UCAS Presentation - Clare Marchant ARC 2017
•Als PPTX, PDF herunterladen•
1 gefällt mir•330 views
UCAS Presentation - Clare Marchant ARC 2017
Empfohlen
Empfohlen
Weitere ähnliche Inhalte
Was ist angesagt?
Was ist angesagt? (20)
Ähnlich wie UCAS Presentation - Clare Marchant ARC 2017
Ähnlich wie UCAS Presentation - Clare Marchant ARC 2017 (20)
Mehr von Association of University Administrators
Mehr von Association of University Administrators (20)
Kürzlich hochgeladen
Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)
UCAS Presentation - Clare Marchant ARC 2017
- 1. Academic Registrars Conference 2017 Clare Marchant Chief Executive
- 2. • Introduction • Looking back at the 2017 entry cycle • Looking forward to 2018 and beyond • How I want us to work together Purpose of session
- 3. Hi, I’m Clare… ‘To improve is to change, to perfect is to change often.’
- 5. Looking back
- 7. 2017 was a busy year for the sector and for UCAS… • New collection and search tools • New Tariff • Qualification reform readiness • Zero results embargo breach project • Progression Pathways 2017 • Enhancements to analytical services • More timely and personalised I&A • TEF engagement • New CRM approach • Technological enhancements
- 9. Confirmation and clearing 2017
- 10. On the day… • Heightened media interest – UCAS had double the audience reach of the Bake Off premiere on Channel 4 (12.8m) • New qualifications were the story of the day • Fees and degree apprenticeships were prominent in the media
- 11. How we performed
- 12. Differencebetweencycle’s acceptancesand2016cycle Applicants Day 28 Outcome better than expected for 2017 cycle Acceptances down 1% at day 28. This is a recovery from the 5% fall in applicants at January deadline.
- 13. Differencebetweencycleand 2016cycle Netincreaseinacceptancessince previousweekday Clearing was faster this year Fewer applicants available to be placed in Clearing (-20k on ARD). More Clearing acceptances on the first day. By day 28, main scheme Clearing acceptances were only 1% down. Direct to Clearing increased by 9%.
- 14. Direct to clearing acceptances up 9% +9% 13,640 placed via DTC, an increase of 1,150 from last year. Who are these applicants? Why aren’t they applying earlier?
- 15. UK accepts have highest proportion of DTC Over 2.5% of acceptances from the UK are via Direct to Clearing (12,500), whereas this is only about 1.5% for non-UK accepts (1,000 overall).
- 16. Direct to Clearing mostly older UK applicants 70% of DTC applicants are aged 20 and over (15,000). Falls in older applicants at June deadline – applying direct to clearing instead?
- 17. Majority of DTC accepts stay close to home Over 60% of DTC acceptances are to providers less than 45 minutes away from home. Where in the country are these acceptances?
- 18. Business & Admin most popular for DTC Business & Admin studies and Subjects allied to Medicine had most applications (2,800); for Group B nearly half were to Nursing.
- 19. Increasingly competitive environment A wide range of outcomes across providers. 40 providers have seen decreases in acceptances each cycle for the last four cycles – 15 of those decreased by at least 5% each cycle. Good time to be an applicant. Differenceinacceptancesbetween cycleand2016cycle
- 20. • Unconditional offers have increased again this year – 5% of offers to 18 year olds • Unconditional offers may affect attainment • 32% of applicants with an UF offer miss their grades by more than 3 points, compared to 20% for those with CF. • Remain unpopular with teachers and advisers • Students ‘taking their foot off the pedal’ • Are they prepared for university? • Should they let universities and colleges know if a learner is failing? • UCAS resources to inform decisions Unconditional offer making and learners
- 21. 4% increase in acceptances seen for non-EU Differenceinacceptances2016–2017 Is outside the EU key potential for growth in the current climate? Number of acceptances 2016
- 22. Improvements in POLAR3 but not in MEM 18yearoldentryrate 18yearoldentryrate MEM However, when looking at MEM, there has been no progress this year. The MEM Q1:Q5 ratio is larger than POLAR3 at 3.9. POLAR3 The POLAR3 Q1:Q5 ratio has decreased to 2.3 this year due to the largest increases in acceptances seen for the most disadvantaged (Q1).
- 23. 18yearoldentryrate Gender gap shows no improvement Young women are now 36% more likely to enter HE than men.
