Home » National News

Criticism of admissions process

10 May 2009

Last month, Durham University was publically linked to growing concerns over how UK universities should distinguish between high performing applicants.

On 5th April, the Sunday Times published a letter from a parent whose son had been rejected by the University to study History and Russian, despite achieving four ‘A’s at A Level and holding ten ‘A’s or ‘A*s’ at GCSE.

After asking for the decision to be reconsidered, the applicant was told that, given the intense competition for places, the University had taken into account the “educational context in which previous qualifications had been achieved” and applied a “mathematical formula” to reach its decision.

The University informed the applicant that the formula was applied to GCSE results to “recognise candidates who had performed very well despite attending schools where average performance was weak”.

The letter received attention from Chris Woodhead, former chief inspector of schools and now columnist for the Sunday Times’ education feature ‘Answer the Question’.

His response echoed the parent’s concerns of a system that had the potential to work against those who had attended fee-paying schools. “Exactly how it works is not clear to me. Admissions tutors should exercise discretion rather than blindly apply a formula”.

Vice-chancellor Chris Higgins was quick to clarify the University’s position in his bulletin to staff and students. Defending the admissions process, he highlighted the difficulties faced by academic selectors in distinguishing between candidates achieving three ‘A’s or above at A Level. “The University is committed to recruiting high quality students by identifying merit and potential, regardless of background. We do not have quotas or reduce A Level grades for offers to students because of their school type or socio-economic circumstances”.

In June 2008, universities were told that they could adopt controversial admissions procedures to make lower offers to pupils from struggling state schools because they show greater potential than applicants that have been intensively tutored at private schools.

However, last year’s revised Undergraduate Admissions Policy saw no change in the University’s procedures for attracting state-educated applicants. Outreach activities, including a generous bursary scheme to attract students from lower income backgrounds, remain the favoured approach.

It would appear that despite considerable pressure, Durham University admissions tutors  remain opposed to the use of social engineering to encourage state school applicants.

Related posts:

  1. Unravelling the mystery behind university admissions…
  2. Durham ‘Incision’ expected to revolutionise medical training
  3. In defense of the Exec – Cuth’s JCR stands up to criticism
  4. University earmarked as city academy sponsor
  • Tom Fletcher

    I cannot understand why people think this is unreasonable. A degree takes an awful lot of work; surely the University is inevitably going to be more desirous of a student who has had to work so much harder, often because of his social circumstances, to get where he is than of a student who has been fortunate enough to have all the necessary support around him. There are so many students now coming out with high A-Level grades (a big problem with the system!) that Universities are at a loss as to how to determine which are the best ones!

    Whether we like it or not, the Higher Education sector in this country runs on the basis of University’s choosing whom they want. Just because you have 4 A’s at A-Level and 10 A’s at GCSE, it doesn’t mean you have a God-given right to go to the University of your choice. If a student is turned away, it is very disappointing for that student. I’m sure many Durham students can sympathise with this, given the large number of people who come here off the back of having been rejected from Oxbridge!

    I’m sure that with such high grades this prospective student will have acceptances from many other universities. I’m sure he’ll go on to have a successful academic career. Unfortunately it won’t be at Durham, because somebody whom the University felt would be more suitable for a Durham education has beaten him to it. C’est la vie.

    • rachel

      i think you’re missing the point here. i agree that getting top grades does not mean you’re entitled to go to the university of your choice, and that a student from a less priveledged background who, despite this, has performed exceptionally well in their exams may indeed be a better candidate. I think the point here is, however, that the with the use of this mathematical formula, students from high performing, usually fee-paying schools are being negatively descriminated against. Just because someone has attented a better performing school does not mean that they have worked less hard, or more importantly have less potential, than those from under-performing schools. The boy in question has top marks in his exams; if this is not good enough, how is he meant to show that has more potential than another? Surely the admissions tutors can use the details provided in personal statments and references to make an informed judgement based on factors such as the dedication the applicant has shown to extra cirricular activities, to give an indication of the level of dedication the applicant will show to their studies. The key point however, is that just because an applicant has gone to a highly performing school does not mean that they lack the skills, dedication or capabilities that the university looks for in a potential student. In getting the grades required to study at durham, a student from a poorer performing school may indeed have shown that they deserve a place, but if this formula is applied, students from higher performing schools are not given a chance to prove that they deserve one too. Surely, in order for the fairest possible outcome, a decision regarding the outcome of an application should be made on the basis of exam results, references and information provided in the personal statement only, with credit for hard work despite the odds given where it is due, rather than a formula which automatically decriminates against those from more priviledged background.

      • Tom Fletcher

        Rachel I can totally see your point. However, one thing that I think is crucial here is that we know nothing of the boy’s personal statement or his references for that matter.

        At the end of the day, it is the University’s prerogative who they accept and who they don’t, and more to the point, I would be concerned if there was much interference in that. A University should be able to control its own environment and atmosphere, and a lot of that does come from the fact that there are people here from many different backgrounds.

        If the University genuinely feels that, because of competition for places, the only way in which to make sure there is a good mix of people within the University is to use a mathematical formula, then I have to say it’s a formula I’m in favour of. Unfortunately, some very good students will not be accepted and some of them may be from fee-paying schools. Yet one of the things that Durham has always been renowned for, particularly amongst employers, is the fact that it provides a very good, all-round education with a good mix of students. In a time where, if we’re being frank, A-Levels are getting easier and easier to pass and more and more students are getting straight A’s, the University has to work out how to get the best students whilst retaining a good social mix. I don’t see anything wrong with being mathematical, as long as the University’s standards don’t drop.