Offer higher that published grades

[Pinhoe]

Hi My DS has received an offer for stem subject from Edinburgh of Astar AA. For this subject AAA is standard offer. They are a strong candidate (all 9s/Astar predictions). Does this mean university is not sure about them or that the course is more in demand? It’s good news that they have offered early but I wonder why they make offers above their stated standard level? Anyone else finding this?

Interestingly the admissions trends for a given year are usually established early on in my experience, which should compare to the situation at Edinburgh.

Sometimes one must lower standards at the end but that isn’t nearly as drastic as going into Clearing. E also has a reputation for delaying decisions on a rather large proportion of applications. These may be ones that meet but don’t (much) exceed the stated offer, as a way of addressing this important concern Just a guess, however.

Applicants do need more transparancy. Too many assume that if their predicted grades are equal to the ‘standard entry offer’ that they will get an offer. How can they know exactly which unis are likely to offer to everyone in this position and also with lower predictions, and which in reality will need 2 grades higher to make a standard prediction? Most won’t know this and many schools or colleges won’t know either.

But of course it’s not in the interests of the organisations in a highly competitive market to be transparent. Smoke and mirrors is definitely timely at play by universities. Some need to make themselves look more competitive than they really are, by having higher standard offers advertised than predicted grades they will offer to, or indeed take on results day. Others have so many applicants they won’t be able to offer to many who only have the predicted grades of the standard offer and as in Edinburgh’s case might boost the actual offer requirement. But those unis don’t want to boost the standard offer advertised in case it puts off applicants or is seen as elitist.

Given unis are struggling financially and need to fill their spaces and fill with the best students they can get, a variety of advertising and recruiting and finally accepting/declining come results day will continue to be the norm for each to maximise their outcomes, when they start from different positions of strength and with different challenges. Those who are ‘more in the know’ about different unis and have a sense of their patterns of offering over recent years are in much stronger positions to choose wisely. But this is of course wrong, as the lack of transparancy and information available to all benefits certain types of students who are more likely to have this information. But what is the solution, when unis have capped fees and need to compete to fill? An entirely transparent market which revealed more clearly just what low grades many unis accept on results day, would drive more unis into decline and reduce their popularity. It would reveal the inequalities in uni entry even more. Perhaps in reality we need some unis to close….but what about the equality impacts? Ultimately the problem is that university education is not a service that should be provided purely by free market forces, but free market forces are at play in various forms within the market, and that’s probably unavoidable and actually delivers some benefits too. No obvious solution as far as I can see, but I think that over time, some unis will close and uni will increasingly be the preserve of those from more privileged backgrounds and less people will go to uni, plus the move towards attending local unis and shorter courses will become more the thing. The current system of 3 year courses and living away is not affordable for the majority or even necessary to supply our workforce.

I think this is true. The reality is that over 80% of applicants have predictions which are inaccurate and most of them are too generous. This is increasingly the case as you look at lower offers. Unis know this. They know X% typically miss their offer. Some unis know they will have to take them anyway in order to fill. Those in a stronger position, want to make sure their offers go to those least likely to miss their offer…..and that will naturally be those with predicted grades which exceed the standard offer by as much as possible. There is quite simply more room for a bit of slippage from the 3 x A star predictee than the person with AAA prediction, when the standard offer is AAA.
I suppose the dream is for a uni to fill with people who far exceed the standard offer. It’s what Oxford can do with their standard offer of AAA for humanities subject….in reality few of those successful in getting in ‘only’ have this….there will always be some who were predicted far more but get AAA after the rigorous entrance procedure and of course if they meet their offer they are in…but they will be few and far between.
In other places of course, the reverse is true and the majority on a course have below the standard offer and very many are admitted through Clearing. It really is about filling the course with whoever will come and pay up.

@StressedLP1 no I don’t think DS will query - from reading this thread it seems to be something that happens not infrequently and is arguably covered in their admissions policy. I agree this should be clearer and a range would be more transparent. It’s possibly going to be DS firm so we’ll have to keep fingers crossed. Second time around for our family - DD also had AstarAA offer, which was by no means certain due to exam nerves. I wish they would review whole process so that offers are made post results, but that’s another thread. Current system piled on the stress and uncertainty in an already very stressful year for our children.

My DS said that everyone he knows on his course were also given the higher offer so it's not like they are picking people out, everyone is being given the higher than advertised offer.

@Cx5 Well they are in a way picking people out if students predicted AAA don’t get an offer because they don’t have the Astar prediction they didn’t think they needed. I do see the caveats but all unis should be transparent about what grades they really want. Some aren’t terribly transparent about what A levels are the best bet either when it comes down to maximizing chances.

@TizerorFizz absolutely agree, definitely need to be more transparent. It does make you wonder what happens to those who have the predicted advertised grades, are they rejected or also given the higher offer. In my son's case he was applying for direct entry so we assume that he may have been offered first year entry if he didn't meet the requirements but still this should be clear when applying for the course.

@Cx5 Yes. It’s one for admissions officers to know and most others to guess at.

Oh I've seen what happens to the students with the listed AAA offers, they are rejected. Twice now I've seen friends of my DCs not be offered any places at all because they applied with Standard Offer grades for competitive courses at top universities, and in both cases they got in at Clearing.

