Unconditional offers

[GnomeDePlume]

Is the expansion of unconditional offers distorting not just entry to higher education but also A level results themselves?

Fully admit this thought is totally based on a limited amount of anecdata.

In DD2's year 13 large numbers of students have been offered and accepted unconditional offers on a range of uni courses. As a result according to DD2 these students all 'took the foot off the gas' in terms of studies and then revision/preparation for exams. Less attentiveness to studies, less commitment to revision, willingness to go to parties in the run up to exams.

These are students DD2 has known all through school so has a good understanding of their attitudes to learning before the uni application process started.

As a result of the reduced intensity of study, these students are likely to perform less well at A level than they would have otherwise done.

If this picture were repeated across the country will this potentially impact on grade boundaries?

While this may be good for individual students is it bad for education as a whole?

Just musing on a Sunday morning but would be interested if other people had a view.

Well, it's the sort of thing that ought to make it into professional and academic journals if it's happening on a significant scale, given that it contradicts both recent received wisdom and public statements by various large firms, including statistics such as increases in the number of different universities new starters came from. The process by which it's occurring should also be analysed, e.g. maybe interviewers are seeing a greater proportion of candidates against whom they have unconscious bias and filtering those out in the first round in favour of the most traditional candidates.

If studies have flawed design, people who know the subject area should be saying so publicly, enabling others to have access to that info.

Yes perhaps peggy but clearly my large firm/ organization info contradicts yours, but that's all good. I don't have a problem with the brightest/ best suited applicants getting jobs getting jobs whatever their background - even if that's Oxbridge. The application blind thing removes the opportunity for positive discrimination in favour of non Oxbridge unis so I find it quite interesting.

It doesn’t fly in the face of received wisdom if you look at it logically. Throughout life you come across people who are very bright. They pick things up very quickly, they are good at everything, they absorb huge amounts of information and are also logical and articulate. Thet have no weaknesses. They sail into Oxbridge. Others are still clever but don’t have this edge. Therefore by removing the name of the university it does not mask all the skills they have that come out via other tests. There is still a lot of information on an application form that gives employers a steer as to the skills of a candidate too. This particular cream will rise. These types of people are not all at Oxbridge of course but I am willing to take a punt that they are not at Bucks Chiltern University or similar. If you remove the institution, it doesn’t mean you can suddenly find the stellar candidates from Anglia Ruskin who are at the same level.

I’m sorry Lonicera- I did think you had mentioned Physiotherapy! I’m glad the discussion has been helpful though.

Why do you and your contacts think it happens? (Specifically WRT universities.) At what stage in the process does it become apparent? The first stage or the recruited staff?

Sorry, penny not peggy. All I know is recruited staff and that more Oxbridge applicants are hired, not fewer.

Penny, based on a sample of one, active processes designed to promote diversity are used and working.

DS has a good and specialist masters from a top ranked University, which a few years back would have almost certainly guaranteed him an interview with obvious public sector recruiters. He was the only Brit on his course, which is probably the best course of its type in Europe, and few of his peers would have interested in working in the uk (indeed several were sponsored by their own governments). The previous year he passed the final assessment for an internship, though failed to get one as they did not have enough places. And he was waitlisted for a job at an American equivalent.

This time round he failed the first, computer, sift. He though it was because he was unable to agree or disagree strongly about anything! His detatched approach may have meant he may have been weeded out at a later stage, but by putting the personality stuff first and anonymously, they will have trawalled a wider pool and will, I am sure, have achieved a wider diversity in terms of academic background at interview stage.

I am not sure Stranger is correct. Many public sector jobs dont attract Oxbridge graduates. Especially those competing for the same skills sets as city employers. Salary is not good enough and location is not always popular. And the public sector really does not seem to have the same Oxbridge/RG obsession as MN. The people DS did do an internship with, were really struggling to recruit. National graduate recruitment did not yield enough who both wanted to work in their area and had the skills they needed. Promising interns, some from newer Universities which MN regularly sniffs at, were taken aside and briefed on back ways in.

As a teacher unconditional offers are causing huge issues in my classroom. Students who receive them sometimes aren’t the strongest anyway and so take the foot off the gas and coast. I found many were offered to students applying to places that typically wanted BBB or BBC

@BubblesBuddy - I only meant the received wisdom that blind recruitment is a solution to the issue of bias towards Oxbridge and Russell Group graduates.

