The Student Room Group

Universities to ditch predicted grades, places will be based on actual results

Poll

Should there be a new university admissions system that ditches predicted grades?

UPDATE 6pm 13/11/20

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-54932013

Universities in England are to switch to offering degree places on the basis of actual grades rather than predicted ones, the government has announced.

In an interview with BBC Education Editor Branwen Jeffreys, Gavin Williamson said the present system held bright but disadvantaged pupils back.

He said he wanted all students to be able to choose the best university they can go to once they know their grades.

Universities have just backed such a change following a review.

Currently, pupils are offered places from universities ahead of their results, so decisions are based on predictions made by their teachers.

Once A-level, BTEC and other exam results are issued in August, candidates then accept or refuse offers they have received.

A consultation will be carried out but it is expected the change to what is known as a post-qualification admissions system will take place before the next general election.



ORIGINAL POST

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-54908150

Applying to uni with your predicted grades and then having to wait until Results Day to find out if you got in can be pretty stressful. Many students and university leaders have been asking - is it the best way of applying to university?

The outcome of several reviews have been released this week that show university leaders think it might be time for a change, and a move to a new system that means you could apply or receive your offers only after you receive your grades.

There have been suggested two different options on how to improve:

Post-Qualification Admissions (PQA)

This option would require students to submit their applications in the summer after receiving their A-level and BTEC results. To give universities time to process applications and offers, terms would need to begin in January.


Post-Qualification Offers (PQO)

With PQO, term times would not change. Students would submit applications in the winter, before their final exams, but universities would not respond until exam boards confirm results in August.

The current system - which has been criticised by the University and College Union (UCU), the National Union of Students (NUS), and ministers and the House of Commons - was last reviewed (unsuccessfully) in 2012. There have been no final decisions, but these reviews will go a long way to working out how to make the university admissions process the best it can be.

Here's what the BBC has been saying:


A post-qualifications admissions (PQA) system could be introduced across the UK by 2023-24, says Universities UK.
The plan is one of a series of recommendations from an 18-month review by university leaders across Britain.
It comes after a chaotic summer exam results process meant many students lost places on their chosen courses.
Some reports over the years have suggested a switch to exam results, arguing it would be fairer to candidates from less-affluent backgrounds.
But universities previously cited the timescale between results day and courses starting as a reason not to proceed.


What do you think? What system would you prefer to use, or do you like the use of predicted grades?

Do you see any problems, or could this be the best way forward?
(edited 3 years ago)

Scroll to see replies

I hate the idea of predicted grades. Many students get over-predicted or under-predicted. It’s interesting to see on Results day how students actual results compare to their predicted grades.

I believe we are the only country that follows the idea of predicted grades?
Original post by StrawberryDreams
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-54908150

Applying to uni with your predicted grades and then having to wait until Results Day to find out if you got in can be pretty stressful. Many students and university leaders have been asking - is it the best way of applying to university?

The outcome of several reviews have been released this week that show university leaders think it might be time for a change, and a move to a new system that means you could apply or receive your offers only after you receive your grades.

There have been suggested two different options on how to improve:

Post-Qualification Admissions (PQA)

This option would require students to submit their applications in the summer after receiving their A-level and BTEC results. To give universities time to process applications and offers, terms would need to begin in January.


Post-Qualification Offers (PQO)

With PQO, term times would not change. Students would submit applications in the winter, before their final exams their final exams, but universities would not respond until exam boards confirm results in August.

The current system - which has been criticised by the University and College Union (UCU), the National Union of Students (NUS), and ministers and the House of Commons - was last reviewed (unsuccessfully) in 2012. There have been no final decisions, but these reviews will go a long way to working out how to make the university admissions process the best it can be.

Here's what the BBC has been saying:



What do you think? What system would you prefer to use, or do you like the use of predicted grades?

Do you see any problems, or could this be the best way forward?


Yes, they're a massive pain as an external candidate. In all fairness some uni's such as Cambridge have been sympathetic when I've mentioned I can't provide predicted grades, but others have said I can't apply without them, even when I've explained my situation.
I think that PQO would be the best & fairest system. I know many people who haven't been able to apply to their dream universities, as they're predicted grades as close as one grade lower than the entry requirements. Predicted grades aren't very accurate, and offers shouldn't depend on them.

