University lowers entry grades for disadvantaged
Scroll to see replies
Original post by l'etranger
Literally everyone has an extenuating circumstance of some sort, it's not like people from wealthy backgrounds lead idyllic lives.
Im not saying they do, but its unlikely to affect them as much as those from poorer backgrounds (depending on the circumstannce of course)
Strange that Bristol issue this press release (that is just about a local compact scheme to add to their contextual admissions scheme that's been running for EVER) on the day UCAS release this: https://www.ucas.com/corporate/data-and-analysis/ucas-undergraduate-releases/ucas-undergraduate-analysis-reports/ucas-undergraduate-end-cycle-reports
It's almost as if they were expecting something particularly negative to be in the UCAS stats
It's almost as if they were expecting something particularly negative to be in the UCAS stats
I am one of the Bristol Scholars on this scheme. It's not just for poorer students, it's for people who have the potential to go to university but their grades don't reflect that, for whatever reason. I've applied to do veterinary science and with Bristol Scholar, I have to get AAC instead of AAA. Another person from my sixth form wants to do maths and for her, she would have to get A*AA I think. We're not guaranteed a place just because of the scheme. What we are guaranteed is an offer if the course doesn't interview, or an interview if the course interviews. We also get extra support over the next year
To me this is dumb as hell. Foundation courses are a thing. Through them you can get into a really good university without having the top grades. An extra year would definitely benefit all these poor students who weren't encouraged enough to study, and are therefore behind everyone else. So why can't these people just do that? Oh right, because they don't care enough or want to.
Original post by Nadile
To me this is dumb as hell. Foundation courses are a thing. Through them you can get into a really good university without having the top grades. An extra year would definitely benefit all these poor students who weren't encouraged enough to study, and are therefore behind everyone else. So why can't these people just do that? Oh right, because they don't care enough or want to.
Are foundation years free?
Original post by EastGuava
Are foundation years free?
Sadly no, but they are covered by student finance.
Original post by Nadile
To me this is dumb as hell. Foundation courses are a thing. Through them you can get into a really good university without having the top grades. An extra year would definitely benefit all these poor students who weren't encouraged enough to study, and are therefore behind everyone else. So why can't these people just do that? Oh right, because they don't care enough or want to.
Not all courses offer foundation years..
Original post by Nadile
To me this is dumb as hell. Foundation courses are a thing. Through them you can get into a really good university without having the top grades. An extra year would definitely benefit all these poor students who weren't encouraged enough to study, and are therefore behind everyone else. So why can't these people just do that? Oh right, because they don't care enough or want to.
There aren't foundation courses for everyone. I want to study veterinary medicine and some of the vet schools do gateway and foundation courses. However there are certain requirements you have to fill in order to get onto these courses, and I don't, so I can't apply to them. Bristol scholars will allow to get into vet school with slightly reduced grades. Schools put forward people that are motivated enough to do well, not anyone they feel a bit sorry for. There are also minimum grades to get in; it isn't a free pass into uni.
Why would anyone disagree with this? Surely if you're not classified as poor, your grade requirements will stay the same as they were before?
Original post by teenhorrorstory
Not all courses offer foundation years..
Original post by horsewithnoname
There aren't foundation courses for everyone. I want to study veterinary medicine and some of the vet schools do gateway and foundation courses. However there are certain requirements you have to fill in order to get onto these courses, and I don't, so I can't apply to them. Bristol scholars will allow to get into vet school with slightly reduced grades. Schools put forward people that are motivated enough to do well, not anyone they feel a bit sorry for. There are also minimum grades to get in; it isn't a free pass into uni.
Well, I would personally support introducing more foundation courses as opposed to giving shortcuts.
Though I guess it depends which parts of the grade requirements were to be lowered for the disadvantaged students. Basically, anything course relevant like Chemistry A level for a chemistry degree should stay the same. I can accept the extra two unspecified A levels being lower though. That way they are still as prepared for the degree as everyone else.
Then again, if they just miss the offer then maybe they should do what everyone else does and consider a different degree or university...
Original post by Nadile
Well, I would personally support introducing more foundation courses as opposed to giving shortcuts.
Though I guess it depends which parts of the grade requirements were to be lowered for the disadvantaged students. Basically, anything course relevant like Chemistry A level for a chemistry degree should stay the same. I can accept the extra two unspecified A levels being lower though. That way they are still as prepared for the degree as everyone else.
Then again, if they just miss the offer then maybe they should do what everyone else does and consider a different degree or university...
Though I guess it depends which parts of the grade requirements were to be lowered for the disadvantaged students. Basically, anything course relevant like Chemistry A level for a chemistry degree should stay the same. I can accept the extra two unspecified A levels being lower though. That way they are still as prepared for the degree as everyone else.
Then again, if they just miss the offer then maybe they should do what everyone else does and consider a different degree or university...
As a Bristol Scholar, my grades are reduced to AAC, with As in biology and chemistry, and the C in my third subject. Bristol doesn't specify the third subject for veterinary medicine...
well...this could just be a quick money making scheme as universities with lower entry standards tend to have much higher drop out rates. Students from disadvantaged backgrounds are at an even higher risk for dropping out
Original post by Percypig17
Why would anyone disagree with this? Surely if you're not classified as poor, your grade requirements will stay the same as they were before?
But surely it must be disheartening to know that council house Alan doesn't have to work as hard as you purely because his parents live off benefits? Back in old Len's day everyone had to work equally as hard as each other, thank you very much.
Original post by horsewithnoname
As a Bristol Scholar, my grades are reduced to AAC, with As in biology and chemistry, and the C in my third subject. Bristol doesn't specify the third subject for veterinary medicine...
