Southampton publishes Clearing grade requirements

[HPFA]

I think this is the first time I've seen an RG Uni publishing Clearing grade requirements before Results Day.

It's not for all courses but a lot of popular subjects nonetheless

https://www.southampton.ac.uk/clearing/course-vacancies?subject=All+Subjects&filter=&studentType=uk&availableOnly=true

Not sure what it means for those students holding offers at Southampton - does it indicate how far they can drop grades and still get in?

Wow that is ridiculously low for Keele! They are asking for 64 points for the course my DS wants to do. I applied to Keele 35 years ago and had to get all B's in old money (didnt go in the end and regretted it as its a beautiful campus -or was when I was 17!)

Keele is very low. I’m on wiwikau (uni parents facebook group) and never hear it mentioned. I’d assumed it had amalgamated or changed name.
Law is 64 points. I didn’t see anything that low for none foundation courses last year.

Keele ranks # 68 on the Complete University Guide. It's always been a bit of an outcast.

And another thing....

If you check on What Uni and CUG Keele is still advertising all these courses at the original grades.

So if you're a post A Level student with BCC who wants to do Geography but isn't "in the know" you might quite understandably trust these two sites and think that Keele is within reach for you and Southampton totally out of it.

The system as a whole just doesn't give you the information you need to make an informed decision - and that's not good enough. Almost 69,000 students used Clearing last year and they deserve better than this.

I agree.

It makes the concept of an ‘insurance’ offer seem utterly redundant - especially when so many unis make it clear you cannot apply for accommodation if you only accept a place as insurance.

I can see the logic in lower tariff unis making conditional unconditional offers given the difficulty they will have filling places in years to come. 2006/7 was a bulge year after all. It doesn’t get better from now on!

I really do think clearing is a blow to any attempts to widen participation through contextual offers etc.
It’s not well known you can trade up in clearing, it’s not just for missed grades.
But that takes knowledge, usually mum/dad knowing and assisting. Plus it helps if money not a factor so only getting stuck with expensive accommodation or needing to use private halls not an issue. DC’s friend did very well clearing last year due to switched on parents acting quickly - she’s at a well regarded RG with CCD.
I’d personally prefer an apply with grades in hand scenario. It just seems like so much wasted time and effort goes into whole process. If sector is so stretched then streamlining entry makes sense.

A post qualification admissions process would widen access. About 80% of PGs are wrong, and the underpredicted ones - affecting offers - come very disproportionately from schools where pupils have contextual flags.

At the other extreme, the most competitive universities flex offers only for very good reason. A PQA process saves huge effort and stress all around. The problem is that every stakeholder must revise their part in the process. Everyone likes the idea until they realise the personal effort that would be required.

I find this so confusing. It seems the top Universities like Oxford, Cambridge, Durham, Imperial, UCL and LSE require excellent grades including GCSEs but most other Unis then end up in clearing and take candidates with Bs. So a candidate with 3 As, for instance, won't be accepted to the top Unis and ends up at a Uni with other candidates with much lower grades. Or is this not the case? Which Unis are just below the top ones listed? Bristol and Warwick? Do they tend to go into clearing? DD is looking at doing a history degree

I think there is possibly another way. If the A levels themselves were restructured perhaps so that actual grades could be attained half way through the 2 yr process as well as at the end of the process.

I only suggest this as someone whose children benefitted from being in a US school and taking AP exams which typically follow after 1 year of studying the class. So my DD had essentially got 3 x A or A star grades and was able to apply to Uk universities with these in hand while taking a few more subjects in her final year. Some places were going to expect more A/A grades while most were happy with what she had achieved. If A levels were changed to mirror this, it would make the process less onerous and take a lot of pressure off many students.

I love it. All admissions tutors love(d) it. We used to have it in the form of AS or A1 exams. The previous Conservative government disbanded them.

I mean, some years ago

I'd probably think of places like Manchester, York and Sheffield as being the second tier below your Oxbridge, Durham and Imperial. But everyone would have their own list. Where does Bath fit?

Bath doesn't do BA History so not sure. But I assume Manchester, York, Bristol Warwick and Sheffield all end up taking students with lower requirements - although will have a look at cleaning in August (or before) and see...

I believe that was a Gove thing, purely brcause it wasnt the way he did A-Levels.

In STEM I would rank Oxbridge, Warwick, Imperial - COWI - at the top and Bath in the next tier. Durham there only partially.

Of course this is in the large. Particular disciplines will vary.