- 24. Nursing outcome as expected Nursing applicants down 20% at Jan15 deadline (45,090, -10,990), all placed down 4% (-1,000). Increase in applicants from outside EU. Applicants Acceptances (400, +60) (27,240, -1,000)
- 25. Why do students make decisions? Applicants complete Track survey after responding to offers, rating factors affecting their decision making. Allows providers to see what they do well and what they can improve.
- 26. UCAS the information provider
- 27. UCAS the information provider… • Ucas.com is a central point for neutral I+A. • We cover all post-16 and post-18 options, including post-16 qualifications, UG, PG, apprenticeships, employment and how to set up your own business. • …but many other providers are out there. • We are now working with Generation Z – changing needs of applicants? • Also operating in a market. • Role of data? • HE partners? • Core focus of our Corporate Strategy refresh.
- 28. Offer Rate Calculator Based on feedback from providers, advisers, and learners, we have made the following improvements to our offer rate calculator since launch: • An extended list of A level subject groupings • The names of some degree clusters have been reviewed and updated • Better signposting to information and advice for course providers, advisers, and learners from the calculator itself, to caveat its usage and explain the rationale. During the month leading up to the 15 October deadline, there were over 46,000 searches on the offer rate calculator.
- 29. The second version of the offer rate calculator is currently in development. A release date has not yet been set, as we are consulting further with representatives for learners, advisers, and HEPs. Summary of the proposed changes: • Include 2017 data • Account for changes in offer-making strategies of HEPs • Return predicted offer rates for a larger number of HEPs and courses • Facilitate side-by-side comparisons • Support for a wider range of qualifications, where statistically meaningful. Plans for an updated offer rate calculator
- 30. Looking forward
- 31. The landscape continues to change… Fees debate (and review?) OfS consultation Quals changes Sector Agencies Review Increase in medicine places TE(SO)F Autumn Budget Quality Code Technical educationTech disruption I+A
- 32. Qualifications in 2018 • Ongoing introduction of reformed A levels across the UK, including additional subjects in England and CCEA regulated A levels in Northern Ireland • Growing number of reformed GCSEs (9 – 1) entering HE • First substantive award of new- style vocational qualifications
- 33. UK 18 year old population still falling UK18yearoldpopulation UK 18 year old population doesn’t stop falling until 2020. Population won’t recover to levels seen in 2010 ‘til 2025
- 34. Forecasted decrease in UK 18 year old applicants of 1% to 2020. If application rates continue to rise, new highs forecasted for 2021 and beyond. UK 18 applicants forecasted to fall
- 35. Mature demand likely to fall Debt averse? Economy? UK 20 and overs forecasted to keep declining. 16% less in 2022 than 2017.
- 36. Non-EU forecasted to continue increasing
- 37. Insight and UCAS Media products Conversion analysis Track survey STROBE Market scan EXACT Digital display Targeted communications
- 38. Rise of apprenticeships? • Higher apprenticeship starts increased 35% in 2016/17. • UUK and HEFCE anticipate 5,000 degree apprenticeship starts in 2017/18 – an increase in 658% from previous year. • Second most asked question at UCAS exhibitions. • Role of UCAS?
- 39. Oct15 deadline applicants up 7%
- 40. Medicine applicants up 8%
- 41. • Due to be released w/c 13 November. • Report provides an update on progress made against the seven recommendations made in the 2016 report, and the range of work undertaken across the sector. • Indicates that name-blind applications do not impact a learner’s chances of receiving an offer. • Continues to encourage HEPs to undertake and introduce processes to minimise the risk of unconscious bias and enhance quality assurance. • Encourages a wider view of differential outcomes, from pre-HE to degree attainment. Unconscious bias report 2017
- 42. UCAS support for contextualised admissions • Questions in Apply • Personal statement and reference • UCAS contextual data service - provides data about an applicant’s school or college and local area: • The school performance data is linked to an applicant via their Apply centre. • The local area data draws on an applicant’s postcode in order to display the corresponding POLAR3 quintile or the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD). • Work with the Fair Education Alliance to raise awareness with teachers and advisers. • Information and advice on ucas.com. • Exploring new, more modern ways of supporting contextualised admissions.
