Are entry requirements a quality indicator?
I know that there are many different things to consider, that rankings and quality indicators are always somehow subjective, and that there are cultural elements in this... But do you guys really think that higher entry requirement indicate higher university quality?
Here is what I think: having high entry requirements is not an indication of quality, it is just a way to process a first selection among huge numbers of applications... Indeed, even if a school had only the top 10% students - 10% in high school - that would say me nothing about the quality of teaching and research of the university (i.e. two of the most important tasks universities are expected to fulfill). Entry requirements are however often considered a 'prestige indicator' of the university, under the assumption that cutting off all but the brightest - those with the best grades - makes the university reputable... Is this the case? I would instead expect that all but those with real passion and capacity in their field of study would go on in their degrees and achieve high grades for what they do at university. Instead, most consider drop outs a failing, and pre-selection an achievement.
What do you think?
Here is what I think: having high entry requirements is not an indication of quality, it is just a way to process a first selection among huge numbers of applications... Indeed, even if a school had only the top 10% students - 10% in high school - that would say me nothing about the quality of teaching and research of the university (i.e. two of the most important tasks universities are expected to fulfill). Entry requirements are however often considered a 'prestige indicator' of the university, under the assumption that cutting off all but the brightest - those with the best grades - makes the university reputable... Is this the case? I would instead expect that all but those with real passion and capacity in their field of study would go on in their degrees and achieve high grades for what they do at university. Instead, most consider drop outs a failing, and pre-selection an achievement.
What do you think?
Scroll to see replies
I completely agree.
It's been extremely interesting for me, as I'm applying for journalism, a course for which the grade requirements are not the top priority (interviews and the like generally take precedence).
Here, the course requirements are relatively low, and merely a cut off to stop people who wouldn't cope from taking the course. They do not indicate course quality in any way.
Posted from TSR Mobile
It's been extremely interesting for me, as I'm applying for journalism, a course for which the grade requirements are not the top priority (interviews and the like generally take precedence).
Here, the course requirements are relatively low, and merely a cut off to stop people who wouldn't cope from taking the course. They do not indicate course quality in any way.
Posted from TSR Mobile
They often indicate the popularity of the course. If a course if popular, even a mid ranking uni can ask for AAA and be picky because they know many students applying will have AAA. But saying the 'quality of the uni' is a pretty dilly thing to do, the unis overall ranking doesn't make a difference, it's the department/course that matter and its links to industry/whether its accredited that matters.
I understand the 'popularity factor', but I have heard many students claiming that if you want to understand what are the best and most prestigious departments you should just look at the entry requirements... (so not referring to overall rankings, but also to subject-specific ones)...
Interviews are quite an interesting selection method... Unfortunately they cannot be used much, especially for popular courses with hundreds of applicants...
Original post by thewhoviannerd
I completely agree.
It's been extremely interesting for me, as I'm applying for journalism, a course for which the grade requirements are not the top priority (interviews and the like generally take precedence).
Here, the course requirements are relatively low, and merely a cut off to stop people who wouldn't cope from taking the course. They do not indicate course quality in any way.
It's been extremely interesting for me, as I'm applying for journalism, a course for which the grade requirements are not the top priority (interviews and the like generally take precedence).
Here, the course requirements are relatively low, and merely a cut off to stop people who wouldn't cope from taking the course. They do not indicate course quality in any way.
Interviews are quite an interesting selection method... Unfortunately they cannot be used much, especially for popular courses with hundreds of applicants...
Original post by smd4std
agreed with op
retards chose universities based on how hard it is to get in which i think is stupid. high entry requirements are not a quality indicator...
retards chose universities based on how hard it is to get in which i think is stupid. high entry requirements are not a quality indicator...
Not necessarily as all the top end universities have high entry requirements regardless. If you do get relatively good A level results I think you could easily differentiate universities.
Entry requirements in my opinion is a guideline for people choosing the course to see whether or not they could cope. Of course, some entry requirements are ridiculous but it also symbolizes competition.
Original post by yaboy
No City university say they want 3 As for Economics when they accept people with 3 Cs through clearing...
Maybe theres more hope for me when it comes to applying there for A+F!
Original post by tania2396
Maybe theres more hope for me when it comes to applying there for A+F!
Maybe theres more hope for me when it comes to applying there for A+F!
If you are applying to the Cass degree it's different, that's a very well respected business school.
They are not that lenient on requirements but I know a person who got in with AAC, I'm guessing you need the A in maths and then they can be a bit lenient.
Original post by Abdul-Karim
Not necessarily as all the top end universities have high entry requirements regardless. If you do get relatively good A level results I think you could easily differentiate universities.
Entry requirements in my opinion is a guideline for people choosing the course to see whether or not they could cope. Of course, some entry requirements are ridiculous but it also symbolizes competition.
Entry requirements in my opinion is a guideline for people choosing the course to see whether or not they could cope. Of course, some entry requirements are ridiculous but it also symbolizes competition.
you do realise that what you just said is complete crap?
It is a reflection on popularity. I bet there are many A*AA students on every course at all RG unis but some have entry requirements at AAB because they need to fill places.
Plus, entry requirements change throughout the year depending on how many applications a course has.
Classical Civilisation is ABB at Warwick, but AAB at Nottingham; I bet the difference between courses is negligible.
Plus, entry requirements change throughout the year depending on how many applications a course has.
Classical Civilisation is ABB at Warwick, but AAB at Nottingham; I bet the difference between courses is negligible.
Original post by Meat is Murder
Classical Civilisation is ABB at Warwick, but AAB at Nottingham; I bet the difference between courses is negligible.
Classical Civilisation is ABB at Warwick, but AAB at Nottingham; I bet the difference between courses is negligible.
So are the requirements...
