University admissions practices: What is right? What is wrong? How should they change? Steven Schwartz.

University admissions practices: What is right? What is wrong? How should they change?

Steven Schwartz

Margaret Ferguson

Diversity is still a long way away

Milton Friedman

Income-Contingent Loan

No money up-frontNo chance of default (poor credit rating)Only pay if benefit

Income Top-up-fee repayment

£0 to £15,000 Nil

£16,000 £1.73 per week

£20,000 £8.65 per week

£30,000 £25.96 per week

Fair Admissions

There are different interpretations of merit

It can be difficult for applicants to know how they will be assessed or why they were rejected

The information used in assessing applicants may not be reliable or valid

Some courses have high drop out rates

It is difficult for admissions staff to select from a growing pool of highly-qualified applicants (need finer discriminators)

Some applicants face a burden of additional assessment (and cost burden)

There is uneven awareness of qualifications and pathways into higher education (especially vocational)

Most offers depend on predicted grades

The legislation that applies to admissions is complex

Four basic assumptions

1. It is not the task of higher education admissions to compensate for educational or social disadvantage

2. Applicants should be individually assessed and not treated as members of a group or class

3. It is legitimate for higher education institutions to seek the most academically qualified students

4. No external body should make admissions decisions

Principle 1: transparency

Provide the information that applicants need to make informed choices

1. Publish admissions policies, criteria, and processes (including weight given to predictors and non-traditional opportunities to demonstrate potential)

2. Publish actual entry qualifications, drop-out rates, and employment outcomes (Cook, TQI)

3. Provide feedback on request to unsuccessful candidates

Three aspects of transparency

Principle 2 : reliability and validity

Monitor and evaluate

Principle 3: selecting for merit, potential and diversity

Ability to complete the course is essential May use factors other than A-level results: other examinations,

interviews, work experience (UCAS form re-design) May consider the educational effects of diversity May not bias the system toward or against state school or

private school applicants

Principle 3: (continued)

Admissions criteria should not include factors irrelevant to the assessment of merit, for example institutions should not give preference to the relatives of graduates or benefactors

Institutions should have the discretion to vary the weight they give to examination results and other indicators of potential and therefore to vary the offer

Principle 4:minimise barriers

Resources and advice available, disability, vocational qualifications

Principle 5:processes and professionalism

Clear lines of responsibility and accountability, sufficient resources, training centralise

Post-Qualification Applications

Present system violates recommendations Not reliable (half wrong) Not valid Not transparent Misses students who are able to complete course

Thus, the current system is unfair Ask Secretary of State to implement PQA as

soon as possible

Wider recommendations

Electronic applications and new forms One examination (included in diploma) Review compacts and access courses Streamline Criminal Record Bureau checks, health

exams and other processes by having central repository

Part-time applicants treated the same as full-time Central source of expertise --Muir Russell,

Academy and UCAS

Secretary of State to commission a review after three years