Black Mark on UCAS File Before Clearing?

[CowTown]

Someone mentioned to me that DC shouldn’t put courses they are at risk of not getting an offer for. Their reasoning is that if DC is rejected at this stage, they will have a black mark from that particular uni department on their UCAS file, and will have problems getting through clearing there. Their advice is that if DC is under the required grades, they shouldn’t put the course on their application, because if the course goes into clearing with lower grades (which it historically does), they’ll be able to get in through clearing on results day if they don’t have this black mark on their record. That if they were initially rejected, the uni will say no at the clearing stage.

Is there any truth to this?

Yes that’s a very common scenario for lots of unis usually those outside top 10 and not the very competitive courses.
Best thing is to watch clearing a year or two before to get an idea.

It’s because some schools will predict higher especially if parents leaning on them. Some schools are much more conservative.

My understanding is that the fairly rapid decline in overseas applicants (for a variety of reasons) has meant highest tariff universities have made offers to high grade applicants in the main cycle who would not normally have received an offer (ie no grade dilution necessary to backfill); this has had a knock-on effect at the next tariff level and the ones after that, where grade dilution has been necessary to backfill.

Now it might be that minimum offers in this and the next cycle might be adjusted down to reflect the new reality; but it sounds like the adjustments, if any, are taking place slowly (to preserve implied 'quality indicators').

Ultimately it sounds like standards will have to be adjusted downwards in mid-tier universities to accommodate applicants achieving lower grades and/or accept that departments will have to teach to a much wider attainment spectrum. You can already see this in Chemistry departments in some mid-tier universities where MChem streams are maintaining high minimum entry grades but BSc streams are seeing an appreciable decline.

Yes, and there is an obvious socioeconomic component to this. Around 80% of predicted grades are wrong with most too optimistic.

Sadly, the exception is that students from schools in deprived areas tend to be underpredicted, and their parents don’t tend to have sharp elbows. This in addition to everything else they must cope with.

If we are going to continue our status as the outlier country with the pre-qualification offer system, and it looks like we are, we need better alignment between stated admissions standards and achieved offer grades.

Anyone can have a bad year or two in terms of admissions, and I agree with you that our reliance on Overseas admissions income means that we are terribly vulnerable to its sudden failures. And suddenly less vulnerable, possibly, if HMG policy and international perception reverse in the space of a year.

Nevertheless we could require that stated admissions requirements align with some set of achieved grades. I would use either the achieved grades of the previous year’s cohort or the average of some the achieved grades over several of, say, the past five years (or all of them).

I would let each degree programme choose the years to use (at least in the beginning), based on which entry years most reflect current conditions. (Universities will most likely bend this criterion to their perceived short term advantage, so I would do a reality check after five years and possibly make it more uniform then.)

I think this would be quite helpful to applicants.

@CowTown Is a possible pragmatic way through the maze to enter initially just 2-3 choices and submit now and then add the remainder prior to the equal consideration deadline in January? People forget that you do not have to submit all 5 at the outset of the cycle and this would allow the testing with some aspirational unis now and adjust the later choices accordingly.

FWIW my two cents on this idea is that one must be prepared for the possibility that early aspirational applications will disappear into a void.

As I said above, during our lean years we deferred decisions on anyone we thought we might conceivably admit. In some sense no news is good news, because I think most admissions tutors will reject clearly unsuitable applications fairly quickly. But there is no denying that a reasonable percentage of those who only hear late will be rejected.

It is a good idea in that there is always the possibility of quick replies: it will have worked perfectly. Delays offer the hope of good news. But no guarantees.

Yes, thanks. I think I’ll recommend to DC that they apply to a few to see how it pans out before committing to all 5. Fingers crossed answers come through before the deadline. The 6th Form reviews applications first (which I’m sure most do)—does anyone know whether they are only involved at the first stage for reference/PS purposes, or whether they review every tweak DC makes along the way re: adding new courses to the application? The 6th Form has an internal deadline in 8 weeks, and I’d like my DC to have the opportunity to make additions up until the actual UCAS deadline in Jan.

