Will the Use of Contextual Indicators Make UK Higher Education Admissions Fairer?

Abstract

In the UK, as elsewhere, the use of 'contextual' data has been strongly advocated in order to inform undergraduate admissions decision-making. More than a third of UK universities currently take the socioeconomic or other background context of undergraduate applicants' attainment into account when deciding whom to shortlist, interview, make standard or reduced offers to, or accept at confirmation or clearing. Even more universities plan to do so in the future. Contextualised admissions policies are considered by many commentators to be intrinsically fairer, and to represent a potentially powerful means of addressing the persistent under-representation of HE students from less advantaged backgrounds, but their impact has not yet been rigorously evaluated. In order to be effective, the indicators must be accurate, appropriate, and complete, and policies for their use must demonstrably widen participation, presumably without compromising student achievement. This paper reviews the indicators available for judging context, and the existing evidence base on how contextually-identified students perform in higher education. It illustrates the considerable difficulties of using any available indicators, alone or in combination, in terms of trustworthiness. And it explains how their use could introduce new injustices while tackling merely the symptoms of stratified participation in HE. This is far from a counsel of despair. We need to widen participation and the use of context stills shows considerable promise. The paper therefore presents the case for a new OPEN ACCESS Educ. Sci. 2015, 5 307 study by the authors, looking at which of the available contextual indicators are best in practice, and what difference their use would really make to widening participation at HE.

Bridging the cultural divide? Exploring school pupils’ perceptions of medicine

“…their parents were professionals or they lived in areas defined as being of high socio-economic status according to their postcodes). This is not unexpected: Boliver et al 76 caution against the ecological fallacy of assuming that all people (pupils) have the modal characteristics of those who live in the same area or attend the same school. We considered this mix authentic, and it facilitated a reflexive 'group view' via exposure to various perspectives.…”

Higher vocational education and social mobility: educational participation in Australia and England

“…However, it is important to note that researchers in both countries have questioned the accuracy of these area-based proxy indicators of socio-economic disadvantage for the identification of equity groups and the locales to target resources to widen participation. For example, in the UK new indicators are being evaluated (Boliver, Gorard, & Siddiqui 2015) and in Australia, Dockery, Seymour and Koshy (2015) argue that area-based socio-economic status measures leads to substantial misclassification, which results in overestimating the proportion of students from low-SES households enrolled in university and underestimating the difficulties many individuals may have in accessing higher education. Notwithstanding these difficulties, for the purposes of this article, the measures used in government national collections and publications will be used for the comparative discussion, albeit with caution, because these are the data that inform policy discussion and development.…”

‘It’s Scary and It’s Big, and There’s No Job Security’: Undergraduate Experiences of Career Planning and Stratification in an English Red Brick University

“…However, it is worth highlighting that many higher education institutions have been enthusiastic in using their access agreements to enhance inward undergraduate and postgraduate opportunities for students labelled 'widening participation'. Substantial improvements in the youth and graduate labor market and a fairer system of access into HE notwithstanding (see Boliver et al 2015), shorter-term measures to continue to financially support lower-income students after graduation could be developed by HEIs. Such outward, and non-repayable, grants could help to enable their lower-income graduates to at least try and continue to develop their careers as they move into employment.…”