Do you agree with the question about how the 'second tier' Universities are likely to take those with lower grades through clearing so that candidates with 3 As who don't get into COWI/Durham end up mixing with students with lower grades than AAA? Or is the next 'tier' (Bristol, Warwick, York, Sheffield, Manchester etc) likely to have mostly AAA type students? Just seems to me (might very well be incorrect) that those working pretty hard getting 3 As would want to get into a University with these grades and not then find out that they could still have got in with lower grades and that most others have lower grades. It's almost as if you either work super hard and get the 3 A stars or similar, or otherwise it's fine to have a mix of As and Bs and no real advantage or aiming for 3 As

@HPFA Thanks for sharing this. My DC put Southampton as his reserve, even though the offer grades were the same as his first choice (Bristol) because they hinted at the open day that they usually accept lower. This confirms it. It's very reassuring!

Well presumably 3 As still a) looks good on your cv for interns and placements etc b) stands you in better stead for a first.
i am not sure i buy the utter awfulness of a 3A candidate having to be in proximity to someone who got 3Bs. For one thing that’s how studies work at A level - at least in state schools where kids can progress to their chosen subjects with 5s and 6s - so kids with 9s will also be rubbing along with those less gifted than them and it seems to work ok.
secondly 3 Bs is still by any measure a good result and people who achieve those also have something to contribute? I understand the idea that with maths the difference between a very high achiever and a middling achiever is significant, in other subjects may be not so much.
certainly in the 90s people went to very good universities with 3Bs as a standard offer.

would be interested in seeing how many students trade up into clearing this year and what will the proportion of offer acceptances in clearing be vs overall acceptances. Perhaps it will come a time that post result applications will be the norm, as in the rest of the world (except some Anglophone former British colonies)

This is a great question. I think the best answer may not resonate with DC until after they have experience of university.

With rare exceptions (eg a bereavement or breakup during exam season) better exam results, particularly in core subjects, will prime you for a better university experience. My biggest worry about those admitted with substandard grades concerns their university experience.

I came up under a system where a state exam carried great weight. Top scorers got preferential university admission. The exam was largely a test of intellectual power, and I arrogantly but accurately assumed I would ace it. Therefore I slacked off badly in high school. I took care not to disqualify myself from the top uni tier (assuming top exam performance) but nothing more.

Well, I chose Nerd Tech U and all my classmates seemed to have been studying for 60 hrs/wk all through high school. I struggled until I lucked into a course module thought hellish that totally clicked with my thinking. The lecturer was an influential professor and he both gave me confidence and paved my way.

This turned my life around, although if am honest the professor’s glam, young wife in a related field - we had few women in STEM in my country and almost none were physical role models - was also a factor.

But I digress. The point is that meeting the admissions standards means that you are prepared to meet the challenge, at least in theory. And if not, not. The teaching pedagogy is, or should be, designed for the band of students who meet the admissions standards.

Everyone tries to justify the need for bums on seats as giving others a chance. That’s true. I know that when it’s a question of work habits only a (gratifying) minority adjust. I would think that amongst hard workers even fewer do. Ultimately money is driving these. decisions

I'm really hoping my post didn't suggest that I think it would be awful to mix with people with lower grades than 3 As - that's not at all what I meant!!! More that my DD is working very hard trying to get the 3 As she is predicted and has decided not to work that much in yr 13 (in the cafe she is working in rather than academically) as she wants to stand the best chance of getting the best possible grades. If she knew she could get into the same Universities with a lower grade she would probably enjoy the coming year a lot more, and have more money....

Thats great, I was thinking it would be nice if someone who'd picked Southampton saw it.

Its yet another reason why we should have a system with greater honesty.

His course is an MEng with AStar A A as the headline entry grades. We knew there would probably be leeway at Southampton though. At the open day talk they said offer-holders might still get in if they slipped down a grade or two, or else be offered the BEng with the chance to trade up to MEng after the first year exams. This was the main reason he chose Southampton as his reserve offer, even though the grades were the same as Bristol on paper. His school (a grammar) is pretty switched on about that sort of thing so didn't talk him out of it. Southampton is a popular backup choice for many of their Oxbridge applicants, presumably for the same reason.

The other good thing about Southampton is that reserve offer-holders get the same priority for accommodation as firm offer holders.

It is also a brilliant department and course and could easily have been DS's first choice if the city had been a little more appealing. Bristol had the edge on that.

Gove didn't do A levels! He's Scottish.

The 'UCAS tool' data on most common grades has been of some use in looking at the sort of grades people have on entry. Realise it's flawed. And is only one part of the decision-making. But (slightly) interesting to see that for a particular course Leeds, York and Bristol had higher grades than Birmingham and Durham which in turn were higher than Manchester and Southampton. These didn't exactly reflect differences in the standard offer.