- 43. The present – UCAS and you
- 45. • Current strategy ambitious, but requires focus and prioritisation. • Refreshed strategy 2018 onwards being developed. • Clarity over core purpose – fair, trusted undergraduate admissions service. • Key will be revised digital roadmap: • Underpinned by success in stabilising and making more secure services. • Delivering technology, data, and marketing services, driven by customer value. • Anticipating technology disruption. • Working with partners and creating alliances. • Will influence future financial strategy. Strategy refresh
- 46. • Customer voice already clear and unambiguous e.g. advisory groups, Clearing working group. • Help us prioritise. • Keep an eye on the medium term: • Generation Z and beyond • Technology disruption • Growth of international markets • Expect agility – both the up’s and downs. • Be constructive. How can you influence?
- 47. How we engage with you • Webinars: 60 – 80 providers attend every month • Conferences: nearly 600 HEP delegates • Weekly emails • Feedback button on ucas.com • Relationship managers have visited 148 providers in the last year • Working groups, including our new Business Rules and Admissions Principles Working Group
- 48. Thank you
Hinweis der Redaktion
- Relationship with audience word cloud
- This is now just a slide for referencing volume – we could draw upon the high number of calls received and question whether this is a modern way of working. Also suggests learners like 1-2-1 contact for such a big decision.
- Applicants down 5% at Jan 15 deadline, down 4% at Jun deadline, acceptances only down 1% at day 28 Falls in applicants are rare – only 3 since 2002. Around 15k accepted apps less than if trend continued.
- Faster clearing? More clearing placed on day 1 than previous years (+6%) but by day 2 same numbers. Graph shows number placed in clearing on each day- can see that the line is steeper for first day. Acceptances through clearing have increased. Main scheme applicants placed via clearing dropped for the first time since 2013 by 1% (due to drop in applicants), but direct to clearing (applied after June 30) accepts rose by 9% to record numbers. There were less unplaced applicants but clearing up as a whole. Who are these applicants? Why are these applicants applying later in the cycle and how can you persuade them to apply earlier? Free to be placed in clearing down 20K on A Level results day compared to 2016. Yet only 1k less placed in main scheme clearing by day 28.
- Main scheme applicants placed via clearing dropped for the first time since 2013 by 1% (due to drop in applicants), but direct to clearing (applied after June 30) accepts rose by 9% to record numbers.
- UK has highest proportion of acceptances as DTC accepts Also more likely to go to a lower tariff HEP
- Most DTC applicants are older – older applicants fell at June deadline, applying DTC instead?
- DTC applications and acceptances by subject group
- A range of different outcomes for providers. Some have seen losses over last 5 years. The categories of growth, no change, reduction are based on the change between 2012 to 2015.
- Option1. Acceptances from outside the EU to UK providers increased by 4%. Graph shows those outside the EU who had a change of more than 50 acceptances. It is also restricted to those who had more than 200 acceptances in 2017 Green coloured bars are high percentage increases (over 10%). Countries with less than 5 accepts in 2017 and largest pops are mostly in Africa and the Americas. Largest countries are Yemen, North Korea, Niger, Burkina Faso, Mali, Guatemala, Chad, Guinea, South Sudan, Rwanda
- POLAR3 The UK 18 year old entry rate has increased for all quintiles. The Q5:Q1 ratio across the UK still shows a large difference, however the gap continues to shrink with the ratio reducing from 2.4 to 2.3 in the past year. However the same is not true about MEM for which the Q5:Q1 has seen no improvement from last year. POLAR3 Developed by HEFCE and classifies small areas across the UK into five groups according to their level of young participation in HE. Each of these groups represents around 20 per cent of young people and is ranked from quintile 1 (areas with the lowest young participation rates, considered as the most disadvantaged) to quintile 5 (highest young participation rates, considered most advantaged). – Postcode based measure. Multi-dimensional equality measure (MEM) The multiple equality measure (MEM) brings together information on several equality dimensions for which large differences in the probability of progression into higher education exist. These equality dimensions include sex, ethnic group, where people live (using the POLAR3 classification), secondary education school sector (state or private), and income background (as measured by whether a person was in receipt of free school meals (FSM), a means-tested benefit while at school). These equality dimensions are combined using statistical modelling techniques and a linked data set of pupils in English schools who were aged 18 between 2006 and 2010 (source: National Pupil Database and School Census, Department for Education). The probability of entry to higher education aged 18 is then calculated based on these equality characteristics and their combinations. These probabilities are then used to aggregate pupils into groups, where group 1 contains those least likely to enter higher education (“most disadvantaged” in this context), and group 5 contains those most likely to enter higher education (“most advantaged” in this context). The composition of these groups, and their entry rates, can then be calculated and the trends in these assessed over time.