With that being said though, what I like about having to apply with predicted grades is it ensures that people tryhard over the 2 year period & put in effort consistently - which is key to doing well in university. If people knew that them getting offers only depended on their final grades, they may slack off over the 2 year period and just revise & put in a lot of effort in the 6 month run up to the real exams. In a sense, America, where you apply to university with your GPA is kind of similar to predicted grades as it factors in how you've performed over the course of sixth form, to build good study habits. Thus, I do understand why predicted grades are used.. I just feel like there should be a better system in place to monitor schools etc. as you are right in that there are many situations where students are under-predicted (meaning they can't apply to universities they want to, even though they know that they'd meet the grades in the real exam) + over-predicted (they get offers & miss them).
(edited 3 years ago)
I mean clearing and adjustment exists for a reason. Generally speaking most courses are available on clearing abs if you do manage to out perform your predicted you can go to a “better” uni. Also a good amount of people who over perform on results day might end up taking a gap year and reapplying.
While I agree some people do get under predicted, predicted grades are based off your work in year 12 and for most candidates aiming for higher grades, they should’ve performed well throughout year 12.
Original post by StrawberryDreams
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-54908150

Applying to uni with your predicted grades and then having to wait until Results Day to find out if you got in can be pretty stressful. Many students and university leaders have been asking - is it the best way of applying to university?

The outcome of several reviews have been released this week that show university leaders think it might be time for a change, and a move to a new system that means you could apply or receive your offers only after you receive your grades.

There have been suggested two different options on how to improve:

Post-Qualification Admissions (PQA)

This option would require students to submit their applications in the summer after receiving their A-level and BTEC results. To give universities time to process applications and offers, terms would need to begin in January.


Post-Qualification Offers (PQO)

With PQO, term times would not change. Students would submit applications in the winter, before their final exams their final exams, but universities would not respond until exam boards confirm results in August.

The current system - which has been criticised by the University and College Union (UCU), the National Union of Students (NUS), and ministers and the House of Commons - was last reviewed (unsuccessfully) in 2012. There have been no final decisions, but these reviews will go a long way to working out how to make the university admissions process the best it can be.

Here's what the BBC has been saying:



What do you think? What system would you prefer to use, or do you like the use of predicted grades?

Do you see any problems, or could this be the best way forward?


I think most people think post results would be better, but this raises substantial questions about re-organising the required time frame & entire academic calender. Whilst if everything shifted simultaneously. i.e undergrad teaching/post-grad teaching/ internships/ graduate employment... could it work? probably. Is their much appetite for this? I don't think so, and i think it would cause a lot of anxiety around unintended consequences.

Now the other major issue is predicted grades have failed, they simply arent representative (my go to citation is the UCU-UCL report: https://www.ucu.org.uk/media/8409/Predicted-grades-accuracy-and-impact-Dec-16/pdf/Predicted_grades_report_Dec2016.pdf)

How do you correct this?
The easiest way imo, remove them. Re-introduce A-level year 12 exams as 50% of final grades (but ban resits and keep them linear).
--
What I would do:
-cut A-levels into quarters where you sit exams January and June every year. Each worth 25%. Applicants compile the UCAS stuff from September year 13 with 50% of their final grade in hand & by the time applicants chose firm choice & insurance choice unis they will know 75% of an applicants final grades (as will the universities).
-I would also ban resits & keep them linearised (and I would try and consolidate everything into 1 exam board).
(edited 3 years ago)
Original post by mnot
I think most people think post results would be better, but this raises substantial questions about re-organising the required time frame & entire academic calender. Whilst if everything shifted simultaneously. i.e undergrad teaching/post-grad teaching/ internships/ graduate employment... could it work? probably. Is their much appetite for this? I don't think so, and i think it would cause a lot of anxiety around unintended consequences.

Now the other major issue is predicted grades have failed, they simply arent representative (my go to citation is the UCU-UCL report: https://www.ucu.org.uk/media/8409/Predicted-grades-accuracy-and-impact-Dec-16/pdf/Predicted_grades_report_Dec2016.pdf)

How do you correct this?
The easiest way imo, remove them. Re-introduce A-level year 12 exams as 50% of final grades (but ban resits and keep them linear).
--
What I would do:
-cut A-levels into quarters where you sit exams January and June every year. Each worth 25%. Applicants compile the UCAS stuff from September year 13 with 50% of their final grade in hand & by the time applicants chose firm choice & insurance choice unis they will know 75% of an applicants final grades (as will the universities).
-I would also ban resits & keep them linearised (and I would try and consolidate everything into 1 exam board tbh).


