A Level U turn

[Jargo]

Holy shit, now based on teacher predictions.

I can imagine universities which are one of two in a town and the other being RG are feeling a bit concerned. Not so much if they are the only university in town and attract a lot of local and/or mature students.

The whole thing seems ridiculous. Poor students lost a chunk of education, now future employers won't know which ones were genuinely deserving of their grades and which weren't. Should never have locked down, these teens may have paid a huge price.

So can you choose one CAG grade then two algorithm grades or do you have to choose one set of grades?

We await further instructions, but I expect you can pick which you prefer for each subject.

It seems that one of the original aims was to produce an overall set of results that would be consistent with past and future years. Teachers predictions failed to do this (hence the 12% overestimate). The algorithm that was supposed to correct for this had a flaw in that it left the predictions for small numbers of students and those where there was no history (eg. new school/college or new subject taught) unchanged. That meant that the remaining students had to have their grades over-reduced to meet the target and this is clearly and blatantly unfair to those students. Anyone with a comprehension of maths would have seen this problem looming in advance.

Unfortunately the committees in charge at Ofqual, DfE and the cabinet probably had too few people who understood the mathematical concepts, and ignored the effects on individual students. Late in the day they have come to realise that the aim of having results comparable to other years is just dogma and can be easily abandoned - the 12% boost to grades doesn't really matter. Not destroying the future prospects of a large number of students is a price well worth paying.

PS. The previous time a horrendous failure of politicians to grasp mathematical concepts occurred was the Miliband/Balls plan to reduce tuition fees to £6000/year thinking this would help poorer students. It actually would have only helped the richest 40% or so, and the lower earning 50% or so of students would pay back exactly the same as with £9000 (or even much higher) fees.

that's a good analysis Jcyclops

Although I would say that reducing the fees to £6k would have helped a lot of middle income people - those that get limited benefits or none at at as they earn slightly too much - who could then afford to pay up front and avoid debt - maybe those people are the richest 40% though.

I would also another maths failure was in the Brown gov when they scrapped the 10% income tax rate - simply not realising how many people earn very little and that rate hugely benefit them and they were now going to have to pay 20% (or whatever) I can't remember the limits to 10% though - but it showed the politicians had no clue that it wasn't just "hobby" jobs but people's actual livelihoods.

@therhubarbbrothers

I can imagine universities which are one of two in a town and the other being RG are feeling a bit concerned. Not so much if they are the only university in town and attract a lot of local and/or mature students.

My husband's university is really concerned. Their numbers were looking okay and everyone was breathing a sigh of relief. Now the university (literally across the road) will scoop up large numbers of those students.

It's really worrying and could have been avoided.

Unfortunately the government really doesn't care about those types of universities even though they play a really important part in the sector.

Each teacher will have looked at what a student could achieve on their best day in their subject.

Certainly didn't happen at DD's school.
Almost all of the CAGs from DD's friendship group are below, some by 2+ grades, their ucas predictions.

Ucas predictions are usually based on the 'best day' idea. Their schools CAGs were most definitely not. They were based almost entirely on January's written exams, and dint include incomplete nea and coursework elements, nor year 12 mock attainment.

Some CAGs lower than the ucas predictions to such an extent that we already know of two set of parents (just from this smallish friendship group) so far who are looking at if it is possible to appeal CAGs. When school finally release all of them today this may increase, especially in the subjects with a high percentage of nea.

jcyclops yes that's exactly the point.

The 12% over-estimation doesn't matter at a macro level. It's not exactly a secret that the 2020 'results' aren't 'results' in the traditional sense.

It's also irrelevant at an individual level. Sure, some of those students wouldn't have got those grades if they had sat an exam, but given that teachers have no way of identifying these students in advance and that the kids didn't actually have the opportunity to sit an exam, it's irrelevant.

Every year, young people start HE courses and drop out, switch course, defer etc etc. We all know people that have been promoted way out of their depth at work.

It's utterly ridiculous to pretend that some algorithm was going to address this.

