In the debate about the A level results fiasco, many seem to be turning their fire from Ofqual and the Govt, to Universities. Why, it is said, can't Universities simply give places to those denied places by the workings of the blatantly unfair algorithm? Long thread. 1/

Some may be able to do, and those who have the capacity to give offers to deserving 'near-miss' candidates should do so. Some Oxbridge colleges have shown the way. Others have fallen back on very weak excuses. 2/

But... the reality is that many Universities simply cannot make offers to all near-miss students, given capacity and resource constraints.

So... here's an insight into the admissions process. 3/

All this needs to be carefully caveated. Universities have a lot of autonomy around admissions, and it is almost impossible to generalise. Those with questions on the current fiasco are strongly advised to contact individual Universities and ask about the evolving situation. 4/

Also, there is a big difference between 'selecting' and 'recruiting' Unis (or courses within Unis). Selecting Unis have the privilege, and responsibility, to select between a large number of suitably qualified applicants. 5/

Students typically apply to up to 5 Unis via UCAS, either pre- or post- A level (or equivalent), by January (for entry in Sept/Oct). As applications come in, Universities decide whether or not to make offers. 6/

A selecting Uni may have X home places; and 5X applications. It has to decide how many offers to make, and to whom. Typically, it looks at GCSE results, A level predictions (or results), the reference and personal statement, and perhaps extra tests and/or an interview. 7/

There are well-known problems with each of these, and a keen awareness of the fact that one's school, and background, can have a big impact on the quality of the UCAS application. 8/

As said above, approaches differ (widely) but all Unis are trying to fill their places with 'the best' (however defined) applicants.

I'll concentrate here not on the assessment of quality, but on the numbers game. 9/

When students apply, Unis do not know which other Unis candidates have applied to. And, they do not know which offers candidates will choose to take up (as either their 'firm' or their 'insurance' choice). 10/

How many offers to make to fill X places? Well... it depends. How many offers will be accepted (as firm or insurance)? How many students with conditional offers will make their predicted grades? 11/

Unis simply do not know; and instead rely on the data from previous years. It is not uncommon for a Uni to make 2X or 3X offers in order to seek to fill X places. 12/

Two comments on that. First, many applicants are rejected. They are rejected not because they are unworthy, but because there are 'too many' 'better' applicants. These decisions are hard to make. 13/

Second, why so many offers? Well... a) many candidates to whom any Uni gives an offer will reject that offer in favour of one from another University; and b) some candidates may not meet the terms of their offer. 14/

When Unis make an offer, which is accepted by a candidate as a 'firm choice'... Unis are (quite rightly) contractually obliged to honour the offer when the candidate meets the terms of the offer. 15/

So... if all those to whom offers were made accepted those offers, and made the grades, Unis would have to cope with an intake double the expected size. That doesn't happen... but it is not uncommon for some Schools in some Unis to 'overshoot'. 16/

When this happens there tend to be consequences in terms of resources, accommodation, staff/student ratio, the student experience etc. It is, unsurprisingly, usually best to end up with the number of students you were planning for, rather than more. 17/

There are also obvious consequences for near-miss applicants. In a year in which there is an 'overshoot', near-miss candidates are very likely to miss out - there is no legal obligation on the University to take them, and capacity has already been reached/exceeded. 18/

Conversely, there are years in which Unis may have 'undershot'. In those circumstances, Unis will want to fill their places, and will be much readier to take near-miss candidates (and/or use clearing and adjustment). 19/

Candidates often struggle to understand why one Uni is being 'more generous' than another. It is rarely (except in the most marginal situations) about any sort of judgment on 'merit', but is instead a function of the constraints within which Unis are operating. 20/

Which... brings me (finally) to this year.

Unis have long since made offers, which have long since been accepted (as firm or insurance) or rejected by candidates. They have, by now, given places to firm offer-holders who have made the grades. 21/

Overall, results are (slightly) up on last year.

Some Unis will be full, others will have spaces remaining. Those with spaces remaining will, I'm sure, be looking to give them to those disadvantaged by the operation of the algorithm. 22/

Those who are full have less room for manoeuvre. If it is possible to stretch capacity, they may look to do so... but there is a Govt cap limiting the amount by which they increase capacity, and there are also (esp this year) significant resource constraints. 23/

All in all, much of the criticism I have seen directed at Unis, and comparing the response of different Unis (and Oxbridge colleges) seems wide of the mark.

My hope is that a better understanding of admissions processes will help to explain the different responses. 24/

And NB This should not be seen as a defence of what is, to my mind, a very flawed system. It is intended merely as a description of that system, and to explain what are (wrongly) seen as heartless/irrational decisions on the part of some Unis. ENDS 25/25