- Graph covers UK 18 year olds. Both men and women UK 18 year olds increased by 1% this year slightly increasing the gap. There are a range of factors linked to this. Attainment is a key one. Traditionally females have achieved higher grades than males. However, the latest JCQ data suggested a potential change: This year’s results have shown some interesting patterns emerging in the performance of males and females, especially in the reformed subjects in England. At the top grade (A*), 18 year old females perform better than males (7.3% compared to 7.0%) and at A*-A males and females perform the same (24.3%). However, there is a suggestion that males are closing the gap. At A*, whereas female outcomes at A* went down 0.6 percentage points in the reformed subjects, males went down only 0.3 percentage points. There is a similar picture at grades A*-A, with females dropping 1.1 percentage points but males only 0.2 percentage points. It is too early to draw conclusions, especially as this is the first year of the reformed specifications, and we are also seeing a similar pattern in Wales, which has had different reforms. It will be interesting, as we continue to progress through the reform timetable, to see if this pattern becomes a trend and the gender performance gap is closed at A level. There is also an attainment gap at GCSE.
- For nursing, applicants dropped by 20% and accepts dropped by 4% - small drop, as expected due to Nursing being oversubscribed Not EU apps increased nearly 40% but actual numbers small, only 60 extra Changes to bursaries
- SDRs – new product this year, data about why applicants make certain decisions based on track survey data Reports for 2017 cycle started in July, providers pay based on number of survey responses Graph from Sector level report. T.3 What did offer holders rate highest and lowest? Did this influence their decision to select their firm choice? The bars show which factors were rated highest and lowest. The line shows where being rated highly increased the likelihood of being selected as a firm choice. For example, a score of two shows offer holders who rated highly on a factor were twice as likely to select that as their firm choice, compared to those who rated unfavourably. Track Survey Provider Report, June Deadline (July 10, 2017): UCAS Analysis and Research, internal use only: Sector Level Report: Sector T.3 What did offer holders rate highest and lowest? Did this influence their decision to select their firm choice? The bars show which factors were rated highest and lowest. The line shows where being rated highly increased the likelihood of being selected as a firm choice. For example, a score of two shows offer holders who rated highly on a factor were twice as likely to select that as their firm choice, compared to those who rated unfavourably. 199,070 responses (1,728,520 after weighting) Most important factors – range of modules and student reviews Benefits to provider: - Identify areas where you are performing well. - Identify areas for improvement. - Discover how you compare with providers in your competitor group. - Find out why offer holders selected you as their firm choice. - Find out why offer holders selected another provider as their firm choice. Identify focus areas for your marketing. Offer holders complete our online survey after they have responded to their offers. The survey explores why they select an offer as either 'firm' or 'insurance'. We ask how important 20 factors are when making their decisions, including accommodation, course modules, social life, and location. This gives us an importance rating. Offer holders rate all providers that made them an offer against these factors. This gives us a provider rating. Offer holders respond to two questions: Importance rating – generally, how important are each of these factors? Extremely important, important, slightly important, not very important, or not at all important. Provider rating – rate the performance of each university you received an offer from: excellent, good, fair, poor, or awful. The response rate to the survey is around 20% – that's around 90,000 offer holders.
- Around 6,500 were for courses at Oxford or Cambridge, and over 5,000 were for medicine, dentistry or veterinary medicine.
