Oxbridge 2021: another 6 months of fretting

[DahliaMacNamara]

Will they make the grades? How will grades be awarded anyway? What the hell are Cambridge up to with that nasty little clause?

I’m satisfied that it would be very difficult for C to do anything outside the terms of their announcement yesterday: a deferral or college change for those happy to do it. DD would not be an initial volunteer for a deferral but could be tempted, if needed.
I don’t think it’s been a storm in a teacup for all those Offer Holders this year @goodbyestranger. The storm in the teacup was C using a unique and heavy-handed approach when they could have simply made fewer offers and relied on voluntary deferrals as every year.
As (another) lawyer (and not wanting to burden mumsnet with a dry legal debate), I doubt that the clause would be enforceable as it would be hard to show circumstances outside the uni’s reasonable control to trigger these provisions: like all other unis, C knew at the time of making the offer that the predicted grades were given by the same teachers that will be giving the CAGs and could therefore fairly assume the vast majority of Offer Holders would get their predicted grades so if C made Offers at or lower than predicted grades, they could fairly assume the Offers would be met. There is more certainty for C and O on numbers, as first choice unis, than possibly any other year! They could control circumstances by making fewer offers - which they say they have done.

Elsewhere23 I said storm in a teacup in that I'd bet quite a bit of money that Cambridge is being over cautious and that incredibly few students will be asked to defer.

I said the same thing earlier in the thread (or possibly the previous one) about Cambridge having time after decisions and before the offer date of 25th Jan to cull their list slightly. At the end of the day it's those students who would have been culled who are the ones who might conceivably be asked to change college/ defer. Which would they prefer? Also offer holders have the option to decline and go elsewhere; Cambridge hasn't removed the students' power of self determination!

In terms of outside their reasonable control, Cambridge had committed to an offer date of 25th Jan and the Y13 cohort still don't know how they will be awarded grades, so it's fair to say that Cambridge can't do its sums perfectly in that situation even with all the clever statisticians wandering about its quads, but what it is reasonable to do is to bring in some sticking plaster the other (legal) end. If the situation had been clearer between decisions in December and mid January then Cambridge could more easily have shed even more than it's already done. On that basis, it seems a decent solution.

I think it's unlikely they would have to invoke such a clause, but it seems a bit callous after all the emotional and mental investment of achieving an offer to shrug at students and say they can go elsewhere if they don't want to suck up a bit more uncertainty.

In a usual year a Cambridge offer holder with a high tariff offer or an A* required in a particular subject will have uncertainty until results day.

The whole scenario is completely tone-deaf to what the current Y13s are experiencing in terms of stress. Mental health problems are sky high in this year group.

Goodbyestranger - I really do think the students need a bit of certainty atm; remember NO STUDENT has been told if they are at risk of being culled in this way, they have all received conditional offers, but no-one has been told ‘by the way, if we get too many, you’re out.’

This should be the easiest year ever for Cambridge; they know they are most applicants 1st choice, and they probably know that most people will get their grades. Certainly a higher percentage than normal, so they already have some details to inform their offer rate.

In any case, I don’t think they have a leg to stand on. I just read through the extensive guidance that UCAS send to admissions tutors. It’s very clear that before exam results are released, universities might in very exceptional circumstances make changes (eg asking to defer), but only WITH THE CANDIDATE’S AGREEMENT. Post results, they are not allowed to make changes to the terms of the offer - ie if you get your grades you must be admitted. The clause on Cambridge’s website is not part of a legal offer - because it is not one of the things that is permitted to be included, it’s incumbent on the university to manage its oversubscription in the numbers of offers it makes. The only exception is where a course DOES NOT RUN, and then they should offer an alternative course.

The wording about post-exams is;

You are committed to confirming the applicant’s place on the course with the year of entry and point of entry they accepted.

@goodbyestranger

In a usual year a Cambridge offer holder with a high tariff offer or an A* required in a particular subject will have uncertainty until results day.

In a normal year, for many the Cambridge requirement is two A stars in specific subjects (one often being FM). There's probably way less uncertainty than normal this year.

Agreed @ErrolTheDragon. My DS had an AAA offer with the conditions that the As should be in any subjects except Maths. His third A Level was Maths and that is a requirement for his course so pretty much everyone on the course is expected to get an A in Maths anyway.

BB that does not surprise me as that is the overall system and agreement. Hopefully no one will have to go to court over it.

There is certainly more certainty for Cambridge!

