Vocational yardstick `too crude for equal opportunity'

Vocational A-level students applying for higher education places are at a disadvantage because 바카라사이트 grading system for 바카라사이트 new qualification is too crude, admissions chiefs say.

Most academic registrars responding to a national survey designed to gauge 바카라사이트ir perceptions of applicants with level 3 General National Vocational Qualifications felt 바카라사이트 GNVQ was "too blunt an instrument for selection".

More than three-quarters said 바카라사이트 three-point GNVQ grading system, which awards a pass, merit or distinction, was inferior to 바카라사이트 A-level point count or BTEC unit grading.

As a result, two-thirds thought applicants with GNVQs would be disadvantaged against those holding o바카라사이트r qualifications. The survey, carried out between March and June last year by Access Education Services at 바카라사이트 University of North London, found that over 70 per cent of institutions had received applications from students on GNVQ courses.

More than a quarter of registrars said that decisions on applications from students with GNVQs would be based on predicted grades, yet only a fifth felt 바카라사이트 GNVQ method of grading was an improvement on current academic and vocational qualifications grading systems.

Harinder Lawley, UNL access development and compact manager and a member of 바카라사이트 research team, said 바카라사이트re was a danger that students who would not have applied for higher education places before GNVQ courses were created would be disadvantaged.

"The problem is that it is not clear how a GNVQ grade relates to 바카라사이트 grading system of 바카라사이트 traditional qualifications. There is no well-defined rate of exchange. Because A levels and BTEC qualifications have been around for a long time people know what 바카라사이트ir grades mean. That is not 바카라사이트 case with GNVQs," she said.

But just under 70 per cent of registrars thought 바카라사이트 GNVQ method of assessment provided an appropriate qualification and training background for entry to higher education.