- Newly added: I+A – Information and advice will remain a key focus of the OFS. The consultation document says: 81.The ability of students to make informed choices is critical, both for the individual and to shape the sector for the benefit of future students. Although there are vast amounts of information available to students, this information is sometimes hard to navigate and is not always consistently presented. This is particularly the case for students who have less awareness of higher education provision, such as those who are the first in their family to consider it. In order to support students to make the choices that are right for them, the OfS and Government need to ensure that the right information is presented in the right way. The OfS will draw from the latest expertise in behavioural science and technological development, as well as student input, to ensure that information is presented to students effectively. 82.An important component of the OfS’s approach to student information will be to ensure coherence and comparability in the information provided to students from a variety of sources. Schools, further education providers and employers, amongst many others, all play a role in informing students. The OfS will work, in partnership with others, to empower students through these different sources, rather than overwhelm them. 83.In particular, the OfS will improve the quality of information available to students through two new information sources: the TEF and the Transparency condition (further detail in the Guidance). Alongside these, the OfS will revisit the operation and design of Unistats, taking the latest thinking on behavioural science into account, to consider how best to present this data in a consistent and helpful way for students, and ensure they have access to an authoritative source of information about higher education. Providers will also be expected to provide information, advice and guidance to students from disadvantaged backgrounds and under-represented groups through activity negotiated within their access and participation plans (From left to right) TESOF: Following a lesson learned exercise the TEF Y3 specification has been released. TEF has been renamed “the ‘Teaching Excellence and Student Outcomes Framework’ (although the acronym remains TEF). Key differences are the addition of new metrics (such as grade inflation), the introduction of LEO data and a reduction in the weighting of the National Student Survey. OfS consultation: The OfS consultation is due imminently. This will give further insight into the operation of the new regulator. Fees debate and review: Tuition fees are a hugely political area at present. A review of tuition fees was announced at the Conservative conference, although there very few details are available. There are also other reviews underway such as the university-led review announced by Prof Keith Burnett (University of Sheffield), the Education Committee inquiry into value for money in higher education and the Treasury Committee inquiry into the student loan system. The Autumn Budget (22nd November) is also likely to reference higher education. Increase in medicine places: In October 2016, the Secretary of State for Health announced the Government’s commitment to expanding undergraduate medical training by 1,500 places, with effect from September 2018. A total of 500 of these additional places have already been allocated to existing medical schools. The Government has asked HEFCE and HEE to run a competition for the remaining 1,000 places. The guidance documents to apply for additional places have recently been released by HEFCE and HEE. Quals changes: 2018 sees the first major award of Applied General and Tech level qualifications. These vocational qualifications are fundamentally different to their predecessors. Changes to the assessment will result in a decline in the pass rate and fewer applicants achieving the top grades. We are continuously working to ensure the sector is aware of these developments Sector Agency Review: UCAS is keen to show it is embracing joint working with other sector agencies. Quality code: UKSCQA is consulting on a new approach to the Quality Code’s Expectations. The consultation seeks to ensure that the Code remains the cornerstone for quality in UK higher education, that it protects the public and student interest, and that it maintains the UK’s world-leading reputation for quality in higher education. The proposed changes seek to make the quality code more agile and responsive, to place the student at the heart of the code and to align it with ongoing regulatory changes. Technical education: The T level action plan has now been published, which provides an update on progress made in developing policy and implementing the reforms set out in the Skills Plan. It confirms that T levels - Level 3 qualifications, equivalent in size to a three A level programme - in digital, childcare and education, and construction will be taught by a small number of providers from 2020, and eight further routes being launched in two waves in September 2021 and 2022. Note that the remaining four routes are expected to be delivered through apprenticeships only. Apprenticeships and T levels will be based on the same set of standards designed by employers and others but there will be differences in the overall content of each programme, to reflect that apprenticeships are mainly delivered in the workplace, and T levels will mainly be delivered in the classroom. In addition to this, UCAS continues to explore what role it could play in the technical education space.
- BTEC Fundamentally different, including mandatory external assessment Of a higher standard – possibility of reduced pass rate and grade distribution will change. Reformed and unreformed versions will be delivered simultaneously Accuracy when entering qualifications into Apply will be key – differentiated by RQF (reformed)/QCF (unreformed) in the title Changes to the distribution of results for some vocational qualifications
- Impact of reducing 18yo on recruitment
- UK 18 year olds set to decrease in coming years – yet increasing application rates prevent the falls being as large as the population falls. Smaller pool = competition for recruitment Updated forecasts for day 55 – will be slightly higher than recent forecasts due to clearing and small shifts in the estimates of final 2017 numbers. Should be noted that these are prediction intervals are for presentation purposes only; they are reasonably sensible approximations but should not be used for planning and other uses. Assumptions Historical trends in the application rate will continue (with a higher weighting towards more recent cycles) This assumption becomes less reliable when major policy shifts occur (e.g. tuition fees / Brexit) Population projections are correct Projections for 2017 cycle are correct (still two weeks out until we receive finalised datasets, RPAs/withdrawals will have an effect) Brief methodology Applicant numbers are calculated from the product of the application rate and population. It is important to separate these two effects, as while the UK 18yo population is decreasing over the next few years, the application rate has been continuing to rise. Using historical UCAS data, trends in the application rate are forecast forward for around a thousand combinations of age, sex and area. These can then be multiplied by their appropriate population forecasts, sourced via the ONS, but then processed by us. Summing up these smaller demographic forecasts gives us the total sector-wide forecast. A similar methodology is used for acceptance rates, in order to calculate a forecast for placed applicants.