I don't think the universities will have such a big problem.

Oxford and Cambridge never enter clearing anyway; they may very slightly over offer, but only to students who have passed stringent interviews, who they believe will be able to do the work. If they accept the CAGS, they might be a bit overcrowded, they will push 3rd years or post-grads out into other accommodation.
This means the ones who missed their Oxbridge offer won't now be taking the Russel group clearing places, so there will be spaces for the ones at the other end, who won't take the places from the lower ranked unis... and so on.
The Unis that normally take people with the lowest grades will now have room for pupils who otherwise might have struggled to get in, and in other years would have got a job, but can't get one this year because of COVID.
It probably works out cheaper for the government to fund the loan for University, than to pay them job-seekers.

@Choccyp1g

I don't think the universities will have such a big problem.

Oxford and Cambridge never enter clearing anyway; they may very slightly over offer, but only to students who have passed stringent interviews, who they believe will be able to do the work. If they accept the CAGS, they might be a bit overcrowded, they will push 3rd years or post-grads out into other accommodation.
This means the ones who missed their Oxbridge offer won't now be taking the Russel group clearing places, so there will be spaces for the ones at the other end, who won't take the places from the lower ranked unis... and so on.
The Unis that normally take people with the lowest grades will now have room for pupils who otherwise might have struggled to get in, and in other years would have got a job, but can't get one this year because of COVID.
It probably works out cheaper for the government to fund the loan for University, than to pay them job-seekers.

There are fewer students overall this year as many international students will not come and it is also a low birthrate year. Not all courses are offered at Oxford or Cambridge anyway. It is quite likely that the Russell group universities will take students from other universities. They brought in the cap to stop some universities taking students from other universities to replace the loss of international students and this now seems to have been forgotten about.

@Choccyp1g

I don't think the universities will have such a big problem.

Oxford and Cambridge never enter clearing anyway; they may very slightly over offer, but only to students who have passed stringent interviews, who they believe will be able to do the work. If they accept the CAGS, they might be a bit overcrowded, they will push 3rd years or post-grads out into other accommodation.
This means the ones who missed their Oxbridge offer won't now be taking the Russel group clearing places, so there will be spaces for the ones at the other end, who won't take the places from the lower ranked unis... and so on.
The Unis that normally take people with the lowest grades will now have room for pupils who otherwise might have struggled to get in, and in other years would have got a job, but can't get one this year because of COVID.
It probably works out cheaper for the government to fund the loan for University, than to pay them job-seekers.

Ah, if only it was so simple. Some universities will have huge issues. Students who had secured places through clearing at one university will now go back to their original choice leaving some universities in a tricky position. Do they under-recruit or do they take those that would usually be rejected and run the risk of them dropping out, performing poorly and impacting employability figures 3-4 years down the road?

The cap was put in place to project these universities but now they've been hung out to dry.

If they accept the CAGS, they might be a bit overcrowded, they will push 3rd years or post-grads out into other accommodation.

If those students have already been offered accommodation and they have accepted there was no way they are going to be pushed out to make way for first years. That is something else students will have to deal with if they decide to go to an overcrowded university.

--was- is

In ds’s college the third year was when you hit the accommodation jackpot and got the lovely large old room with a view. Ds was gutted to have to leave it and miss the last term. 1st years have to earn their stripes! (And at many colleges that would be in a 1960s concrete block.)

Cambridge has confirmed it will take all offer holders who now meet terms of their offers. It has said it will have to ask aome offer holders to defer.

Cambridge has confirmed it will take all offer holders who now meet terms of their offers. It has said it will have to ask aome offer holders to defer

A lot of universities will do this which will be a problem for students next year.

Cambridge statement on undergraduate admissions

A lot of universities will do this which will be a problem for students next year.

Yes, as someone said upthread it's this year's Year 12 that are really facing chaos.

Cambridge has confirmed it will take all offer holders who now meet terms of their offers. It has said it will have to ask aome offer holders to defer.
This will be pretty standard. I really feel for next years students as this will really impact them too.

