Unfair contextualisation for uni entry

[helparoundthehouse]

I'm absolutely supportive of the efforts to widen access e.g. considering applicants being the first in the family to university, receipt of free school meals, and CERTAIN contextualisation of attainment.

BUT, I don't agree with the contextualisation where a student is judged against the cohort & their school's GCSE/A-level results when that school is selective.

E.g. 'strong but not as strong as peers' applicant, who attended a highly selective school at GCSE, might have a contextualised GCSE of zero or even below/minus even if they have all 8s/9s!

I get that highly selective schools MAY provide superior teaching but, frankly, in a lot of cases - whether grammar or indie - the results are more likely a result of the school being selective in the first place.

So AIBU to think that this type of contextualisation is not helpful and, in fact, rather unfair.

None of the universities I have worked for count disability as a contextual marker. We would expect those who are disabled to have had provisions made for them at school, e.g extra time in exams, to ‘level the playing field’. So we don’t make people contextual on this basis alone.

Plus these days every Tom, Dick and Harry declares a disability on their application so it would mean contextual offers for everyone.

@verysmellyjelly I have a physical disability and I disagree with you. The contextualised offer doesn’t indicate that we’re not people, in the same way it wouldn’t indicate that someone living in a deprived area isn’t a person. Contextualised offers will always sweep up people that are not the target of the scheme because they’re blunt indicators. A friend of ours got a contextualised offer based on their postcode despite being very wealthy and both parents having phds but I’d rather they benefited incorrectly then all the other students in that postcode didn’t.

There are massive barriers in education for disabled people. My friend can’t pick up a pen or type and uses eye gaze equipment, his parents didn’t have a lot of time to support his educational needs because they were literally trying to keep him alive they live and he often missed school for a week at a time for what others would consider minor illnesses. Managing disabilities, medical appointments, therapies, care and access needs takes time away from studying.

I spent two months in hospital related to my disability (not well enough to revise) and was discharged two days before my A-level exams, which I sat at home because I was too unwell to go to school. I didn’t get the required GCSE or A-level results, but a contextualised offer let me access university. I got a first and I have a good career with an employer who is flexible. Similar for my friend - a first in his undergrad and 2 masters.

Just to add, I don’t mean a contextualise offer in the modern sense, but there was an opportunity to ask for disability to be taken into account when the offer was made.

I probably got my Russell group uni place in part due to contextualised criteria (underperforming school, poor area) this was in 2000

I got 4As in the end but had to beg and plead to be predicted a B in maths rather than a C (was 1 mark off in my first modular exam in year 12) otherwise there was no point applying. The careers teacher ummed and aahed about it, told me no one ever got onto that course anyway etc etc. but reluctantly did it. You had to be so determined as no one at the school encouraged or believed in you. My offer was AAB.

The sixth form was actually quite good but for GCSEs a lot of lessons were like crowd control and you would be bullied if you put up your hand to answer a question, sexual harassment was rife. so there are a lot more barriers to learning and uni applications in these environments than just the teaching or even how supportive your parents are.

My kids go to an average comp now in an average small town. Sadly I am seeing the same patterns, chaotic lessons, borderline bullying/harassment, teachers focussing purely on getting the weaker students a pass mark and not having the time to help anyone else. We are graduates and probably can help more at home than my parents did, but there are times I think that a girls grammar or private school would be worlds apart from her current experience.

Why do you think they should have priority?

Obviously I understand the argument that teenagers who have experienced ACEs are at a disadvantage, but I’m not sure that university is there to give places to the students they decide are most deserving. They can reasonably make offers after taking individual circumstances into account and making a judgement call, but no student should be penalised because of choices their parents made. They’ve still done the work and reached the required standard.

I want universities to be institutions that, where places are limited, take the students who are the best prepared and most likely to succeed.

That’s good to know! I fully support all kinds of adjustments being made in school / college, of course, and have benefited from this myself. But when it comes to accomplishment, I think we (disabled people) should be judged on par with others. It’s a matter of respect.

I don’t agree that the two things are in any way comparable. Disability can be accommodated and adjusted for in many ways, and the more privileged a person is the more likely they are to have had those adjustments put in place. I don’t think it’s doing disabled students any favours to give them contextual offers. They’re perfectly capable of competing with everyone else and should be given the respect of being allowed to do so. Fortunately PP has said it’s usually not considered as a contextual factor!

We will have to agree to disagree. As the statistics show, support disabled people get does not overcome the barriers in comparison to non-disabled peers. Anyone who doesn’t want to accept a contextualised offer doesn’t have to. The pp was only commenting on the institutions they have worked at. There are universities who offer contextual offers to disabled applicants.

