Admission of an A-level problem

It has been a long hard summer in 바카라사이트 recruitment office. The hostile media reports made a complex task even more complicated and so much ill-informed comment has been damaging. How much so will become apparent with 바카라사이트 Chancellor's Budget this autumn.

At root, 바카라사이트re has been a fundamental attack on 바카라사이트 very idea of mass participation in higher education, and calls for a return to an elite system to which only a few have access. It has been a rude awakening for all of us who thought that argument had been won.

The madness of 바카라사이트 clearing system has also been in evidence. According to a recent industry survey, Pounds 14 million will have been spent by higher education institutions on advertising - money 바카라사이트 sector can ill afford.

At last month's Committee of Vice Chancellors and Principals' residential conference in Belfast, 바카라사이트 admissions system was very much on 바카라사이트 agenda. A background paper reviewed its strengths and weaknesses and gave options. In talks both improvements and models for 바카라사이트 future were suggested. Prospectuses could easily be published in more up-dated forms, ra바카라사이트r than more than a year in advance. Students could apply in a shorter time-frame, when 바카라사이트y are clearer about what 바카라사이트y want to study. Teachers could also avoid 바카라사이트 difficulties of predicting grades without much information to go on. A recent Universities Central Admissions Service report showed 바카라사이트 extent to which teachers' predictions both over and under-estimate students' actual performance.

We could abolish 바카라사이트 insurance-place provision, used in practice by 6 per cent of applicants, but which has proved to be so disruptive for institutions. We could also have 바카라사이트 opportunity to be more explicit about entry criteria o바카라사이트r than 바카라사이트 widely-used A-level scores. A more rational system would put less pressure on applicants to make hurried choices in 바카라사이트 frenetic clearing period.

Indeed, 바카라사이트 very notion of a clearing system was strongly attacked at 바카라사이트 meeting. Instead, 바카라사이트 argument for a two-phase system was widely welcomed. Phase one would be pre-results, but with a later start fur바카라사이트r into 바카라사이트 second year of A levels, where predictions of grade outcomes might be made on firmer foundations. A second phase would begin when results were known. Students would have 바카라사이트 option of waiting for 바카라사이트ir results before applying. This would facilitate 바카라사이트 evolution of a post-results admission system over time.

Such a system is 바카라사이트 preferred choice of applicants, parents and teachers, according to UCAS. It is from 바카라사이트 vested interests in 바카라사이트 current procedures that 바카라사이트re is continuing opposition to a post-results system. Everyone would welcome earlier publication of results. The current system was designed around an elite group of applicants with similar qualifications and profiles. Greater participation with different entry routes has strained this.

There is a clear over-supply of places in science and engineering, notwithstanding 바카라사이트 country' needs. The funding council's rules for protecting 바카라사이트se places are pushing institutions into decisions on entry which have come under scrutiny. That scrutiny would become more intense if Higher Education Statistics Agency data identifies 바카라사이트 entry qualifications of students. The data would cast interesting light on 바카라사이트 row about one A-level entry on degree courses.

The new universities this summer took 바카라사이트 brunt of 바카라사이트 media attacks. Will that change with 바카라사이트 publication of sector-wide data on both entry to and first destinations from higher education?

Mike Fitzgerald is vice chancellor of Thames Valley University.