Original post by yaboy
If you are applying to the Cass degree it's different, that's a very well respected business school.
They are not that lenient on requirements but I know a person who got in with AAC, I'm guessing you need the A in maths and then they can be a bit lenient.
They are not that lenient on requirements but I know a person who got in with AAC, I'm guessing you need the A in maths and then they can be a bit lenient.
Ah okay, thanks for the info, im predicted ABB with an A in maths, hoping to push myself this summer to achieve an A* fingers crossed!
Ahem AAB is not to fill the places - they wouldn't put AAB as the standard entry requirements for the whole course if it was just to fill the places. If you are applying with A*AA predicted, and all the Unis you have chosen want as standard AAB well then yes you have a pretty good chance of getting in. But there are other factors besides the grades.
I know for History the course at Cardiff and at Leeds is miles and miles apart, almost nothing is the same. It makes it hard then to judge quality when there is such a huge gap between the course content. That's where I think a lot of people miss out - they don't consider what they are actually going to be learning and if the content is more diverse, they only think about how it compares to other places.
I know for History the course at Cardiff and at Leeds is miles and miles apart, almost nothing is the same. It makes it hard then to judge quality when there is such a huge gap between the course content. That's where I think a lot of people miss out - they don't consider what they are actually going to be learning and if the content is more diverse, they only think about how it compares to other places.
I actually think average entry tariffs is the best objective measure of university prestige/ranking available, and if I ever look at tables (rarely do) I ignore the publisher's rankings and sort by tariffs instead.
Original post by ClickItBack
I actually think average entry tariffs is the best objective measure of university prestige/ranking available, and if I ever look at tables (rarely do) I ignore the publisher's rankings and sort by tariffs instead.
Why do you think so? When I look at rankings, I often only look at research... Very different approach, so I am curious.
Original post by polscistudent88
Why do you think so? When I look at rankings, I often only look at research... Very different approach, so I am curious.
Research is not a bad criterion either, but I don't think it tells you much about the quality of the undergraduate programmes.
My rationale for entry tariffs is simple. When selecting between universities to apply to, and then later deciding which of their offers to go to, students are essentially casting a vote for which they think is the best university. Assuming that students are fairly rational (also that universities offer roughly the same spread of courses), you should then have that students on average end up going to the best programme for which their qualifications are sufficient. This even allows for the definition of 'best' to be determined by the market - i.e. students themselves. It may be the case that 50% go on prestige, 25% on employment opportunities, 15% on student satisfaction etc . . . that all gets factored in.
Additionally, as posted on these forums before, there are studies showing that in a cohort with higher A Levels it is harder to obtain a good degree class.
(note difference between average entry tariffs and entry requirements . . . I agree requirements are somewhat flawed [though to be honest if A Levels were capable of distinguishing better at the top end, I would say requirements wouldn't be bad either])
Well I only applied to entry requirements that want AAA-AAB, I want to feel the success in my A-levels accounts for something.
Original post by ClickItBack
Assuming that students are fairly rational
A big assumption.
However, even if true would it be rational to do a 6 hour train journey to Aberystwyth?
Would it be rational to take the unconditional from Birmingham rather than the AAA offer from Leeds?
Would it be rational to take the offer from Loughborough rather than Lancaster if you hope to be in the UK under 23 team?
Would it be rational to take the offer from Sheffield Hallam rather than Westminster because London is just so damn expensive?
Would it be rational to do the law degree at Stirling rather than Manchester because you want to qualify as a Scottish lawyer?
Would it be rational to apply to Northumbria rather than Trinity St Davids because Newcastle is a better night out than Lampeter?
Original post by nulli tertius
A big assumption.
However, even if true would it be rational to do a 6 hour train journey to Aberystwyth?
Would it be rational to take the unconditional from Birmingham rather than the AAA offer from Leeds?
Would it be rational to take the offer from Loughborough rather than Lancaster if you hope to be in the UK under 23 team?
Would it be rational to take the offer from Sheffield Hallam rather than Westminster because London is just so damn expensive?
Would it be rational to do the law degree at Stirling rather than Manchester because you want to qualify as a Scottish lawyer?
Would it be rational to apply to Northumbria rather than Trinity St Davids because Newcastle is a better night out than Lampeter?
However, even if true would it be rational to do a 6 hour train journey to Aberystwyth?
Would it be rational to take the unconditional from Birmingham rather than the AAA offer from Leeds?
Would it be rational to take the offer from Loughborough rather than Lancaster if you hope to be in the UK under 23 team?
Would it be rational to take the offer from Sheffield Hallam rather than Westminster because London is just so damn expensive?
Would it be rational to do the law degree at Stirling rather than Manchester because you want to qualify as a Scottish lawyer?
Would it be rational to apply to Northumbria rather than Trinity St Davids because Newcastle is a better night out than Lampeter?
Are these questions supposed to be exposing flaws in my argument?
Everything you've asked is exactly the problem with the usual rankings. Looking at UCAS tariff tells you, on average, what students think is the right answer to each of your questions.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Durham university went downhill
- Best university to study Film studies/production?
- BMAT Section 3 | Post & Reflection | 2023 FINAL SESSION
- Which university subject has the highest entry requirements?
- Cambridge Maths
- Graduate medicine
- chemical engineering - nottingham vs ucl?
- Understanding Durometers: A Guide to Hardness Measurement
- A level options
- will uni's accept me with my a levels?
- Scared I won’t get into uni
- Msc Applied maths at Imperilal
- What are the most competative courses at Cardiff university?
- Can I go from GCSE Stats to A level Maths?
- What uni should I pick!?
- Geography vs Politics alevel
- Do my current GCSE grades indicate full 9s in Y11?
- Math, FM, phy & chem for economics degree
- University
- Transferring unis in second year
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