One even managed to score a medical school place in Clearing because he bettered his predicted grades, while somewhere an offer holder didn't (which must have been heartbreaking). It's a bonkers system.

It’s a brutal process isn’t it.

I didn’t mention it earlier but my ds experienced the same from Edinburgh last week - predicted 3Astars and an A, STEM course with AAA listed, but his offer was Astar A A.

seems not uncommon but did make me think, oh, seems like they don’t really want him. He’s not sure what he’ll do yet as waiting to hear back from UCL.

@RayonSunrise As said above, I assume most DC have applied to a range of unis but it’s difficult to know which ones to leave out if there’s no transparency. Clearing is a gamble for accommodation at some unis. I do wonder if courses could start later in the year (my DD started on 10 October in 2010)? Her uni is now three weeks earlier. They should finish later. Just move the academic year to apply with grades.i can hear the howls but the current system is known to some and guesswork for others.

That’s really awful for the applicant who shouldn’t be in the position where they’ve ended up wasting a UCAS choice.

They deny it but loads anecdotal evidence that higher standards required for domestic Scottish candidates as fees paid lower
than can charge for English/ Overseas students.

I wish they would review the whole process

To be fair @Pinhoe a review was published just a few years ago in 2021. https://www.ucas.com/file/440906/download?token=xYT93dPW Though you are right in that it’s a topic for a whole other thread.

The Scottish government sets the number of places for Scottish applicants (because they are paying for them). There is a financial penalty for recruiting too many Scottish students which universities are keen to avoid, obviously. So the process is I described above, they calculate how many offers they can make to Scottish applicants, look at the profile of the applications that have been received and decide where to draw the line for minimum qualifications for that cycle. Sometimes Edinburgh operates a “gathered field”; which means they don’t make any offers until all the applications are in. The university decides how many “rest of the UK” and international students it wants, but it doesn’t control the Scottish student numbers. There is an argument that having no fees for home students in Scotland makes it more difficult for them to get places, compared to other classes of students.

@boys3 thats interesting and makes a lot of sense - I wonder if the post qualification part will ever be implemented. This report raises valid (but not insurmountable) challenges with that option that I hadn’t thought of.

When I was a Russell Group admissions tutor I participated in discussions on a post qualification applications process. Admissions tutors tend to like the idea because it is so much more transparent and fair.

But it requires the co-operation of all parties: examiners, examinees, markers, academics, teachers and families. People tend to like the idea until they realise that they will need to be part of the change. It is rather depressing.

I know someone who was offered 4Astars for a course advertised as AstarAA. a couple of years ago. They made it, but it was very stressful. Also Edinburgh.

Did he also apply to Oxbridge, OP?
An offer of Astar A A aligns Edinburgh more closely with Oxbridge for Stem subjects, therefore might persuade a good candidate to pick Edinburgh over Oxbridge. Universities often allow you in even if you drop a grade - they do what they can to try and attract the best candidates.

Yes Oxford interview coming up. Edinburgh probably next choice. We’ll see after outcome of Oxford application and offer holders visits.

They really don’t at the Edinburgh/Oxbridge level. Have only heard of contextual candidates coming in with sub offer grades at that level of university.

@WombatChocolate ’s post of 10.30 yesterday contains a great deal of truth. If Edinburgh adhered as closely as practicable to the offer policy they have explained, they have done a better job than most with transparency. But that is a highly relative statement. Their policy should be a headline, as should tiered admissions policies.

The universities that do this have competitive admissions. The ones more likely to be in trouble and to obscure the grades they will actually take need to work much harder to recruit. UCAS or the CUG will tell applicants the achieved grades of recent cohorts, but one must know how to interpret them.

@WombatChocolate is correct that many universities are not interested in transparency. Edinburgh should be, IMO. Their stated policy is fine and has some good points, helping to promote equity within the sector. Applicants and their families need to understand it better in order to appreciate this, and for that to happen E should publicise it better

@poetryandwine I agree, Edinburgh's policy is fair, but not particularly well communicated. They were clear about it at the open day DD attended, but if she had not been to the open day we would not have been aware of how competitive her course is (25% offer rate for RUK students) and the likelihood that she would need grade predictions exceeding the published minimum to receive an offer.

The other area in which Edinburgh could improve their communication is over 2nd year entry. The website for DD's course just says that the standard minimum offer must be exceeded but again, from open day conversations with staff and students it was clear that there were very limited spaces, entry was competitive and the grades listed on the website would not in practice be sufficient for a 2nd year place. There is also nothing on the website about the pros and cons of 2nd year entry - after talking it through DD decided against applying. Again, without the open day, she would have been very short of the information she needed to take that decision.

Y2 entry for RUK is a very interesting point, @PumpkinKnitter . TBH aside from the financial aspect I am not sure of the pros and cons myself.

Do you and other MumsNetters see any disadvantages to Y2 entry even if you qualify? TIA

@poetryandwine Only observations with no evidence: my questions might be about friendships within the teaching group and whether y2 entry students hit the ground running? Do they get support that they could access in y1? I know when DD was at uni, some students accessed essay writing skills workshops. Would these be available for y2 students? Overall it’s more about settling in when others are already settled into friendship groups and working routines. Not insurmountable though.