Contextualised admissions in the competitive environment Applicant Experience in Wales SPA event - 4 June 2014 Janet Graham, Director of SPA

External policy drivers impacting admissions1  New competitive market place - looking for efficiencies and new USPs for quality of offering and service, while enhancing access for disadvantaged students and ensuring fair admissions  Increasing competition between HEIs, and with HE in FE and new independent providers, UK plc: global competition, league tables  Changes and developments to the Pre-HE curriculum - GCSEs, A/AS level reform, Welsh Bac - other changes round the UK  QAA UK Quality Code - Chapter B2 covers admission

External policy drivers impacting admissions2  UCAS changes - to admissions process and UCAS Tariff  Issues round advice and guidance for potential students  Student number controls deregulation in England - impact UK wide  Tuition fees and student finance - policy varies round UK  Push for fair access and widening access  Demographics - Fewer young applicants until 2020  HE providers recruit UK-wide, changing patterns of behaviour by HE

Institutional Challenges in Admissions  Meeting targets for both student numbers and under-represented groups – getting the right balance  Good record keeping, IT systems for admissions data analysis and market intelligence  Managing change - planning, admissions and student recruitment working together  Implementing policy -Tracking and Evaluating: in-house, UCAS Strobe  Quality of the applicant and student experience including pre-entry engagement, information and guidance and learning support  Promotion of academic success - access, transition, retention, employability

Fair admissions in a competitive landscape Competition between HE providers is growing. There is an increasing need to seek out students with potential from a wider range of backgrounds.

What is contextualised admissions? Contextualised admissions is defined as contextual information and contextual data used by HE providers to assess an applicant’s prior attainment and potential to succeed in higher education in the context of the circumstances in which their attainment has been obtained. SPAs Report: spasworkoncontextual/cdresearch2013/

Why is contextual data used? Academic Excellence  Competition  Evidence-base  Increase applicant pool  External policy drivers  Diversity as pedagogical value Fair admissions “We are very aware of the differences out there, and it’s obvious when students come to study with us that the brightest sparks do not always come with the best grades.”

Contextualised admissions and holistic assessment

Fair admissions in a competitive landscape So does this mean moving away from academic rigor and high standards? No.  It is about supporting the delivery of fair admissions and maintaining high academic standards.  It is about seeking excellence by identifying the ‘best’ applicants with the greatest potential and likelihood of a successful degree outcome.

 Scientific ‘Gold standard’: good, individual-level data Caveats:  Data availability  Expertise and cost  Limitations (often young, UK domiciled HE applicants)  Outreach or / and admissions Area School Household Individual Evidence 1: What matters for measuring academic potential?

Evidence 2: Same grades same potential  Students from different types of school perform differently.  In the majority of research, those from state schools outperform independent school students or those from poorer performing schools outperform those from higher performing schools (Oxford, Bristol, Cardiff, HEFCE, Scottish institution)  This is not confirmed in one case study where school did not affect degree results (Cambridge)  Studies use different ways of thinking about and measuring disadvantage as well as attainment.

Evidence 3 : Positive progress where students admitted using contextual data  Positive benefits for individual providers (recruitment, conversions, PIs) “…can only work if you get the applicants…. to do that you have to change the perception that the university is ‘not for me’.”  Comparative research into performance of contextualised students supports the approach  Research into outcomes achieved by WP outreach groups confirms performance (e.g. PARTNERS, LEAPS)  Building commitment to those who enter

Evidence 4: Transferring evidence into practice Case study providers Methodology: Application of data FFTA FFFAF Approach: Implications (beyond additional consideration) AOI AO (some) GO/IAOMO ‘ Formal’ application of contextual data into holistic decision making ‘F’ – flagging; ‘T’ – triangulation; ‘‘A’ – adjusting scores (i.e. calculating adjusted grades to reflect relative performance as well as using actual grades). ‘I’ –highly likely or guaranteed interview; GO –guaranteed offer; AO/MO–adjusted offer on individual basis/ modified offer - at lower end of range

Contextual data indicators School performance indicator for Level 2/age 16 School/college performance indicator for Level 3/age 18 School/college higher education progression indicator Low Participation Neighbourhood indicator Area of relative deprivation Other geo-demographic indicator (ACORN and OAC) Outreach indicator (completion of agreed programme) Declaration of exceptional circumstance Higher education background indicator ‘In care’ indicator Other individual indicator (refugees)

Basket of Data Educational Background  School performance: % of students achieving 5+ GCSEs A*-C including English and Maths (or equivalent in Scotland)  Average point score by school “best 8” GCSEs (or Standard grade SCQF level 4 equivalent performance)  mean QCA points per A level and per student (or equivalent in Scotland) Socio-Economic Background  % of students entitled to free school meals by School (historical data only by Local Authority)  % of students entitled to EMA (not England)  Lives in a low progression to higher education neighbourhood (POLAR 2 and POLAR 3) derived from postcode  SIMD Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SFC version) Supplied by UCAS, if universities and colleges sign up to take it. Contextual data for HEPs, free, via UCAS for 2014

Useful practices  Using multiple datasets  Dealing with missing data (N.B. standardisation)  Using multiple indicators  Triangulation  Checking information - particularly self declared, e.g. follow up ‘in- care’  Using ranked data for decision making  Using additional information for marginal decisions

From the report to practice:  Use of contextual data and information aligned to strategic mission  Contextual data can be a helpful part of holistic admissions  Senior management buy-in and pro-active support  Good record keeping  Linked systems for widening participation, admission, planning, student progression, graduation and beyond – student lifecycle  Create / use HEI own ‘baseline’ evidence base

From the report to practice:  Know what data is out there and how to use it  Appropriately trained staff  Transparency about how and when contextual data is used  Integrated approach to outreach/WP and admissions  and ideally to support the student experience, retention, and graduation  ‘Access without support is not opportunity’  If possible, sharing of expertise, creation of a comparative evidence- base

Strategic importance of contextualised admissions: Facilitates reaching targets Improves calibre of entrants through identifying potential Widens participation and enhances diversity of the student body Supports the applicant experience Could aid social mobility Helps delivery of fair admissions Helps assess applicants for financial support Helps identify applicants who may benefit from additional support

Janet Graham, Director of SPA Tel Thank you