Randomly allocate university places to make system fairer, report suggests
RANDOMLY allocating top A-level students university places would be a fairer way of selecting people for degree courses, a report suggests.
The radical measure would give students an equal chance of gaining a place at a leading institution, according to a paper published by the Higher Education Policy Institute (HEPI).
It argues that at current rates, it will take almost a century for highly selective universities to raise the participation rate of the most disadvantaged students to the existing participation rate of the most advantaged.
Current progress on access to top institutions is "glacially slow", the report authors argue, calling for a simpler, more transparent and consistent university admissions system.
Data published by the Office for Students (OfS), the universities regulator, in September showed that in 2017/18 English higher education providers recruited twice as many students from the most advantaged backgrounds compared to the least advantaged.
This increased to around five times as many among the most selective institutions.
The OfS has set targets including an aim to eliminate gaps in entry rates at the most selective universities between the most and least represented groups.
The HEPI paper estimates that it would take 96 years to get the participation rate in 2030 for 18 to 30-year-olds from the least advantaged areas to the participation rate in 2017/18 for students in the same age group who are from the most advantaged areas.
Post-qualification applications - when students apply for courses after getting their exam grades - would allow more radical solutions to this issue, such as random allocation of places, it says.
"Universities could use random allocation of places for students over a certain threshold of A-level grades," the paper adds.
"This is the fairest way of selecting equally qualified candidates for degree courses. Lotteries have been used widely in education. You might compensate losers in the lottery - such as guaranteeing a place at another institution.
"The benefit of these schemes is their simplicity. Admissions tutors have amassed a battery of criteria designed to distinguish between thousands of equally well-qualified applicants: personal statements; teacher recommendations; predicted exam grades; essays; university admissions tests; interviews; and much more.
"But how much of this data add to predicting which candidates are best suited for degree courses? And how much does the complexity alienate potentially excellent applicants?"
The paper also proposes that universities produce two published offers for degree courses - a standard entry requirement such as three A grades at A-level, and a minimum entry requirement, up to three grades lower, such as BBB.
The authors calculate that the number of places available at highly selective universities would need to double over the next 20 years to ensure all young people have the same participation rates as the most advantaged students.
If the number of degree places was kept at the current level, then the number of places going to the most advantaged students would need to be cut by as much as 10,000.
Lee Elliot Major, a professor in social mobility at the University of Exeter and the report's lead author, said: "Current progress on fairer access to our most selective universities is glacially slow.
"The time has come for a simpler, more transparent, consistent and honest system of university admissions, recognising that A-level grades and our system of predicted grades, are no longer the gold standard of entry."