Tag: UCAS

  • Teachers need support to understand what’s needed in the UCAS personal statement

    Teachers need support to understand what’s needed in the UCAS personal statement

    Our recent paper found substantial misalignment between state-school teachers and university admissions staff on what makes a high-quality UCAS personal statement.

    In our study, 409 state school teachers were presented with ten paragraphs from UCAS personal statements and asked to select between two pieces of feedback. One ‘correct’ feedback was provided by an admissions tutor, and the one ‘incorrect’ feedback was supplied by another teacher. These paragraphs and feedback were all real-world examples derived from Steven Jones’ (2016) study, used as part of Causeway Education’s pre-training programme for state school teachers.

    We found:

    • There was significant misalignment between teachers and admissions staff. In only 56.5% of cases did teachers select the ‘correct’ feedback response.
    • There are a number of pervasive myths regarding the UCAS personal statement. Teachers had a dual tendency to:
    1. Advise for the incorporation of personal content that aimed to demonstrate a holistic view of the student rather than course-related competencies; and
    2. Suggest reducing content that demonstrated course-related knowledge and skills.

    To give one example, teachers were presented with the paragraph below and asked to choose between two pieces of feedback: (1) Strong reasons backed up by detailed examples; and (2) Too much detail; doesn’t give a sense of the student as an individual. The first of these is from an admissions tutor and the second from a teacher in Jones’ (2016) work.

    My main reason for wanting to study Japanese is because I enjoy studying complex grammar rules to see how languages come together. This is why I chose to undertake Latin at A-Level as I enjoy translating pieces of complex texts. Analysing writers techniques in presenting ideas and characters is also interesting, in particular how Tacitus in Annals I, presents Tiberius as an unsuitable emperor by often comparing him to his father Augustus, an emperor who was deemed ‘an upholder of moral justice’.

    In 58.4% of cases teachers selected the first ‘correct’ answer, and 41.6% selected the ‘incorrect’ second answer.

    These findings should not be interpreted as a criticism of teachers. In the context of studies finding a considerable lack of transparency on how universities use the UCAS personal statement (Fryer et al., 2024), the burden of responsibility for misalignment falls primarily on universities. Without clear and transparent guidance, this misalignment between teachers and admissions staff is inevitable.

    There is an important opportunity to address this situation, as many universities will currently be in the process of updating their public-facing guidance in response to the upcoming UCAS personal statement reform. The shift to three short questions for the 2025-26 application cycle and the corresponding need to update guidance present universities with an opportunity to address and counter the misalignments noted in our paper.

    To support this goal, our paper contains a table of key implications (Table 5, pp.14-15), which can be downloaded directly from this link.

    We hope this is of practical use to admissions staff in updating and developing guidance on the UCAS personal statement. We contend that this new guidance, alongside transparent explanations of how the personal statement is used in selection decisions, is crucial to enable UCAS’s reform to widen participation and address inequalities.

    This blog is based on a paper ‘Investigating the alignment of teachers and admissions professionals on UCAS personal statements’ by Tom Fryer, Anna Burchfiel, Matt Griffin, Sam Holmes and Steven Jones. Due to its time-sensitive nature, the paper has been published as a preprint, and therefore has not yet been subject to peer-review.    

    The table summarising the implications for public-facing guidance is available for download here.  

    Source link

  • UCAS End of Cycle provider data, 2024

    UCAS End of Cycle provider data, 2024

    Chat to anyone involved in sector admissions and you will hear a similar story.

    And the story appears to be true.

    It is now clear “high tariff” providers have been lowering their entry tariff (often substantially) in order to grow recruitment – meaning students with less-than-stellar grades have been ending up in prestigious institutions, and the kinds of places students like this would more usually attend have been struggling to recruit as a result.

    In other words, the 2024 looks a lot like a lockdown cycle (without the examnishambles and Zoom pub quizzes).

    Any major dude will tell you

    We noted, at a sector level, the rise in the number of offers made by high-tariff providers – it was the highest number on record. There was no parallel rise in A level attainment, which suggests a strategic decision, made early on, to widen access.

    Today’s release of UCAS End of Cycle data for 2024 at provider level illustrates that this picture is a generalisation. Some high-tariff providers have acted in the way described above, others have pursued alternative strategies. And other providers have hit on other ways to drive undergraduate recruitment.

    Starting with my favourite chart, we can think about these individual strategies in more detail. This scatter plot shows the year-on-year change in the number of applications along the horizontal axis and the year-on-year change in acceptances on the vertical. There’s filters for gender, domicile, age group and subject group (at the top level) – and I’ve provided a choice of comparator years if you want to look at changes over a longer term. The size of the dots represents the total recruitment by that provider in 2024, given the parameters we can see.

    [Full screen]

    In essence this illustrates popularity (among applicants) and selectivity. What we can see here for 2024 (defaulting to UK 18 year olds applying to all subjects compared to 2023) is that pretty much the entire Russell group has made significant (c500 or above) increases in recruitment, whether or not they saw a corresponding growth in applications.

    It’s not the full story – the picture for other pre-92 and post-92 providers is more mixed, with some providers able to leverage popularity (or desperation) to find growth.

    My old school

    We can’t look directly at provider behaviour by tariff, but we can examine what qualifications students placed at the provider have – here a key indicator might be an increase in the number of students entering without A levels (a group that tends to have lower tariffs overall).

    [Full screen]

    The trouble is, A level entry rates have also increased – pretty much anyone who wants to and can do A levels is now doing A levels. With the decline in BTEC popularity, and the still uncertain interest in T levels, this is to be expected. All this means most providers have seen an increase or steady state in the number of students entering with A levels (when you include that A level plus project options). In Scotland – and recall we don’t get the complete picture of Scottish applications from UCAS because of a wonderful little thing called intercalation – it’s SQA pretty much all the way.

    Everything you did

    If you are wondering whether a change in age groups placed as undergraduates could also have an impact on recruitment patterns, it looks as if the pattern of low and slowly falling mature recruitment continues for most providers. For larger universities most of the action is around 18 year old home recruitment – and specialist providers that focus on mature students (often via part-time or flexible study) tend to struggle.

    [Full screen]

    The other key factor is domicile – the changes to visa arrangements this time last year had a huge impact on international applications (particularly from countries like India and Nigeria that have become important for lower tariff providers) and coupled with some of the changes described above this has resulted in some providers seeing undergraduate international admissions fall off a cliff.

    [Full screen]

    As always, undergraduate isn’t the full story – we’ve still no reliable way of understanding postgraduate recruitment in the round until we get the HESA data long after the academic year in question has finished. I just hope that regulators with new duties to understand the financial stability of the sector have more of a clue.

    Any world that I’m welcome to

    With some providers stuffed to the seams and beyond with students they wouldn’t usually accept – many with support needs it is unclear whether they are able to meet – it is unclear who exactly benefits from this new state of affairs. The claim we regularly hear is that universities lose money on educating home students, and that these must be cross subsidised by international recruitment.

    The corollary of this is that in times where international student recruitment is restricted you would expect to see the number of home students at providers reliant on this income fall – after all, if you lose money on every home student the more you recruit the more money you lose. Though measures to widen access and participation are important (and indeed, we see welcome evidence of contextual admissions at selective providers in the chart below) the fact of it is that you need to spend money to support students without the cultural capital to succeed.

    [Full screen]

    The rather painful conclusion I reach is that the only way to make this year’s sums add up is a reduction in spend per student – and, thus, most likely, the quality of the student experience among precisely the students who would have been overjoyed to get a place at a famous university. We should keep a close eye on continuation metrics and the national student survey this year.

    Source link