How on Earth do a level lower achievers get to uni with the grades that are being asked?

[NCTDN]

If I wanted to go to uni now, I'd have no chance. In my day, I needed three E grades to get into teaching, from which I've had a fabulous career.
DD is very lucky and looking at places asking for 3As (Not teaching) but I'm so shocked at how high everywhere asks for. I went to what was primarily a teacher training college and even that is asking for 3 alleged at grade b.
So my question is, what do teenagers do these days if they get grades C D or E? It must be so disheartening.

I got three A’s at A level and then a 1st when I graduated in the mid 90’s. DT’s both got three A’s and a first when they graduated last year. *

You certainly did better than most at the time!

Your children also did very well, but as a much higher percentage of students get a First Class degree today, you did actually do better !

Degree inflation incredible - 2:ii used to be what most people left with - a first was rare

Yes, massive grade inflation. Hence a First today is much more achievable than in the 1990s!

@MadameMinimes is right. I work in a Uni and on many courses there's a big difference between what they ask for and what they accept....

In the early 80s my uni wanted BCC or BCD (some were offered the lower grade, no idea why. I wasn't!). The course (science at an RG uni) now requires a clutch of As & A*s!

There were 82 in my year on my psychology degree. 2 people got firsts - both mature students.

I work in a Uni and on many courses there's a big difference between what they ask for and what they accept....

Do you mean that the required grades are minimum grades and in reality the actual offers are much higher?

not rtft but DD got BCC two years ago and got a clearing place at Leicester (her held offers were AAB/ABB) with that.

Last year the clearing offer for the same course was CCD.

The course asks for AAB.

So basically, unis need to fill seats, and won't always get what they ask for.

There will always be a place somewhere

Universities are businesses and they need customers to survive

I got AAA in 1990 and it was unusual, but I just chose my subjects wisely. I got AAAABBBC in my GCSEs which wasn't stellar at all.

I needed BBC for my insurance offer uni (now a RG uni). Didn't get into Cambridge due to failing one of the entrance exams (which probably indicates how intelligent I actually wasn't).

DS is hoping for A*AB in his A levels this year.

People like to talk about grade inflation but even when I did my A levels people said they were easier than in the 1970s. One thing I did notice was that the way the essay questions were phrased was easier when I did mine. But if you understood what the 1975 questions were getting at, you would have done fine.

I actually think my son's Ancient History course and what he is expected to know and the way he is expected to structure his answers is more demanding than when I did my (Tudor) history A level.

I also agree that it's a shame the polys were turned into universities. If you want to do a more technical subject you are much better off not going to a "good" university and going to an ex-poly.

So if you want to do history, go to an RG uni.

But if you want to do a marketing/business degree go to an ex-poly.

You'll be very employable.

As for accepting lower grades than offers, I don't know - there is a website that gives you a view of what grades actually got (what uni?) (interestingly for ds' course at Warwick they ask for AAA and students got AAA whereas somewhere like York they ask for AAB but students got ABB). However, it was up to 2019, and 2020 and 2021 are not going to be representative.

I always say that the E in Pure Maths was my best achievement given that in one 3 hour exam, I had done as much as I could and checked it all after 15 minutes. Sadly we weren't allowed to leave the room so I went to sleep

I laughed out loud when I read that!

With a good 40% of school leavers going to university, it's clearly easier now

There are way more course and places available now. So this doesn't quite make sense.

@looptheloopinahulahoop
Warwick is a very sought after uni though. York a bit less maybe. Depends on course regarding grades. MFL courses tend to lower grades but medicine wouldn’t unless widening participation criteria were deployed.

@Neonprint
I think it does make sense. With polys and post 92 universities, students have a wealth of choice and many more can go. Upwards of 40% as opposed to 15% in the 70s. RG have expanded massively hence lowering of grades at the less stellar RG universities.

It depends on the institution and course, but I've known people over the years who've gotten onto courses without meeting the listed grades through talking to the course leader - having someone who is really interested in a topic enough to discuss it well can mean a lot in some subjects, and being able to discuss circumstances and how they'll work to meet the higher expectation can matter too.

Also, some Unis and colleges offer programmes that can be either "topped up" into degrees or go into Level 6 apprenticeship that can becomes degrees too.

University is supposed to be for high achievers. Not anyone and everyone. Unfortunately that doesn't seem to be the case anymore making a degree 2 a penny and not impressive unless it's a high grade. However, it is further education. If you struggle with a levels then uni is probably not for you.

