Contextual offer debate

Hi all so I want to see the justification for contextual offers on such a wide scale at Bristol. I agree with them as it is easier to do well if you go to a good school. So a lower offer is acceptable for people at bad schools. My issue is that at Bristol it seems anyone at a state school regardless of how good it is gets a contextual offer. If everyone is getting these lower offers or most people surely the offer should just be the norm and the university is falsely advertising its academic standards and thus prestige by putting the higher grades as the standard offer? Also is this not unfair on students who actually have to get higher grade as they are misled. Part of the reason you go to a uni with higher requirements is because of the prestige of the uni being selective. So my point is, is the scale on which Bristol gives out contextual offers undermining their standard offer and misleading people on its prestige and academic rigour.

could always save your parents' money and go to a state school. I'm only half joking. It's kind of hard to dictate how good a state school is tbh. I went to a few. One of them was the best state school in my area as rated by ofsted, but when it came down to it they still lacked many resources and were still at a disadvantage compared to private.

If students with contextual offers are doing as well at Bristol as your 3 A student from private school, that also indicates that they would also do just as well in the other universities that you have cited and that those universities would gain from an equal measure of contextual offers. The fact that Oxbridge uses other criteria to chose its students shows how limited the predicted A level grades are in selecting the right students for their courses.
I’m not sure what has driven you to write this post. Are you a 3 A student at Bristol who doesn’t find the course up to standard, or have you missed out on a place and believe a contextual offer has benefited from an unfair advantage?

Iam a 3 A student and I am writing as I believe it is the reason Bristol has fallen off the wagon prestige wise. There’s a reason Durham etc is now better now and I believe it’s that Bristol is not as selective as it once was.

Going private isn’t just about education but about a wider education building students character and giving opportunities in the arts/sports and other areas also the private school links are very valuable

Hi all so I want to see the justification for contextual offers on such a wide scale at Bristol. I agree with them as it is easier to do well if you go to a good school. So a lower offer is acceptable for people at bad schools. My issue is that at Bristol it seems anyone at a state school regardless of how good it is gets a contextual offer. If everyone is getting these lower offers or most people surely the offer should just be the norm and the university is falsely advertising its academic standards and thus prestige by putting the higher grades as the standard offer? Also is this not unfair on students who actually have to get higher grade as they are misled. Part of the reason you go to a uni with higher requirements is because of the prestige of the uni being selective. So my point is, is the scale on which Bristol gives out contextual offers undermining their standard offer and misleading people on its prestige and academic rigour.

Only about 600 students from any given graduation cohort got the contextual offer through being in select state schools in past years, and this remains the case now, not sure where your made up stats have come from but you can look up the actual stats yourself by searching for the degree comes statements (you can also search up and view the intake/offer/etc stats too which paint an even clearer picture of how few people from these state schools apply), they tend to perform on par with normal entry students and better than other cohorts such as BAME, mature, disability, etc

What stats are you even talking about nobody put any stats to do with contextual offers