Another year, another A-level results day, another set of the usual stories in the media. This one caught my eye, though, about Labour’s plans to change the university application process timeline, removing the need for predicted grades.
A-level results: a minority of students achieve predicted marks, so yes the system should be reformed
It’s generally accepted that going to university plays a significant part in shaping lives, and the skills gained there help to sustain a thriving society. So it seems odd that at the heart of this process is guesswork – with the bulk of university offers based on predicted grades.
Indeed, Labour has announced plans to replace offers based on predicted grades with a new “fairer” system of post-qualification admissions. Under Labour’s plans, students would apply for their higher education place after receiving their results instead of the current system of predicted grades – which the party says penalises disadvantaged students and those from minority backgrounds.
My first reaction with these kinds of plans is to almost faint at the thought of the upheaval everyone would have to go through. Hundreds of universities, thousands of schools, millions of students. Would there have to be a pilot implementation with just a few schools? Or just a few universities? How would that work? Would that create a two-tier system? Could it really all be turned around in such a short timeframe? What if it all went wrong?
But then, if other countries can do it, why can’t we?
All of which makes Labour’s most recent suggestions of reforming the system a step in the right direction. Indeed, a 2019 report from The University and College Union revealed that post-qualification admissions were the global norm, and that countries the UK often benchmarks against – such as Germany, Singapore, Australia and the US – all use this system.
The OECD’s top five countries with the highest performing graduates also use post-qualification admissions – so it’s possible that students in those countries are being better matched to institutions and thriving accordingly.
University application processes are in full swing, but here is some reputationally damaging news from Lancaster University.
Lancaster University hit by cyber attack, hundreds of students’ personal data stolen
The full scale of the cyber attack was revealed yesterday (July 22), when university chiefs confirmed that hackers had breached IT systems and accessed student records. […] It said it regretted that the breach has led to fraudulent invoices being sent to some undergraduate applicants demanding large sums of money.
Two days later, and the police have arrested someone for it.
Man arrested over UK’s Lancaster University data breach hack allegations
Names, addresses, email addresses and phone numbers were among the categories of data visible to the hackers. Fraudulent invoices were sent to some, the university admitted. With overseas applicants (of which Lancaster had 575 last year from non-EU countries and 375 from other EU countries) paying fees measured in the tens of thousands of pounds per year, the potential for high returns is great.
Our sources added that around half a dozen students had paid these fraudulent invoices. The highest undergraduate fees for overseas (non-EU) students is Lancaster’s Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery (MBChB) course at £31,540.
It’s more than a little embarrassing, as Lancaster University is one of a number of universities offering degrees in cyber security…
Cyber Security MSc – Lancaster University
In addition to the taught modules, you will also work on an individual research project, supervised by two academics from two of the four departments. Through this project, you will obtain an in-depth understanding of the theoretical and practical aspects of cyber security and technology. You will put the skills and knowledge you have developed throughout the year into practice and gain experience of tackling real-world cyber security issues.
Well, there’s a ‘real-world cyber security issue’ for you.
It’s that time of year again.
Top performing Leeds school makes exam blunder leaving pupils clueless on rogue question
Year 11 students at Prince Henry’s Grammar School in Otley were dumbfounded on Monday, May 20, when a question appeared on their GCSE paper in Religious Studies asking about a topic they had not been taught. […]
Headteacher Janet Sheriff confirmed the school has launched an immediate investigation and called on the exam board to apply ‘special consideration’ – although pupils and parents will only find out if the appeal has been successful when they open the envelope containing their results in August.
A few weeks ago, The Guardian ran this story.
Sajid Javid urged to act in immigration scandal ‘bigger than Windrush’
The drive to find and deport potential cheats began during Theresa May’s tenure as home secretary, when she promised to create a “hostile environment” for migrants deemed to be in the country illegally.
Thousands of students who have remained in the UK to fight to clear their reputations have spent the past five years attempting to prove that they are not guilty of cheating, but most have struggled because the Home Office has told them they have no right of appeal in the UK and must leave the country.
But then today we have this.
English test students may have been wrongly accused, says watchdog
About 2,500 students have been forcibly removed from the UK after being accused of cheating in the exam and a further 7,200 left the country after being warned that they faced detention and removal if they stayed. Many have protested their innocence; 12,500 appeals have been heard in UK courts, and so far 3,600 people have won their appeals.
Andrew Fisher goes over the latest UCAS data; things are still far from clear
Consider the case of the applicant who just misses the AAB threshold. Prestigious institutions which have had many of their AABs hijacked by even more prestigious ones (maybe SOAS) and would therefore like to have this person, may not be able to accept such students at Confirmation or in Clearing, because they will be constrained by the SNC; so there may well be a population of applicants too proud to accept the institutions able to accept them. Even students well short of AAB may not be willing to go to certain institutions in Clearing. Once London Metropolitan is full at £6k or less, will applicants be willing to pay £9k to go to UEL or will they decide that at that price it is better to miss out on HE? We don’t know.
Read the rest and check out the charts. As he says, “the proof of the pudding will be in the Clearing.”