I found dh's offer sheet from UCCA in early 90s recently.
His offers included CCD for Durham. (DD last year was A A A in a similar subject) and his highest offer was BBB and they were all Russell group/Oxbridge.

Oxford, back then was an EE offer if you did the exam, but they didn't expect you to get that!

University is supposed to be for high achievers. Not anyone and everyone. Unfortunately that doesn't seem to be the case anymore making a degree 2 a penny and not impressive unless it's a high grade.

Yes, unless it's a First or Upper Second from a reputable University.

Thankfully most employers understand this.

It's very expensive to go to Uni, so it is worth considering the return on that investment!

A first from the university of blogshire is often not worth the same as a 2:1 from a top 15 university. Depends on the course but for humanities it’s vital to aim high. Employers take lots of things into account and not just the first which, in some universities, is awarded to 40% of grads. Someone with low grade A levels and weak GCSEs might not get a great job even with a first.

Eye opening stuff. I fear for DS (who isn't - yet - motivated enough to work).

I got offers of EE (Imp), CCC (Nott), BBC (Manch) and BB (Bristol). My school careers were pretty useless and just had a shelf of prospectus copies.

I chose Bristol. This was the 80s.

Now the same Unis for same subject are respectively
AAA, AAA, AAA, AAA

Far fewer dc took A levels. Far less competition for places due to fewer doing A levels. If it’s Imperial it’s science too. Far less competition then from overseas students. With higher grades being achieved, far more dc aim high. These unis are top ones! They have adjusted their entry grades accordingly.

It was interesting that when I checked my children's father's A level grades from the 1970s (B D E) against my AAB (I got 2/1 and he got 2/2 - about a third of people generally got 2/1 or over and in my year in law one girl only got a first and no boys...) I saw at his university not one single person in his subject got higher than a 2/2. So he could be best in the whole year (he was pretty good) and get a 2/2. I had the best exam results in one of my 5 subjects in year 3 and joint best with another and won prizes in those and still "just" got a 2/1.

This was also at a time when only 15% of us got to university in the first place. Hardly anyone went from my year at school for example. So of the 15% who got there you could have no one getting a first in some subjects.

Anyway it is as it is and employers still seem able to work out who is good and who is not. My son had an interview last week after a written assessment and he got the interview because even though some with supposedly great exam results as good or better than his could not in practice do the exercise - the interviewer said (mind you he did badly in the interview so so much for that....)

The comment above about Bristol - we found the opposite - harder to get into for my daughter in about 2002 compared with the twins 13 years later because the state had changed the rules to allow more places to be offered by institutions.

I only left teaching a couple of years ago so have taught a level recently. Anyone with only two E grades at the end of sixth form is either a) totally intellectually unsuited to university study, or b) a lazy fucker and therefore totally unsuited to university study.

I would be fucking furious if I found out my child was being taught by someone so badly qualified. Different if it was someone with decades of experience who went to teacher training college back in the day, but anyone recently - no way.

SirSamuelVimes possibly, or they may have had health problems during their 'A' levels and missed a lot of school, or utterly uninspiring teachers or a whole host of other things.

Do you really think that the grades that someone gets in a few exams when they're 18 either defines their intellect or work ethic for life?

I know loads of young people who scraped through school and are flying in the work environment for example, and other young people who missed a year or more of schooling due to ill health and time-consuming treatment.

And I say that as someone who got 3 grade A 'A' levels from a technical college in the late 1980s which puts me in 'boffin category' as pp says. (Thanks for that, it has made my morning!)

@LauraLovesLemons

I did my A levels in 1995 and messed up quite spectacularly. I got D in English, D in French and an N in history. I have a very vivid memory of looking at my History paper and there being absolutely nothing on there that we had studied. I obviously wrote something of value or I would have got a U but it really was horrific. Nowadays parents would have appealed it I assume but my parents weren’t aware that they could do anything. It was a huge shock as I’d got 8 A’s (before A*s) and a C at GCSE so was considered fairly academic and able to do a levels (the C was in Maths as I sat the lower paper). Luckily I wasn’t going to Uni so it didn’t affect my chances. I did a YTS Dental Nursing coursed where I worked for 10 years then had my children and now I’m a TA.

My DS is now in Y11 and predicted a mix of 7/8’s and is planning on A levels in PE, Geography and Biology. I’m still not sure it’s the right choice for him but his other option was a BTEC course which he applied for. The man interviewing was incredibly surprised at his predicted grades and said a huge proportion start the BTEC having to resit maths/English. I think there should be some middle ground between A levels and a BTEC.