I think there is a v big difference between uncertainty that is, to some extent, within the candidate's control - ie 'I need to get these grades' and that which is entirely outside it - ie 'I need the numbers to fall in my favour'. That is what should be happening now with offers - making the offers to the number of people who will result in the right number of successful candidates on results day.

That's why the algorithm was so (rightly) derided last year - candidates had no possibility of affecting their outcomes.

But in any case, Cambridge are not allowed by UCAS to deny a candidate a place on their offered course, if that course runs and if the candidate achieves their grades.

Xenia I should think Cambridge is sick of rich daddies and mummies challenging them even in court and is more than equal to the task of seeing them off.

Yes Errol. Sciences are notorious but I was thinking also of humanities where Cambridge sometimes sticks in an A* in a specified subject eg History, which can be a bit of a pest.

Actually it might be less well off poor parent doing it on legal aid given how expensive litigation is and it would be seen off only if the legal basis of the challenge were wrong. Hopefully no one has to sue as it is a risky business and may be they will not have to reject candidates who meet the offer requirements in the end.

A very highly unlikely scenario that a challenge would be legally aided and as you must know very well, where there's an arguable case, much depends on the quality of lawyer involved. There are some really duff ones about. I assume that Cambridge wouldn't hold back on employing a reasonable one.

All these challenges seem to be by rich parents Xenia. And then there's the endless FOI requests.....

I've seen it at the 11+ end. It's the rich parents who tend to appeal, employ barristers etc. Same with the FOI requests. That's just how it is.

Re Cambridge uncertainty; as fellow posters on the current Oxbridge thread might recall, my DD ( History, C) «failed» to make the specified A in History on the day initial grades were released. It was 45 minutes of tense waiting to get onto UCAS track to see she was accepted anyway. Her college messaged that day to say that having carefully reviewed her application they still wished to offer her a place. Her grade was subsequently regraded to the required A in the CAG regrading . She’s in the unusual position of having two formal acceptance letters, one stating that « despite missing your required grades» and the other «congratulations on achieving your required grades».. ! I’m not aware of other examples of this in the admittedly tiny cohort that posts on here but I cant imagine it’s unprecedented.

I personally think Cambridge are using this year's issue as an opportunity to put a clause like this in, not so much for this year but as insurance for potential issues in the future - for example if exams were cancelled at the last minute.

@Chilldonaldchill

I personally think Cambridge are using this year's issue as an opportunity to put a clause like this in, not so much for this year but as insurance for potential issues in the future - for example if exams were cancelled at the last minute.

You might be right. But it is against UCAS' own rules, so although they can print whatever they like on their website, they cannot refuse entry to anyone who has achieved the grades detailed in their offer (there are I think 3 exceptions - i) where student finance is not in place, ii) where there is an unspent criminal conviction, iii) where information has been fraudulently given).

The only way they can even have students deferring or changing course is with the student's agreement.

Otherwise they will have to run their own admissions outside of the UCAS process.

Re the discussion about fourth/seventh term papers, I have just found a natural sciences exam from 1977 where it states

"Candidates may attempt at most eight questions in total

Post A-level candidates may attempt at most two questions from section A

Pre A-level candidates have an unrestricted choice of questions"

Which seems to imply that this was both for forth term and seventh term candidates, but there was some differentiation!

I imagine a lawyer thought the Cambridge clause would be a good idea and shoved it in. Cambridge have now made it clear anyway that they meant that they would just ask for volunteers to defer...

Exactly as I said at a very early stage Clara's Zoo.

@goodbyestranger

Exactly as I said at a very early stage Clara's Zoo.

Oh ok - I didn’t read the whole thread!

Letter in The Times today which I think clarifies the matter and hopefully allay unfounded worries.

CAMBRIDGE OFFERS
Sir, Apropos your report “Cambridge to withdraw places if oversubscribed” (Feb 3), the university is not planning to withdraw places from students who meet the terms of their offers. As your article notes, last summer we admitted a record number of students after A-level grades were revised upwards. Fortunately we were able to accommodate this higher intake but only through voluntary entry deferral by some students or by others accepting a place at a college that was not their original choice. This year we altered our terms and conditions to show offer holders that, should their offering college be oversubscribed, we might have to consider these options again. If a student preferred to take up a place at another university, they could, but this would only be necessary if they were not happy with the option of transferring to another college or deferring entry. 
Professor Graham Virgo

ClarasZoo I simply meant that reading the clause it was immediately clear that this was going to be with consent and not imposed, hence storm in a teacup, reasonableness etc.