Yes it’s a massive barrier to widening participation.
A couple of years ago I was on wiwikau parents forum and a few people posted how marvellous it was Liverpool John Moores had changed their dc’s law offers to unconditional a day or two before A level results - mums thought they really wanted their yp. In reality Uni of Liverpool had just put law in clearing at ABB for home students and LJM was trying to stop kids trading up. But any suggestions to hang fire for results are met with accusations of snobbery, RG bias etc.
Nottingham seems to trade on its reputation for clearing. People in the parents age bracket view Nottingham as a decent solid choice. 18 year old is crying with BBB, mum looks at clearing - quick get on phone to them they are decent.
Plus the whole trading up in clearing requires an understanding that not all unis are equal and often a parent with deep pockets able to take chances on accommodation through clearing.
I can understand why teachers don’t touch it with a barge pole. Girl with BBB, teacher why don’t you consider Lancaster for Law in clearing not ULAN (Formerly Preston poly). Mum complains teacher has said ULAN is rubbish, cost me money as she’s already reserved her en-suite accommodation, it’s the same course all universities are the same etc.

tbf @Moreholidaysthanjudithchalmers Nottingham uni is having its own specific problems which have caused a drop in applications over the last few years – and thus surprising courses there on offer for low grades in clearing.

I agree in general though it is a bit of a minefield. I know better now how to make a way through it – handy as both my uni DC have now graduated haha.

I posted law clearing grades on here in summer.
So if you are applying for law M100 for 27 entry Leicester say typical offer AAB, Southampton says typical offer AAA and Lancaster want AAB.
But armed with clearing info all 3 have been in clearing last 3 years way below this - 2026 was the lowest grades I’ve seen but before that it was BBB.
So if I had a DC predicted BBB I’d definitely be encouraging them to apply and fancying their chances of an offer. But I know that from being a clued up mum.
DC with no help predicted BBB will apply for much lower ranked post 92 unis as they don’t know the system.

total bollocks. Hth

No once submitted to UCAS the addition of choices is solely in the hands of the applicant and not the school.

❤️😂

Well no, they don't often pull it out of the bag in my subject because we are quite good at predicting in maths.

However we are good at predicting what they'll actually get. What we predict for UCAS is normally optimistic. The reason that we predict higher is because we know that once you have a foot in the door at a university and get an offer with your high predicted grades, come results day if you miss your offer there's still a reasonable chance they'll accept you. If we predict what we think they'll actually get, they don't get the offer and don't get the foot in the door and end up somewhere else.

So when people talk about putting down an aspirational choice - the ones that match their predicted grades are already aspirational. Now the suggestion is that they should go for even higher than that because they still might get an offer even if they don't meet the stated entry requirements, a foot in the door, and an acceptance for far lower on results day.

The whole system isn't fit for purpose is it? And how the hell are parents and students supposed to know how to play it?

It's all a game

DD observed that people had to be predicted Astar Astar Astar just be offered Astar AA at some universities

She got her predicted grades of AstarAA for a course needing AAB and is now a bit surprised that 'lots' seem to be at uni with much lower grades than she got.

She's still happy with her choice but it is a bit confusing for these poor kids!

She did have an offer for AAA at Leeds that didn't seem to offer much in clearing but decided not to go for it. I hope she didn't have imposter syndrome and think she wasn't 'clever enough' because, in the end, she is!

I’d much prefer to move to a system of applying grades in hand.
The problem with predicted grades is lots of yp and parents think those are what will actually achieve.
In reality lots of schools predict on a good day with wind behind them/best case scenario
So BBB student is predicted AAB to get offers. Actually gets BBB and uni still takes them. They feel a bit crappy, parents think something gone wrong but in reality they have done well. Can also cause imposter syndrome thoughts.

Thanks. This is really helpful. My DC took Y12 mocks from previous papers, and the grade they achieved was what the school said that their PGs will be. They have recently taken a set of Y13 mocks, and once marked, if their grade improves, the PG on their UCAS will change to what they achieved on these recent mocks. Is it safe to assume that because the PGs are based on actual mock results, the grades are realistic?