I agree with all your changes but the resits.
Why ban resits? Students should be able to resit one of the 4 exams similar to how Students were able to back in 2015?
My sister got a C in her AS in 2014 and was able to resit it and achieve a B overall in 2015
Original post by Uzair63
I agree with all your changes but the resits.
Why ban resits? Students should be able to resit one of the 4 exams similar to how Students were able to back in 2015?
My sister got a C in her AS in 2014 and was able to resit it and achieve a B overall in 2015

Resits allow multiple bites at the cherry. If applicants are taking a different number of exams you lose equality in the comparison.

This is one of the things universities have gotten right in the UK (for those unfamiliar most UK universities you cannot resit a pass, with failed grades you normally have 1 or 2 resits so you can achieve the credits to meet the qualification requirement but the grades are capped at 40% the lowest pass mark.)
Original post by mnot
Resits allow multiple bites at the cherry. If applicants are taking a different number of exams you lose equality in the comparison.

This is one of the things universities have gotten right in the UK (for those unfamiliar most UK universities you cannot resit a pass, with failed grades you normally have 1 or 2 resits so you can achieve the credits to meet the qualification requirement but the grades are capped at 40% the lowest pass mark.)


You can resit tho? Literally most universities accept resits except Tier 1 Russel groups (even Kings accept resits)
Original post by Uzair63
You can resit tho? Literally most universities accept resits except Tier 1 Russel groups (even Kings accept resits)

You can resit A-level & GCSE papers & universities choose to accept this as it is permitted by AQA/Edexcel/OCR regulations, however resits in universities are not the same. What I am saying is if I wrote the regulations for A-levels I would take a similar policy to university academic regulations.
It seems to work ok for other countries. Whilst here we have the same mess year on year.
No real issue with applying with achieved grades, However the benefit of predictions is that it decompresses the application cycle over a much longer period. There is a stupendous amount of stuff going on the background other than processing results, (CAS's, scholarships, accommodation etc etc.), and I can't see a practical way of doing all this post-results day without significantly changing the academic year.

Admissions-wise you would probably need a lot of headcount over a short period, who would then have much less to do for the rest of the year. Even now we 'pinch' staff with admissions knowledge to make sure people have a decision on results day.
The problem with predicted grades is that they arent accura

Original post by confuzzledteen
I think that PQO would be the best & fairest system. I know many people who haven't been able to apply to their dream universities, as they're predicted grades as close as one grade lower than the entry requirements. Predicted grades aren't very accurate, and offers shouldn't depend on them.

With that being said though, what I like about having to apply with predicted grades is it ensures that people tryhard over the 2 year period & put in effort consistently - which is key to doing well in university. If people knew that them getting offers only depended on their final grades, they may slack off over the 2 year period and just revise & put in a lot of effort in the 6 month run up to the real exams. In a sense, America, where you apply to university with your GPA is kind of similar to predicted grades as it factors in how you've performed over the course of sixth form, to build good study habits. Thus, I do understand why predicted grades are used.. I just feel like there should be a better system in place to monitor schools etc. as you are right in that there are many situations where students are under-predicted (meaning they can't apply to universities they want to, even though they know that they'd meet the grades in the real exam) + over-predicted (they get offers & miss them).

I agree. Many pupils have not been given the right predicted grades from their teachers. This has meant that they either have to reapply the following year or take the year out which is just silly.
Original post by Smokestar
The problem with predicted grades is that they arent accura

I agree. Many pupils have not been given the right predicted grades from their teachers. This has meant that they either have to reapply the following year or take the year out which is just silly.


But what are predicted grades based of tho? They don’t just appear out of thin air.
In my old sixth from predicted grades were based 90% off end of year 12 exams. A girl I knew achieved a C in this exam and then spent months complaining about how it wasn’t far she wasn’t predicted an A. This is the case I see a lot, students are aware of how much is weighted towards their predicted grade yet perform below their standard in jt and complain. I know for some schools, the teachers just ask what the students want but this could then lead to disappointment.
I know some places do heavily under predict you but for the majority of places there’s some system that makes a reasonable amount of sense. You have to be realistic, why should a teacher predict you an A when you’re working at a C
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09645292.2020.1761945

Only 16% percent of predicted grades are accurate.
75% of grades are over predicted (on average students are over-predicted by 1.7 grades ie. predicted ABB, achieves BBC)
However, high achieving students from disadvantaged backgrounds are likely to have their grades underpredicted.

As it stands this is a system that feeds off teacher bias. Also rewarding wealth and not ability.