- Updated forecasts for day 55 – will be slightly higher than recent forecasts due to clearing and small shifts in the estimates of final 2017 numbers. Should be noted that these are prediction intervals are for presentation purposes only; they are reasonably sensible approximations but should not be used for planning and other uses. Assumptions Historical trends in the application rate will continue (with a higher weighting towards more recent cycles) This assumption becomes less reliable when major policy shifts occur (e.g. tuition fees / Brexit) Population projections are correct Projections for 2017 cycle are correct (still two weeks out until we receive finalised datasets, RPAs/withdrawals will have an effect) Brief methodology Applicant numbers are calculated from the product of the application rate and population. It is important to separate these two effects, as while the UK 18yo population is decreasing over the next few years, the application rate has been continuing to rise. Using historical UCAS data, trends in the application rate are forecast forward for around a thousand combinations of age, sex and area. These can then be multiplied by their appropriate population forecasts, sourced via the ONS, but then processed by us. Summing up these smaller demographic forecasts gives us the total sector-wide forecast. A similar methodology is used for acceptance rates, in order to calculate a forecast for placed applicants.
- Updated forecasts for day 55 – will be slightly higher than recent forecasts due to clearing and small shifts in the estimates of final 2017 numbers. Should be noted that these are prediction intervals are for presentation purposes only; they are reasonably sensible approximations but should not be used for planning and other uses. Overseas forecast – just for not EU here. Assumptions Historical trends in the application rate will continue (with a higher weighting towards more recent cycles) This assumption becomes less reliable when major policy shifts occur (e.g. tuition fees / Brexit) Population projections are correct Projections for 2017 cycle are correct (still two weeks out until we receive finalised datasets, RPAs/withdrawals will have an effect) Brief methodology Applicant numbers are calculated from the product of the application rate and population. It is important to separate these two effects, as while the UK 18yo population is decreasing over the next few years, the application rate has been continuing to rise. Using historical UCAS data, trends in the application rate are forecast forward for around a thousand combinations of age, sex and area. These can then be multiplied by their appropriate population forecasts, sourced via the ONS, but then processed by us. Summing up these smaller demographic forecasts gives us the total sector-wide forecast. A similar methodology is used for acceptance rates, in order to calculate a forecast for placed applicants.
- 36,100 at higher level, an increase of 35.1 per cent from 26,800 in 2015/16. Point one data covers both higher and degree apprenticeships. In total 491,300 apprenticeship starts, a decrease of 2.5 per cent from 503,700 reported at this time for 2015/16. 43.4% of pre-applicants registering with UCAS express an interest in apprenticeships. 20.6% of new applicants also ‘seriously considering’ a degree apprenticeship. 10.5% of those not completing a 2017 application are choosing an apprenticeship.
- Oxbridge, medicine, vet and dentistry Offer Rate Calculator: 16th September to 15th October 2017 - 46,000 searches. 11,500 of these to Oct15 deadline courses.
- The Unconscious Bias report 2017 provides an update on our previous report. The 2016 report made the following recommendations: Recommendation one: HEPs should run name-blind admissions decision-making projects at a local level Recommendation two: SPA should take the lead on the development of good practice and enhancement of unconscious bias training for those involved in admissions Recommendation three: HEPs should regularly monitor and review their admissions data and address any unexplained differences in offer-making or admissions outcomes Recommendation four: HEPs could consider introducing a review of applications marked for rejection Recommendation five: There should be further research into understanding if there is bias in HE admissions Recommendation six: UCAS should improve support for HEPs using contextualised admissions Recommendation seven: Those responsible for fair access and widening participation should consider what further actions could be taken The headline finding is that masking an applicant’s name did not seem to impact on their chances of receiving an offer, nor did it change the composition of learners that receive an offer. However, some of the process suggest that have two-step decision processes and double checking will not only reduce the risk of unconscious bias, but also reduce the risk of mistakes being made in the process. We also promote the range of work being undertaken in the sector to support learners from all background entering HE. We also reiterate that all of our research to date suggests that there is no evidence of systemic bias in the system.
- Questions in Apply - e.g. experience of the care system. We are intending to expand the range of questions as part of the redevelopment of the Application Management Service to include carers, parental responsibility and estranged students. Personal statement and reference ̶ free text fields where further contextual information can be included. Work with the Fair Education Alliance to raise awareness with teachers and advisers. We’ve co-produced a factsheet: www.ucas.com/files/contextual-data-factsheet.