Are foundation degrees a way for uni’s to squeeze more money out of people?

[Mrsbunnychops]

My DC missed out on her first and second choice uni today but was luckily offered a place at one of her selections on a foundation course at uni instead. All great and they are relieved but I did a BSc in the 90’s and I was offered really sensible offers from Russell groups and other decent universities like Nottingham, Kings, Newcastle, Surrey, the highest of which was BCC. When I arrived at my pretty decent uni, I discovered many on my course hadn’t met the grade for chemistry. They had got an E - not a problem! They were offered an additional module in chemistry while the rest of us sat a module in organic chemistry. They did their degree and it was absolutely fine! They got 2:1’s and firsts!

Now, My DC was offered stupid grades like AAB for multiple universities - even a much less popular course at a very average Uni was BBB - Which are very high for 2 or 3 science A Levels?

I May also add that I know the uni my DC got into very well because I went to it in the same faculty!

question is - why do they ask such outrageous grades these days? Especially for science?

Is it better for the uni to get an extra year’s income by offering the foundation course for a year when really all they needed was an extra module of chemistry? As so many won’t meet the over inflated grades these days? The University looks like the hero, when in reality it’s just a way of making money?

also, by pushing the grades higher and higher are we setting the poor sixth formers unrealistic grade targets, spoiling their sixth form years and causing major stress?

Hmmm?! Apologies if I sound a bit ranty - but it feels a bit off!

Foundation years are there for two reasons. They were primarily to increase access for those who may have been disadvantaged in their education to date but show promise. And now for some unis it’s for that and for applicants who don’t quite have the grades/knowledge to start the degree course. It probably costs more to run than what they receive in fees.
As for ‘grade inflation’, I don’t agree with this. But what has changed is how many are going to uni - there has been a 79% increase in students attending higher education since 1995. So unis can require higher grades to access courses - why wouldn’t they want a ‘better’ caliber of students? The reputation improves and therefore more students with higher grades apply and round it goes. For example, back in 1995 St Andrews was a good university and average entrance requirement around BBB with some flexibility as it was not in huge demand. Today St A is considered a very competitive sought after uni and the requirements have increased accordingly.
Interestingly, my DD (who earned three A*), is at Durham on a course with AAB requirements. But she says that a BBB student could perfectly well take the course - she’s not convinced that the courses are as rigourous as advertised! It may be harder to get on some courses now, but are the courses themselves harder? No.

But what has changed is how many are going to uni - there has been a 79% increase in students attending higher education since 1995. So unis can require higher grades to access courses - why wouldn’t they want a ‘better’ caliber of students?

That makes sense for high ranked universities that have not increased capacity. There is also an increase in the number of international students competing for the same places. But overall there has been a big increase in capacity, in line with the number of sudents applying.

As for whether you "agree" with grade inflation, it is a fact that there has been a large increase in the number of A grades. In 1984 the % of UK A levels at grade A or above was about 10%, growing steadily to 27% by 2009. From 2009-2024 the % remained at 26-27%, other than the pandemic affected years of 2020-22.

Maybe there a very large increase in the standard of A level candidates during those years, but I doubt that was the only explanation.

On the flip side I worked for a university recently who are low tariff. They require an average CCC. However when I left school the same university required DEE.

Everything has just shifted, whilst underneath these headline requirements there has always been a great deal of flexibility.

Back in the 90s when you were doing your course and the university put on a different course for those who didn't make the chemistry grade, they got more money per student for educating you each year. This probably gave them more freedom to offer a different chemistry course. From this perspective, yes they're trying to make more money, but not as some sort of profit, they're just unable to subsidise the way they used to.

They also didn't get dinged as heavily if students dropped out. So accepting those who didn't make the grade was less risky (and evidence shows that students with lower than average grades were more likely to drop out). By using the foundation year approach, they can minimize the hit to their rankings and grants without completely shutting out kids who just missed.

But just want to say - I'm sorry they didn't get the course they wanted. I'm not surprised you're ranting, it hurts to have your kids knocked back. I hope they get a good result out of whatever they end up choosing.

Grade inflation is definitely real, as is the number/% of students being awarded a First.

When I applied to university in the '80s, only Oxbridge would have even one A in their offer. Now a stated requirement of multiple A's/A*'s across Russell Group universities is common. BCC was a common offer for standard unis (not Polys).

