Yes, there are all kinds of ‘sub-markets’ that it’s not always easy to get data about, and which they’d rather we didn’t know about. International applicants, home non-contextual, contextual….possibly one or two other very small groups too.
I suppose unis are balancing getting candidates with plenty of funding attached to them (international) with wanting the best quality students, but also needing to play a role in levelling-up and likely targets or overall scrutiny of exactly where students are coming from.
Each parent and their child falls within one sub-group (and sometimes different ones for different universities) and what they need is the details about offers for their particular group, so they can make informed choices.
Transparancy is important but there is clearly reluctance about it too - understandably I think, because that data which shows high achieving non-contextual students have a less good offer rate at some highly selective universities isn’t appealing to that demographic. Nor is the idea that on some courses, internationals who are paying can get in with lower grades or Clearing is only open to them.
But universities have to be funded and government loans for fees have stagnated in real terms over many years. Universities might wish to admit the best and also to be involved in widening participation….but as the finds get tighter and tighter, the monetary needs have to overtake the educational excellence and other goals. They can only provide education to anyone if they survive and are financially viable. They are between a rock and a hard place.
Parents and kids often want exclusivity and a sense of being highly selective. Many that actually aren’t, work hard to give that impression, as it attracts certain types of applicants. But at the same time, they need to get the message out that they are also accessible so enough apply and they have some level of choice about who to take and very importantly can fill. Their ultimate goal is to get more of the best to apply and to be able to fill more places with the best and still have enough of those one level below to fill remaining places. It is a sign of their own success and popularity to be able to turn people away - but there is a balance, because if it happens to too great a level and is known, applications might fall.
Most universities and courses won’t have the luxury that Oxbridge or Cowi or some of the London or very top tier RG unis have of being comfortably ‘selecting’ universities. Some might be close to it and achieve it by the skin of their teeth some years and in some courses, but always face the threat that that could easily become recruiting universities. Most will be recruiting universities. And whilst they don’t have the luxury of choice of candidates in the way the elite ones may, it’s just the reality and a numbers game that must be payed and adjusted each year in response to more up-to-date data from the year before that helps them play the game of making sure they are full or as close to it come a few days after A Level results.
One problem is that yr12 students are attending Open Days now, websites have been updated with standard offers for 2025 entry etc and unis have already had to make decisions about that year of entry. But of course the results for 2024 are not yet known. The patterns of grades being above or below what they have banked upon and exactly how many firms, insurances and others will arrive aren’t yet known. If this stuff was known, some would want to adjust their offering profile for 2025. And I guess that’s a reason to why some give a range which is quite vague, to allow them a chance to respond to the results of this year once they are known. Understandable, but doesn’t really help applicants, especially those who are marginal and aspirational candidates for certain courses.