams but do not get their offers until their results are confirmed, and this is one of the options that the government is consulting on.
However, the UCU says that full post-qualification admissions, when students do not apply until they have their final results, is much fairer, as a post-qualification offers system still relies heavily on predicted grades.
Under the UCU’s model, students would make “expressions of interest” to five universities in the January of their final year in school, helping institutions to understand potential demand and to engage with prospective students. However, Dr Atherton emphasises that “expression of interest is not application” and that students would not be locked into these options, with offers being made only once grades have been released.
The UCU report suggests that students could receive their offers during the September after their exams and start their courses by the end of October.
Jo Grady, the UCU’s general secretary, said that the UK was “finally on the cusp of tackling the unfairness in university admissions” but that sector leaders seemed “wary of the bold reform that will end the use of unfair predicted grades”.
“This report shows the blight of predicted grades must end if we are to remove the disadvantages students currently face. It also shows the impact of changes to the admissions cycle on universities and staff can be easily overcome and highlights the benefits to both staff and students that a post-qualification applications system will bring,” Dr Grady said.
“The time has come for a truly student-centred approach to university admissions, and we must not settle for half-measures.”
