Escaping the Atrium

A write up of a recent trip, pushing out and exploring a world beyond conditional formatting on Excel and poorly executed SQL queries....

The Atrium's a funny place. It's home for those bits and pieces of "Professional Services" which most people avoid. HR, IT, Finance, Facilities, Marketing, Admissions and the UK Recruitment team. Those sorts of people. And, more recently, a group of academics who "must have said something" and have been banished to the south east corner of the building. Listen carefully, and you can hear them, powering up SPSS and trying to tap distress signals through the malfunctioning heating system.....

While the wheels of power turn, shiny buildings take shape and teaching and learning goes on across Park St, life in The Atrium can feel disembodied and not very university-like. The place where crates hang out, looking menacing, and mismatched furniture comes to die.

The Atrium - 'come see us sometime'

It's nice to get out and about every now and again. Some time earlier this year, I was asked to facilitate a forum at the University's recent Teachers and Advisers Conference. This took place last Wednesday and was a treat, even if I missed most of the catering. My own fault; I was getting this fantastic picture taken by a proper photographer:

"Do you want fries with that?"

The session - where such diverse institutions as Vandyke Upper to Central Beds College to Hitchin Boys School were represented - enabled me to perform a covert piece of market research and to listen into the thoughts and concerns of those present. Given that everyone had signed up for a "forum", and, therefore, a meeting of minds and exchange of ideas, I saw my role very much in terms of just nudging things along and throwing in the odd question bomb or two. Such as:

"What pressures do young people face if/when they're thinking about university?"

- and -

"How can schools and universities help?"

After a series of breakouts, the first issue to generate heat was finance:

• debt aversion - potential students need to understand repayment terms;
• more communication around bursaries is needed;
• maintenance - some won't attend if none available, creating another 'squeezed middle'; i.e. households with incomes more than £25k pa, but who don't have the level of income which would support their kids through unis;
• party people - those along for a ride and who don't see themselves as ever earning enough to start paying back.

There was some discussion and one or two points of departure for people in the group. Certainly, year on year, the Save our Student quantitative survey gives some graphic stats. For the 2017 results from more than 2300 students, click here.

A more pronounced and unified response was given to unconditional offers, which were picked up on throughout the day. They're not popular with schools, let me tell you. I've blogged about unconditional offers before and explained why I think U offers aren't great.

Still, I don't have to deal with the fallout. Teachers and advisers do. We were told how unconditional offers lead in a proportion of students dropping attendance and grades. The group recognised universities' needed to maximise income, but those who have been more profligate at dishing out offers came in for heavy scorn. Nottingham Trent and Lincoln were mentioned in despatches.

The third main area of concern was mental health. No surprise, although very sobering to hear about anxiety, self-harming and communication issues among people at a key, challenging moment in their personal developments. Again, recently published statistics, this time from the Institute for Public Policy Research, quantify some of the issues (for example a six-fold increase in cases of declared mental health conditions in 2015 vs 2006 and record numbers of student suicides and a 20% increase in the number of students dropping out and suffering mental health conditions. For more detail,see the IPPR website).

All in all, a valuable day spent out of the office. I've just had and will have very different excursions this week, to the London School of Commerce. By which time, I'll probably be gagging for the reassuring comfort of my two screens, Microsoft Powerpoint and my tea/soup drawer.

Market research; back to "business as usual"

9 reasons unconditional offers are a BAD IDEA

In the last few years, a number of institutions of various shapes, sizes and repute have been dishing out unconditional offers on the basis of predicted grades. But is this good practice? Do students benefit?

For my money, the answers are usually a resounding 'no' to both questions.

1. Some applicants will receive an offer and think 'game over'. The foot will come off the gas and performance will slip (recent UCAS research show that those who receive unconditional offers are 23% more likely to miss their grades than those who didn't - see this chart borrowed from a 2016 UCAS research paper);
   
   
   
2. Employers look at A level grades (particularly for apprenticeships, graduate schemes etc), and will disadvantage those who have slipped as a result of the above;
3. Schools are put in a double bind of a) trying to re-engage unconditional offer holders and b) trying to mitigate against knock on effects to classmates and colleagues;
4. Schools may also 'play the system' and encourage enrolment at more 'prestigious' institutions if, for example, they predict grades which will see applicants accept a place at (for example) Poppleton rather than Poppleton Metropolitan;
   
   

   

   Sorry; I think, I might be in the wrong place

5. Students who may receive more support and fare better at Poppleton Met but who are lured to Poppleton, may end up at the 'wrong' uni and become disenfranchised and alienated from higher education altogether;
   
   
6. Similarly, course choice may be driven, not by passion for the course or research into the uni, course content, teaching etc., as by a decision based on flattery and an HEI's reputation and/or ability to promote itself;
7. Long term effects on many universities are likely to be damaging - "Lower tariff" institutions will lose income and "Higher tariff" will see a reduction in their league table scores after a few years of declining entry tariff points;
8. If the logical endgame of this process is the reduction in the number of departments, courses and institutions, there will be less choice in the market;
9. The enthusiasm for unconditionally offering to students evidently regarded as little more than three years' worth of fees (or at least one, if things do inevitably go belly up) is - to my mind - indefensible. And another sign the HE system is on a trajectory where, however much students are said to be at the centre of the system, they're not. Market is king and institutions manipulative and resourced enough to succeed will fight, claw and elbow their way to the surface.

All comments, criticism and name calling in the box below please.

Unonditionally Guaranteed.
The Captain's reviled
commercial effort. 'Nuff said.

Bedfordshire's tariff requirements are low. While this impacts on league table and other reputation measures, it demonstrates our widening participation mission. It also presents an awkward question; do we want to make unconditional offers to non-ABB students and risk helping damage applicants' A level results, denying them the chance to shop around with more points in Adjustment or Clearing and/or restrict their future career choices?

We have an alternative to unconditional offers. Our foundation year option and the 'guaranteed place' may sound similar to an unconditional, but it is different. We do not offer unconditional entry to level 4, but have a foundation offer for students who - for whatever reason - need it. This could quite conceivably include those who have been burned and underachieved after being falsely lured in by an unconditional offer in the past. If and when we get these people, great. The fear is, however, that they will already have been put off by HE altogether.