@verysmellyjelly I actually think you are being incredibly offensive to belittle the difficulties that some disabled people face. How can somehow who can only attend school for an hour a day compete with everyone else on a level playing field? If you don’t feel the additional context of your disability is needed when you are judged against your peers then don’t ask for it, but don’t argue that no one else needs it.

How is such a child going to fare at university? Presumably the same effort to obtain their degree as everyone else would be expected of them?

@Annascaul as I said above I got a first in a STEM subject. One of my friends in a similar position is now a professor. School is an inflexible and artificial environment that has doesn’t reflect the real world.

Also disabilities fluctuate. If someone has a flare up for 6 months that impact their results should they be denied a university place? What about cancer? My friend’s child has just returned to school on a reduced timetable after 9 months of cancer treatment which is ongoing. Should that be taken into account?

My son had mental health problems linked to undiagnosed ASD which caused him to school refuse from year 5 to the end of high school. He scraped his GCSEs and then got all As in A level at our local state sixth form. He didn't qualify for contextualised offers while our neighbours daughter (same 6th form) did as she put down her dad's postcode (low economic area) where she lives 50% of the time despite having sailed through high school with no gaps in education.

No system is fair but if a child wants to go to a top university the best thing they can actually do is knuckle down and work hard to get the best grades they can.

I certainly don't feel sorry for privately educated kids who don't receive contextualised offer.

I was addressing specifically the mythical (presumably?) child who was only able to access education for an hour per day.
As per your own example.

Thanks all - still, would be interested to know how other countries - Europe, US, Far East handle uni applications in widening participation?

Does anyone know?

If you take five minutes to look up my other posts on MN you’ll see I am actually incredibly severely disabled. I missed years of schooling as a child and often was only able to access an hour a day. I still think it’s far more appropriate and respectful to be assessed on a level playing field with others. I studied a very intellectually rigorous course and if I hadn’t been equipped to do it, I wouldn’t have benefitted from being admitted.

Disabled students often find university suits them better. Lots find securing support less of a fight too. Those who struggle to attend full-time may stretch their degree &/or be able to join online.

Exactly. If they are bright enough to do well at uni then they will excel despite missing school. Speaking from experience! If they are massively behind and struggling, then they need to catch up, not to be thrust into an environment they are not equipped for. This is one of the many reasons why disability is not a suitable contextual factor. Thanks for getting it, seriously. I’m stunned that PP, who is disabled herself, is arguing in favour of this. I have literally been the child who only had education for an hour a day or less.

Do you think it does?

Do you have an example of unis who do this?
I'm not sure I know what you mean- do you mean students in private schools are getting contextual offers for being lowest in their class?

I’m feeling you don’t really have any understanding of a comprehensive school. You say some are performing well but you can’t compare a comp with a selective school.
Most comps only set for English or maths. The rest of the subjects are very mixed classes with lots of behaviour issues meaning teaching is all about managing behaviour.
If a child is really doing well they will outperform compared to their peers. If they are a selective or private school they have a massive advantage over comprehensive pupils. I’m also quite sure many pupils at grammar and private schools also have tutors, probably at a higher rate than comprehensive schools.

@helparoundthehouse

There are plenty of very good comprehensives where the wealthy, middle class parents who are lawyers, doctors even teachers - that's an advantage if ever was one - choose to send their kids who then end up in the top set, but these kids STILL get contextualised

No, they don't. Not all students from state schools get contextual offers- are you under the impression they do?
If a student is from a very low performing school, SOME universities will give a contextual offer.

Children who have been hampered on getting grades because of their circumstances is given credit for that

My dd sat her GCSE’s in severe ND burnout. Was unable to attend school for 18 months and has an EHCP.

She’s had no allowances made in uni applications.

All the comps around here have a very wide range of abilities but several have 'top sets' where the kids are semi-contained within that group. Some of the schools informally call them the 'grammar sets'. So no, they wouldn't necessarily be sitting with those in the lowest set for other subjects.

I think if people were honest with themselves, they would agree that had their child gone to a comprehensive school, rather than going to a grammar school or private school, their child’s results would have been lower.
Would any grammar school parent have preferred their child to go to the local secondary modern instead? No.

@helparoundthehouse

Well, Bristol e.g. has a list of 100s, if not 1000s of schools - when I looked it seemed like pretty all of the schools locally - where students have received contextualised offers even though their parents are wealthy, middle class and these being in leafy suburbs. So yes, there are such examples!

Bristol is one very limited example. They are an exception. Their list for schools meeting the contextual offer list for the 2025 cycle does not have all schools in the country. I suspect they are playing the system to stack student numbers