People do get in with lower grades than that now, I don't doubt that, and significantly lower grades for some subjects.

When I graduated in the 1990s,7% of students received a first. It's a way, way higher number now.

My instinct is, it makes much more sense to separate bachelor's from master's.

It doesn’t really. If you do an integrated master’s degree, you are eligible for the tuition and maintenance loan. Plus, it takes less time overall.

If you do it separately, it takes longer and you will have to apply for a Postgraduate Master’s Loan. £12,858 max.

I think it's a money maker; most university degrees spend the first year having to teach how to write essays, reference and think critically anyway. Unless DC have really badly missed the mark they will be bored in the first year of Uni if they have to do it for a year then do it all over again the next year. I did wonder if Y1 is so easy because for freshers it's more about socialising 😄

It takes three months longer…. It’s around 50% more content (60 credits of dissertation, 120 credits of taught modules). So a little more in depth, plus it’s good to move to a new institution.

It probably depends on the degree and University. DD is doing a foundation in Marine biology she has ADHD and dyslexia and really struggled to get going with the study skills required to do well in her A Levels, she's bright but almost needed another 6 months.

For her a foundation is perfect it means she'll be settled in and have had time to build the skills required to do well. It also means she'll be a year older a lot of people with SEN seem to mature slower than their peers.

When we went to an open day one of the professors was saying that they encourage people to do a foundation as they often are the better performing students they just need a bit more time and support.

It’s more than three months longer if you add in the Christmas and Easter vacations which pure master’s students don’t get. Admittedly, there would be work to do during them.

Whether or not it is good to move to another institution is subjective, and not compulsory.

Its down to grade inflation over the decades. DDD for the generation before is equivalent to BBB now

Well they’re Sep to Sep rather than Sep till June UGs are supposed to be studying during Christmas and Easter breaks you know…

My DS is doing a foundation year and I don't think it's a bad thing. He's entered uni via BTEC which I don't think does anything to prepare them for uni.

Or Oct to June instead of Oct to Oct. It depends on the institution.

I do know. That’s why I mentioned it in my post...

If you went to Uni in the 90s this seems unlikely. A* for A levels came in in 2010. I think you may be thinking of GCSEs?

When the N grade was brought in, nearly 25% of A levels were failed. Now only about 3% are!

This does make sense.

I recall reading somewhere that employers regard post grad masters more highly than integrated masters. I guess this is the reason why. Although, am I right in thinking that this isn't the case with engineering degrees?

I'm so old that between an 'E' and a 'U' you could get an 'O' so an O level from sitting the A Level.

@incognitomouse when I taught referencing to BTEC students I would tell them, "you hate me now but you will thank me when you get to uni".

A lot has changed as now you can get software to do a lot of the work. BTEC does have advantages over A Levels in some respects. You are expected to take units in different (related) subjects and you get used to meeting deadlines, and depending on the subject you might also be doing presentations, group work and reports. All good skills for uni.

Universities tried to offer low grades to entice students into STEM subjects such as Engineering. They got the bums on seats but the drop out rates were really high.

In my (considerable) experience of MEng degrees, students have little trouble finding employment. Either within engineering in its various forms or seemingly unrelated fields like finance.

Of course, there is always the odd exception.

@sashh Yes, he did gain some good skills through the BTEC so hopefully that will transfer, but he winged a lot of it, which is why I don't think the foundation year will do him any harm (other than the £10k 😶).

He wasn't great at meeting deadlines I have to say and was given a lot of chances by his BTEC tutors, which he won't get at uni!

DD's university used to deduct marks for late submissions. After a week the work was marked at zero. I expect most universities do this. Also, they don't chase students for outstanding work. The onus is entirely on the students to keep up to date.

They don't take any prisoners.

Definitely not a new thing. I know people who did them 20 years ago.

They CAN be used for students coming in from places like the US where educational standards are lower, to bring them up to A Level standard. Or they can be used to prepare for a course that isn't studied as rigorously at school. My DS didn't do one before his degree when others had and I think he would have done a lot better if he had.

On the plus side I think they've lowered the fees etc this year to £6k-ish for some courses.
Also, compared to my time, it is harder to either retake Alevels or do different subjects after leaving school (without paying through the nose).
DS1 did a F year due to a change of direction. Added to his debt but there would have been no other way.
Anecdotally, because the curriculum is targeted to the related degree subject(s) - students perform better in the actual degree. May depend from one subject to another.