University admissions need complete overhaul

10 April 2003

A detailed blueprint for the complete overhaul of university admissions, including the wholesale shift of the process to the period after A Level results are known, and an ‘ombudsman' role for the newly-announced Office for Fair Access (OFFA), is published today by leading independent schools' associations.

In a joint paper, the Girls' Schools Association (GSA) and Headmasters' and Headmistresses' Conference (HMC), between them representing 450 senior independent schools, set out more than 20 proposals which they believe will restore confidence in the university admissions process by opening it up to external scrutiny.

The GSA/HMC paper sets out six principal objectives, summarised below with the main proposals:

1.   To clarify the roles and responsibilities of Government, OFFA, the Higher Education Funding Council (HEFCE) and the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service (UCAS). The new Office for Fair Access should primarily be concerned with ensuring the consistent application of fair and transparent admission procedures and should have an ombudsman role to hear appeals, once those procedures have been established.

 2. To make admissions procedures more open, transparent and fair, suggesting that

Selection criteria for all courses should be published in full;

Clear ‘audit trails' of each application should be verifiable;

Independent observers from schools and colleges should be used to monitor admissions.

 3.      The Government's aim of widening access to under-represented groups of    students - which the associations support - could be made more effective by:

 

Measuring effectiveness across the whole HE sector, not by individual universities;

 

Targeting funding to encourage regional collaboration between universities, schools and colleges;

 

Making more use of existing school assessments to identify potential in younger children.

 

4.  The difficulties universities face in selecting for popular and over-subscribed courses could be alleviated by

The development of simple, objective assessments of students' attitude, application and wider key skills, to complement their formal qualifications;

Allowing universities to expand popular and successful courses;

‘Blind' admissions - the withholding of applicants' social class, schooling and parental information from those making the selection;

The development of fully professional admissions offices by universities.

5.   The whole system could be made more cost-effective if applications and admissions were all dealt with after A Level results were known. This would mean:

A realignment of the university year;

Later A Level examinations, allowing more teaching and learning time, and more time for marking;

A six month gap for students, allowing opportunities for mentoring, work placements, teaching taster experiences and HE bridging courses;

The continuation of education maintenance allowances for those students entitled to them;

Better pastoral care arrangements in universities to ensure adequate support for students at risk of dropping out.

 6. More research is needed to replace the ‘limited, outdated, inconclusive and contested' evidence which is currently available.

 

In their paper, the associations say: "Historically, reforming governments, independent schools and universities have been trying to do exactly the same thing: to widen access and opportunity, without compromising standards. We believe the measures outlined in this paper, if implemented, would do much to increase public understanding of the admissions process and confidence in the higher education system."