In addition, many courses end up being undersubscribed. Come results day, these courses will often accept students who have missed their offer by several grades. This lack of transparency is sickening.
If a course is routinely accepting students who have achieved BBC it should advertise its self as such.
(edited 3 years ago)
Original post by Wotda****
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09645292.2020.1761945

Only 16% percent of students predicted grades are accurate.
75% of students grades are over predicted.
However, high achieving students from disadvantaged backgrounds are likely to be underpredicted.

As it stands this is a system that rewards wealth and not ability.


I mean I say the best foot forward is to add more assessments throughout the year that contribute to your final grade.
This will allow a fair grade prediction along side a reasonable way to give out grades in the case of an emergency situation like the 2020 grades.
Let’s just go back to 2015 when GCSES and A levels had coursework and it wasn’t all down to end of year exams :smile:
I believe that offers based on predicted grades are beneficial for students.

Primarily, more so in the case if they are optimistic predicted grades, receiving offers from top universities can be motivating. Once students have an offer, it is actually motivating for them to work towards that offer. Many students find that they are unmotivated, and I believe that goals are the best way someone can be motivated. Receiving offers from their university of choice and course of choice can really make someone work hard. Furthermore, if students do work hard towards the offer, then seeing themselves improve in mocks leading up to the exam can further motivate them.

However, I do agree that conditional "unconditional" offer such as if firmed, then offer is CCC should be removed. This can psychologically reassure the student that they are basically guaranteed a place in the university, however, it could lead to them not reaching their full potential in A-Level exams, in comparison to someone having a conditional offer who worked extremely hard to reach it.
There's a misconception behind all of this

The vast majority of universities don't LOOK at predicted grades - they make offers to all applicants with the right type, number and subject qualifications. Those that select (ie reject more than just applicants with unsuitable qualifications) almost all use something else other than predicted grades (GCSEs, LNAT/UCAT/BMAT, interview, audition, portfolio).

After all where is the risk in a university making an extra 200 offers of AAA to 200 applicants predicted DDD - there's very few of those applicants who are likely to MEET those offer conditions and those that do deserve a place just as much as someone predicted A*A*A* who gets AAA in the end.

UCAS could have just removed the requirement for predicted grades years ago with almost zero difference to the admissions process at the vast majority of universities. The only losers would have been universities knowingly using unreliable information (predictions) to reject applicants - so basically universities consciously making unfair admissions decisions.

I have serious doubts about the proposed changes. Even moving to a UCAS system with post-results offers or post-results applications: some universities would bend the rules and start asking potential students to make "pre-applications" and giving out "provisional" offers outside the system in order to increase buy-in/conversion.

At the moment if we look like we're going to end up with an extra 40% in a specific course we'll know that in May/June and have 3/4 months to recruit additional staff and re-work the timetable to accommodate additional students. Likewise if a course is going to undershoot by a large number then we can reduce staffing numbers or shift staff to more over-subscribed subjects and courses with that 3/4 month preparation period. That's not going to be possible in a 1 month window. The risk of students facing over-crowded teaching and chaotic timetabling shoots through the roof.

"Luckily" the government thinks that all universities run like oxbridge and so we're likely to see any reforms tailored entirely around their preferences (and knowing the government implemented in a way that leads scottish universities to leave the UCAS system altogether and end up on a completely different academic calendar to the rest of the UK instead of ~1 month out as it is as the moment).
I definitely think there should be a change. I was predicted to get BCC and ended up leaving school with AAB whereas I have friends who were predicted AAA and got ABB and another who got BBC despite being predicted AAB so there is defo something wrong with the system. I got rejected from Nottingham as I applied for an AAB course with ABB predicted despite getting AAB in the end. Luckily I'm at my first choice uni now and I'm happy but this would affect other individuals
Reply 19
I applied post results exactly for this reason.
Applying with predicted grades is ultimately a shot in the dark. I once read a statistic that said something like only 20% of predicted grades are accurate.
Applying with predictions disadvantages students whose teachers underpredict and puts those whose teachers overpredict in a good position to get offers that they are not necessarily any more deserving of. It also forces students who miss their grades into clearing, which means that people have to organise university in a very last minute fashion. This potentially bars them from getting a choice in their accommodation, and may force them onto a course that they don't actually like.
Universities also abuse this system to inaccurately advertise entry requirements to trick students into firming. For example, Liverpool for law mostly takes in people with BBB. However, its advertised entry requirement is AAA. This will incline students to firm the course when the grade requirements are not what they seem.
Finally, it might put a damper on this ever growing phenomenon (or as teachers would refer to it, the bane of their existence) of unconditional offers.

Quick Reply