You may well be good at predicting, and tbf maths maybe an easier subject to predict. But remember teacher assessed grades in Covid - the fact that they were significantly higher on average must tell you that predictions are not all that accurate at cohort level.

No criticism btw, just a fact that I think what, 20% of predictions end up being accurate. So unis and applicants need to look more widely than just at whether predicted = ”standard offer.

@titchyYes but Economics, maths and quite a few others at elite unis won’t be in clearing. If you are talking about some less favoured courses, then yes, they will be available but clearing can still bring accommodation angst.

Also 3 aspirational ? Where? Cambridge, Imperial and St Andrews? Or similar. Or Oxford Brookes, Sheffield Hallam or Portsmouth? Nothing against the latter 3, but they are not elite and it’s an entirely different scenario to look at them.

We are good at predicting what the students will get. That's not what we send to UCAS!

Teacher assessed grades in covid weren't accurate because they were basically 'what is the highest grade we think we can get away with for this kid?' And then some schools added some more on top of that. Which is pretty much the same as UCAS predictions tbh.

@noblegiraffe at our school, teachers are not optimistic even though the mocks were done very early on in year 12

I agree with you that predicted grades are just to get a foot in the door, so that on results day, if the actual grades are lower, the university will often still confirm the place.

I think this opaque stance is very much the domain of the mid tier universities as OP says. The top ones tend to have high entry grades and the average cohort meets or exceeds those grades.

The mid tier also have reasonably high entry grades, for example AAA but the average grades of accepted students can be BCC with the very highest grades held being AAB ie not even the best student has achieved the book grade!!

Why don’t mid tier just have offers of BBB ? As a PP pointed out, no one is fooled by this pretence of grandeur but it makes for a real headache when applying

I've been reading this thread with interest, although I no longer have skin in the game (my DC are past the application days, and I've recently retired as a teacher). The predicted grade/uni dance (or poker game?) is a very odd one and I have long thought that Post-Qualification Application is the only sensible thing to do.

On the point of predicting grades from using mock grades based on past papers, I have some mixed feelings. In my time I taught a science subject, and an essay subject. In my experience, STEM predicted grades are likely to be far more accurate than essay ones. In part that's because there is a subjective element to marking essays, whatever the exam boards say, but also a scientist has been doing science questions for years and years and is unlikely to hugely change ability level. By contrast, A-level style essays are so unlike GCSEs that it's essentially starting from scratch, and a lot of students "click" somewhere in Year 13 and settle into a higher grade. Students often, but not always, improve their grade performance over the course of Y13. Again, all just my experience, and I'm not sure there are useful statistics to back this up (at least, not since AS-level disappeared!)

So you can see why unis offer regardless of predicted then! At the end of the day, the kid still has to get our minimum grades - even if those grades end up lower than on our website.

We know it tends to be private schools that over-egg predicted grades, so reliance on them as a first sift means we disadvantage state kids.

We rely heavily on the Maths grade in my subject. I agree it should be relatively straightforward to predict, but we see a lot of optimism. I don’t know whether the same teachers are more careful with applicants for Maths degrees but I am not impressed.

Your reasoning is of course sensible and strategic, even if the only reason it works is that PGs, ‘entry requirements’ and real world entry requirements are badly misaligned. However the scenario that surprises you seems to me nothing but the logical next step. You’re right, the system isn’t fit for purpose.

The Sutton Trust surveyed the OECD countries about their university admissions policies, and 32 responded. Allowing that Canada and the US use de facto post qualification applications, 20 countries use post qualification offers,11 use post qualification applications and only the UK uses pre-qualification offers. I think that is very suggestive.

@noblegiraffe , where do you as a teacher, who doesn’t think the current system is fit for purpose, stand on this question? Bearing in mind that although the main changes will be borne by universities, any changes will very likely require revision to the A level and examination calendar.