I don't know anyone from lower ranked universities who tried to get into a major corporate graduate recruitment programme (this type of person is someone I've only heard about online) so couldn't say how these types of people compare. The handful of brilliant people I've known who did first degrees at less prestigious regional unis went where they did for family or health reasons, and also have a bolshy dislike of corporate environments and never would have considered these schemes. (And it might just be the sort of people I've hung out with over the years, but of the most intellectually impressive people - more than not from Oxbridge/RG - only one has a very high-flying career; most of the academically inclined ones who are incredibly quick on the uptake, and in some cases brilliant in conversation, seem to have opted for somewhat more laid-back lives. It's often people who used to seem solid but not stellar as students who are earning the most in big London firms and similar. You need to fit in, put long hours in and keep doing so year on year, and that requires certain attributes. It's strange seeing who's ended up where in their 40s - often not what you'd have expected at 15, 20 or even 25.)

Apologies for quoting from a different thread but if you look in Ask Me Anything an admissions tutor is answering questions.

These quotes from the admissions tutor struck me:

Students from lower socio-economic groups don't have as much confidence/assurance in their applications and don't speak in the same "language" as their counterparts from higher socio-economic groups.

It's not that privately-educated students are spoonfed, but rather they're educated and coached in a very different way. They are encouraged and nurtured to be self-assured, self-confident, and to value their own opinions (even if what they are saying is nonsense). This is absolutely brilliant and makes for some fantastic class discussions but those students who haven't benefited from that educational background don't have the same self-assurance and can get left behind and feel intimidated.

Link if you are interested.

I wonder how much of that self confidence and articulateness impacts in sifting processes whether uni application or CV.

Another bit of anecdata. DD2 was very much aware when doing the open day rounds at high ranking (Times list) unis that she didnt 'fit' with the prospective students from indy schools. She felt she lacked their overall self-confidence. She didnt feel academically inferior but that socially there was no point of contact. Ultimately she firmed a lower ranking (but still RG) uni where she felt the 'fit' was better.

Penny...the wonders of Linked-in, as personal profiles often show the University someone went to, and can be quite surprising. Resilience and stamina count for a lot, as does emotional intelligence.

The difficulty is with quantifying resiliance and stamina at a first sift. It definitely shows after the appointment has been made and several years down the line. It is also recognised in contextual offers from universities which, as I recall needmoresleep, led your DD to think these students were not good enough and the bottom of the barrel had been scraped. Perhaps employers think the same?

I am also perplexed that after an internship, with a stellar degree, your DS did not sail into the job with an employer that is struggling to recruit. That sound bizarre. Were they not good enough for him?

I do think what the individual wants is the key aspect to all of this. Where do they want to end up? Would they rather be reading books in their rose scented garden? To some the idea of commuting, striving every day and meeting targets just is not for them. I totally see that.

Lots of Oxbridge grads in public sector work. They do not attract the ones who want stellar careers in the city, or that have the upbringing and aims to want the highest flying grad schemes, but they are sprinkled all over local government, especially in Education management. Far less in Social work, transport and care of the elderly for obvious reasons. Lots and lots in the Civil Service upper ranks though.

Many people who run NGO's are Oxbidge and have, as Penny says, taken a different route to work and possibly have a more laid back approach. They do not want the high pressure grad schemes, but are, none the less, recruited to suitable roles and are successful. Journalism is another area where Oxbridge grads are over represented. Just look through the Times and the Sunday Times and you see references to their time at Oxbridge all the time.

Thanks for starting this thread joshchan it has been very informative.
You mention that it's maybe best to go to top 50 uni on league tables.

Does this apply to Masters application too?would you advise to go to higher ranking university further away or rather study nearer home but at a university lower and less prestigious than the university attended at undergraduate level.

And do employers care where your masters is from?
TIA

@Fruitpot you need to put the question on the thread I linked to rather than this thread

Oh bloody hell thanks gnome I went on that link to read that thread and posted thinking it would go on that thread automatically. But oh nope it went and posted from the original link page, so this one long day.

Your question is an interesting one. DD1 is now looking at post grad but she is hoping to trade up from her ex poly to a RG. Not because it is RG but because that is where the research is happening for the area which she wants to develop in.

gnome it's what I'm really confused with. There's no league tables for Masters. I understand subjects can be niche and specialist. So it's going to be hard to measure. But I can't help but think if one does a masters, then that degree is looked on more than the undergraduate degree when it comes to employment. But what if the scenario is whereby one has traded down, in terms of uni prestige, ranking and reputation. Does this have a impact say against someone who has traded up at masters level like your dd. Ive noticed many masters student end up at their local uni near home to save on cost. Or their doing a masters because they didn't do too well at undergrad level at a prestigious uni so do one at a lesser uni.
My dd is wondering wether to go to a London uni higher ranking but will cost a lot more for the masters and living cost. So them I'm also wondering wether masters at top uni will help them gain better salaries too.

