Calls for universities to put greater emphasis on contextualised data

A new study by the Sutton Trust found that the number of disadvantaged students attending top universities could increase by 50% if the institutions were to make greater use of contextualised data in assessing admissions.

The report recommended that by lowering the typical offer for highly selective universities by two grades from ABB to BBC, 750 students who were previously eligible for free school meals (FSM) would be able to attend each year, as well as many more from low and moderate income backgrounds.

The research, led by Professor Vikki Boliver from Durham University and Dr Claire Crawford from Warwick University, looked at the use of contextualised admissions in a group of 30 highly selective UK universities.

Contextual data provides universities with information on the socio-economic background of candidates, although there is great variation in the way this is used in practice, with decisions often being left to the discretion of individual departments.

Area-level and school-level data is widely used, but individual indications such as FSM eligibility are less commonly used. Moreover, the study found that a significant number of universities didn’t detail clearly how these indicators would be used. This lack of transparency was claimed to create a barrier to access for potentially eligible students, who may be unaware they would benefit from contextual admissions processes.

Overall, there was found to be little difference in the average A-Level grades with which students from different socio-economic backgrounds entered university, suggesting little success in admitting larger numbers of students with lower grades from contextual backgrounds.

Evidence of the use of contextualisation was found in six universities, as students from lower participation backgrounds were found to have lower A-Level results than the standard offer. However, this difference was small, at less than half a grade on average.

To counter any concern that universities would be setting up students from low income backgrounds to fail by allowing them entry with a lower offer, the study found little evidence to suggest that universities practising greater contextualisation saw lower degree completion rates, lower degree class results or higher dropout rates.

Other recommendations by the report included increasing foundation year provision, with specific targeting of those from disadvantaged backgrounds, and the provision of additional support to students from lower participation backgrounds to recognise additional difficulties they may face.

Dr Claire Crawford, Assistant Professor of Economics at the University of Warwick, said: “Despite a substantial increase in the numbers of universities that report taking account of students’ backgrounds when making application decisions, it is amazing how little difference there is between the average grades of young people from rich and poor backgrounds who are admitted to selective universities.

“While the relatively small numbers of students from disadvantaged backgrounds who secure the highest A-level grades remains the biggest barrier to widening access to elite institutions, our analysis shows that more widespread and transparent use of contextual data could make a significant difference.”

Sarah Stevens from the Russell Group, which represents 24 leading universities, said: “For many years Russell Group universities have used contextualised admissions and data, and have developed foundation courses to support students from disadvantaged backgrounds in accessing higher education.

“This is part of our universities’ wider commitment to ensuring students with the potential and determination to succeed at a leading university have the opportunity to do so, whatever their background or circumstances.”