Yeah I guess that is fine then. Let's you focus on the relevant subjects, and you still need to be just as capable in that area as everyone else.
Original post by azizadil1998
Exactly why they shouldn't adopt a common policy to a complex issue such as this where there may not be a common reason why students are unable to get the required grades, should be on a case by case basis.
It would be SO hard to do it on a case by case basis and actually check that people weren't lying. I do agree with having a list of schools but private schools should not be on there.
Original post by Len Goodman
But surely it must be disheartening to know that council house Alan doesn't have to work as hard as you purely because his parents live off benefits? Back in old Len's day everyone had to work equally as hard as each other, thank you very much.
It's not just for people from disadvantaged backgrounds. Anyone who the school thinks has the motivation to do well can get nominated, regardless of background
Original post by discobish
So the University of Bristol is going to be accepting lower exam grades from disadvantaged local pupils and applicants from schools with poor A-level results.
Surely this is nothing new? Some universities have been giving contextual offers for a while now, taking into consideration whether you are the first in your family to go to university, your school's performance, etc., so I don't see what the fuss is about or why this warrants a press release.
I see where people are coming from but I do agree with what they're doing.
People from less well off backgrounds often have to work harder to get somewhere in life, for example richer people can afford private tuition or a wider range of resources, which people from poorer backgrounds can't. If a school's results are typically lower than average, that's unlikely to be because they have a load of thick students, it's likely to be because of poor teaching. Taking these things into account I wholly agree with what they are doing.
And to those saying they're glad Oxbridge don't do this: They actually do, they're less public about it, but they admit people based on their attitude to their subject in addition to their grades, so someone who has had to work harder because of their background, is more likely to be admitted than someone who hasn't, if they have the same grades. That's because it shows commitment to their subject.
People from less well off backgrounds often have to work harder to get somewhere in life, for example richer people can afford private tuition or a wider range of resources, which people from poorer backgrounds can't. If a school's results are typically lower than average, that's unlikely to be because they have a load of thick students, it's likely to be because of poor teaching. Taking these things into account I wholly agree with what they are doing.
And to those saying they're glad Oxbridge don't do this: They actually do, they're less public about it, but they admit people based on their attitude to their subject in addition to their grades, so someone who has had to work harder because of their background, is more likely to be admitted than someone who hasn't, if they have the same grades. That's because it shows commitment to their subject.
I think it's fair to say that students from poorer schools receive inferior quality of teaching than those who goes to better schools (not just talking about private schools, many state schools can be good schools too). I know because I went to one of these bad schools where the average attainment expressed as a grade was U - very under average! I kept hearing these advices from A* students on tsr who would tell me to 'pay real attention in class so you understand the topic right there and use revision only to considerate your knowledge and practice exam techniques'. However, I found this advice very hard to use because I often didn't have the teachers who could explain more complex A-level stuff to me; I felt that they didn't understand the topics themselves to be able to do that. Instead, I decided to take the motto to 'not expect to learn anything at school and work very hard everyday to do everything at home by myself' and that's exactly what I did to get my A*AAa at A-levels.
I realise that looking back getting those good grades weren't too difficult, If I had worked harder and took less commitments outside studying, maybe I would've got better results. But I also realise that I was extremely lucky that my family were supportive and didn't expect me to help out at home or disturb me while I was studying. I guess that I am an exception rather than a rule tho to people going to poorer schools. More often than not, the parents are not supportive and most simply don't have the time to study at home for too long. To people in these circumstances, I simply do not understand why we should expect them to get the same grades as other well off applicants. It's not a huge difference in grade expectation that they are proposing either, AAA vs AAB, how much difference is that?
just my £0.02
I realise that looking back getting those good grades weren't too difficult, If I had worked harder and took less commitments outside studying, maybe I would've got better results. But I also realise that I was extremely lucky that my family were supportive and didn't expect me to help out at home or disturb me while I was studying. I guess that I am an exception rather than a rule tho to people going to poorer schools. More often than not, the parents are not supportive and most simply don't have the time to study at home for too long. To people in these circumstances, I simply do not understand why we should expect them to get the same grades as other well off applicants. It's not a huge difference in grade expectation that they are proposing either, AAA vs AAB, how much difference is that?
just my £0.02
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Len Goodman
But surely it must be disheartening to know that council house Alan doesn't have to work as hard as you purely because his parents live off benefits? Back in old Len's day everyone had to work equally as hard as each other, thank you very much.
Well many studies have shown that it is statistically easier to do well if you come from a better off background. Although there may well be outlier cases, in general better off families are more able to afford private education/ private tuition, more able to spend time on their children's education. In worse off areas, schools may set lower standards for their students, i.e. BTECs or apprenticeships being seen as the norm instead of A levels, meaning it is harder to go against the herd and gain a place at university.
So rather than people from worse off backgrounds having to work less hard, I'd say this is more about levelling the playing field where better off students already have it easier when trying to get the best grades.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Accounting in KCL
- If A-levels don’t go smoothly this year
- How realistic are my choices (so far)?
- BTEC accepted at Oxford???
- Will I get into Uni?
- Ucas questions
- Subject combination
- chem eng
- contextual offer only if firm?
- DO oxford and cambridge give contextuals and reduced offers??????
- 4 A-levels with Physics for Maths degree?
- Universities that accept A-Level resits for the LLB
- Applying for law with a deferred entry
- Mid Universities
- Should i include my sat score in mycambridge application
- City vs Royal Holloway for Law?
- Oxford UCAS Application
- My parents are going to put me into state school for a levels so uni admissions easie
- Biochem imperial predicted grades
- Contextual Offer Likelihood
Latest
Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 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 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 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 ?