I never went to uni so I have way too many questions, sorry

But I can't help but think if one does a masters, then that degree is looked on more than the undergraduate degree when it comes to employment. But what if the scenario is whereby one has traded down, in terms of uni prestige, ranking and reputation. Does this have a impact say against someone who has traded up at masters level like your dd. Ive noticed many masters student end up at their local uni near home to save on cost.

In general, university ranking is far more important at postgraduate level than undergraduate level. With a few exceptions, it's really only at postgraduate level where the higher-ranked universities come into their own.

In the above scenario, it would make more sense to save on costs by doing an undergraduate degree at a local university and then invest in a postgraduate degree in the most prestigious university possible.

(Although not for law as far as I am aware - people would look to your A level grades and subjects and which first university you went to (although you don't need a masters anyway although some people have them so law is a different kettle of fish anyway))

I was at a school parent meeting (about GCSEs) a few months ago and the head summarised the following;

There are less students doing undergrad courses.
Thus, the less popular (non RG) are making unconditional offers to simply get the a level students in the door.
There's a teenage population dip therefore statistically, more univ spaces available.
High tuition and cost of living fees, plus other routes of entry to higher education (degrees part funded by the workplace) mean less 6th for jets going straight to uni.
Brexit - hitting applications from international students hard so again, less are applying.

It's all adding up to how desperate some Unis are to fill their courses with UC offers.

DD got a unconditional from a RG university but turned it down in favour of a conditional offer from another RG university that she preferred. She then got the grades needed for the conditional (A*aa) rather then the contextual offer of AAB, she was predicted AAA as were many of her peers at a selective state sixth form.

I think it'd be a concern with some universities getting lower achieving students on seats just to get some money coming in but I think at the higher end it's not so much of a problem if universities are giving the offers out carefully and students have applied for the degree course they really want rather than an other one to get the unconditional.

Just spooted this:

"It is also recognised in contextual offers from universities which, as I recall needmoresleep, led your DD to think these students were not good enough and the bottom of the barrel had been scraped."

Bubbles you can be rude at the best of times, but this is plain wrong and insulting. I am very supportive of contextual offers, and of measures to support and encourage capable students to aim high. I have been a bit about contextual offer schemes which had lower offers given to pupils of expensive Central London private schools, but I don't think many disagreed, and indeed that University seems to have stopped doing this. If this is what you mean by "scraping the barrel" I will leave you to it.

user, that is my son's experience - he says the people he knows at Bristol who got contextual low conditional offers then got very good grades anyway as good as his AAA and better so he thinks the system works well. In other words Bristol seems good at predicting those who will exceed their contextual offers by a wide margin and who will manage well at the university. What we don't want is people getting in who cannot keep up, aren't good enough and get very fed up and unhappy ( a bit like getting a coached to the nth degree child into an 11+ grammar or private school who then struggles as they should never have been there in the first place).

fruitpot, from DS' experience it largely depends on what you want to do with your Masters. DS wants to do research. As I have suggested, Briish public sector organisations in his field, rely on national recruiting, and so it is, essentially, the CSSB process or similar, with institution blind recuitment. (At later stages in these processes they will have technical competence tests where some will struggle, but the initial national rounds seem to sift for a wider skill set.) At various interviews he has done along with the way (summer internships) he has come across applicants from places like Westminster University and Oxford Brookes and a surprising number from Scotland. Though you would want to ensure that the Masters delivers the technical skills an employer would be looking for, institution may not matter much.

He also applied for academic and research assistant jobs in the US. Here institution really mattered. Indeed there were several Americans on his one year Masters programme "trading up" from their provincial first degrees in the US in order to become credible applicants for Doctorate programmes at top US Universities. The same was true for some of the Europeans. But then if he eventually seeks an academic job in the UK, time spent at a good US University is a real advantage. That is where the real research in his area is considered to be happening.

This won't be true of other subjects. DS spent a lot of time asking around and seeking advice. Websites like the GradCafe also helped for US applications, though the the focus on "top ten", "top twenty" and so on departments, was very evident. Masters, especially in London, can be a huge investment. But in some circumstances the right one.

Xenia, I dont disagree. However the Sutton Trust suggest there could be more initial help. Probably more applicable for quantitative subjects, where if you did not do the maths at school you might have to catch up fast.

In other words Bristol seems good at predicting those who will exceed their contextual offers by a wide margin and who will manage well at the university

Given the problems that they have had with students taking their own lives I would say that they are keen to make sure they get things right.
I have a student at Bristol and they say much the same as your son has said.