1. Is there a relationship
between entry qualifications,
widening participation status
and degree outcome?
Dr Mary Jane Platt
Dr Judi Turner Gill
Mary Fletcher

2. Outline
• Background
• Methods
• Distribution of degrees by
– Classification of degree
– SEC group
• UCAS tariff on admission
– Relationship with SEC/WP
– Final degree

3. Method
• Admission data relating to students
graduating 2007-2009
• Data on
– degree classification,
– faculty/subject,
– UCAS tariff score on entry,
– gender, ethnicity, social economic group (
HESA) and WP indicator (only for 2009)

4. Inclusion criteria
• Graduated 07-09
• Home student
• With a classified degree
• With UCAS tariff based on GCSE/ A level
qualifications
• Those with Missing data excluded from
analysis
• N=8597

5. Background
• “Extending widening participation” is a key priority
in the University Strategic Plan with the aim of
“Increasing the proportion of under-
represented groups”
• Russell Group universities exploring use of
‘contextual data’
• The Fair Access Working Group raised the
question as to whether students from
disadvantaged backgrounds should be accepted
onto undergraduate programmes with lower UCAS
tariff scores than other students and if so, how
much lower?

6. Distribution by Classification
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
First (12%) 2:1 (52%) 2:2 (22%) Third Pass Other

7. Degree classification by SEC group
SEC 1-3
First
2:1
2:2
3rd
other
SEC 4-7
First
2:1
2:2
3rd
Other
N=7,406, P=0.019

8. UCAS Tariff by SEC (2007-09)
n Mean tariff CI
SEC 1-3 5682 371 368-373
SEC 4-7 1724 353 348-357
p=<0.001)
n Mean tariff CI
WP 509 325 313-337
Not WP 2295 353 348-359
p=<0.001)
UCAS Tariff by WP (2009 only)

9. Average Tariff on admission of
students awarded 2:1 or higher
Faculty/School SEC n Tariff CI p
Arts 1-3 1032 380 374-384 0.004
4-7 276 363 353-372
Engineering 1-3 128 318 313-380 0.08
4-7 50 346 302-333
Science 1-3 873 383 377-389 <0.001
4-7 321 350 338-362
SES 1-3 1227 373 369-378 0.25
4-7 371 367 359-377
Med: Sch HS 1-3 167 367 353-381 0.74
4-7 42 362 331-393
Med: Sciences 1-3 213 395 383-407 0.05
4-7 51 367 341-397

10. Average Tariff on admission of
students with vocational degrees
Faculty/Scho
ol
SEC n Mean Tariff CI p
Med: Med Ed 1-3 353 454 443-464 0.81
4-7 70 457 440-474
Dentistry 1-3 74 398 374-422 0.007
4-7 34 455 423-487
Veterinary 1-3 140 458 443-472 0.31
4-7 40 473 451-496

11. Summary
• Those from lower SEC manage to achieve
good degree from lower UCAS Tariff
• Differences by faculty
– Selection?
– Achievement?
– Classification
• Different picture for Vocational degrees

12. Discussion
• Lots of caveats to this work!
– How is UCAS tariff calculated?
– Doesn’t look at ‘other’ routes of admission
– Other individual level factors not accounted
for
• E.g. Age
– SEC may not be a robust indicator of social
disadvantage

13. Next Steps
• Take this work forward exploring other
contextual data
• Aim for a robust and fair system that
allows students disadvantaged by their
educational opportunities to access higher
education on a ‘level playing field’
• WP a better indicator of ‘educational
disadvantage’
• But only available for 09 graduation