@SueEllenMishke

Cambridge has confirmed it will take all offer holders who now meet terms of their offers. It has said it will have to ask aome offer holders to defer. This will be pretty standard. I really feel for next years students as this will really impact them too.

Yes and if they defer because of it it will affect students a year after...

Cambridge slightly different from oxford in that not all offer holders are in but only those whose CAGs met the offer (which I still suppose might be most!).

I don't think the universities will have such a big problem.

Oh fab, can you tell the admissions team at my work? They've clearly been worrying and racing around like mad unnecessarily.

The whole admissions system should have been frozen as soon as the exams were cancelled, and no-one allowed to 'hold' an offer - including those holding offers already.

Courses should have 'ended' as soon as Exams were cancelled and centres should have moved to producing grades based on performance. This would have eliminated 'variability' of teaching element. Uni's (and employers) would have known that all students were coming to them with 'incomplete' courses from this year, because all students in the country would have been in the same position.

Centres should then have submitted grades and these should have been checked at a centre level against prior attainment. If broadly in line (or if the cohort provably better/worse based on GCSE results etc) then CAG stand. Where not in line, centre should have been moderated accordingly, up or down across the centre/course. Centres should then have been sent the results, and been given a window to submit evidence to support those students who, again, provably, were likely to perform hugely better than in line with the centre.

The grade-spreads should then have been announced to Unis, giving them a real-time, known field for results across the country.

Unis could then have set their course entry requirements. Results announced UK wide on the same day, and 'admissions' opens. Students holding the needed grades all apply by a fixed deadline. Unis receive all Applications together with known results and start accepting based on the application, completing Zoom/in-person interviews/entry tests/ blah etc. If they've already interviewed and offered, Uni's have the option to re-offer on the same terms as before or not. All offers of places go out on the same day via UCAS and students accept/reject within a fixed period. At the end of the period, empty spaces go into clearing which runs just as it does now, with students having the option to stick/reject etc.

Effectively, the admissions process would have changed for everyone. The uncertainty would have been only in seeing what the course requirements were once the grades were announced, but it would have put EVERY student in the same position. Universities would have known the grade-spread ahead of time, and so could have 'adjusted' their required grades accordingly. Courses which are 'normally', say ABB, would look at the 'inflation' and set at AAB or even AAA so that they're still working with the same 'top whatever' percentage of students.

It wouldn't have been a perfect solution, but it would have naturally 'corrected' the over inflation issue for admission.

Unis could then have set their course entry requirements. Results announced UK wide on the same day, and 'admissions' opens. Students holding the needed grades all apply by a fixed deadline. Unis receive all Applications together with known results and start accepting based on the application, completing Zoom/in-person interviews/entry tests/ blah etc. If they've already interviewed and offered, Uni's have the option to re-offer on the same terms as before or not. All offers of places go out on the same day via UCAS and students accept/reject within a fixed period. At the end of the period, empty spaces go into clearing which runs just as it does now, with students having the option to stick/reject etc

Effectively, the admissions process would have changed for everyone. The uncertainty would have been only in seeing what the course requirements were once the grades were announced, but it would have put EVERY student in the same position. Universities would have known the grade-spread ahead of time, and so could have 'adjusted' their required grades accordingly. Courses which are 'normally', say ABB, would look at the 'inflation' and set at AAB or even AAA so that they're still working with the same 'top whatever' percentage of students

This could only be written by someone who has absolutely no knowledge of how university admissions work.

The number of applications makes this completely unworkable ( a course in my school gets 800+ applications) and why would universities adjust their entry requirements? These are based on what the course leader/university wants and aren't adjusted in line with exam performance. They are used as a way of positioning themselves in the market but universities are free to offer whatever they want. Grades do change for clearing but they are never made public.

"as someone said upthread it's this year's Year 12 that are really facing chaos."

Oh yes, because Year 13's have barely been affected at all