Tag Archives: unconditional offers

UNCONDITIONALLY UNACCEPTABLE

subtext readers will have seen that Lancaster was one of 23 universities ‘named and shamed’ by the Department for Education on 5 April for excessive use of unconditional offers to prospective undergraduates (see also subtext 184). In particular, our widespread use of ‘conditional unconditional’ offers, where your offer is only made unconditional if you select us as your firm choice, was slammed by the Secretary of State, Damian Hinds MP, as ‘damaging the reputation of the institutions involved and our world-leading sector as a whole. That is why I will be writing to 23 universities, urging them to stamp out this unethical practice.’

The 23 institutions are: Aston; Birmingham; Birmingham City; Bournemouth; Brighton; City; Derby; Hertfordshire; Keele; Kent; Kingston; Lancaster; Lincoln; Loughborough College; Middlesex; Nottingham Trent; Oxford Brookes; Roehampton; Royal Holloway; Sheffield Hallam; Staffordshire; Surrey; and West London. Perhaps we could suggest that these be listed as our true ‘competitor institutions’ in future admissions strategy meetings?

The DfE statement has had an impact. Aston University reports that it ‘has taken the decision to stop making ‘conditional unconditional’ offers’:

https://www2.aston.ac.uk/study/undergraduate/applicants/post-application/unconditional-offers/index

Roehampton announced on 4 April that, after a review, ‘we no longer offer ‘conditional unconditional’ offers. We also continue to ensure that at every stage of the application process our admissions policies are clear, fair and in the best interests of students’:

https://www.roehampton.ac.uk/general-information/statements/

At Lancaster, however, we’re having none of this defeatist talk. Our press release, as reported in the Lancaster Guardian, states that, ‘there are various assertions within the DfE statement that we do not recognise nor do we feel are backed up by evidence. We don’t practise ‘pressure selling’ tactics and have received overwhelmingly positive feedback from applicants about our approach to offers. We will, of course, consider all advice carefully and will continue to assess our position.’

https://www.lancasterguardian.co.uk/news/lancaster-university-defends-unconditional-offer-stance-amid-government-criticism-1-9701644

subtext understands that, having assessed our position, we are still intending to make conditional unconditional offers next year. Over to you, Office for Students!

LETTERS

Dear subtext,

I was interested to see Lancaster University mentioned in the news today as one of 23 universities with an unconditional offer scheme and to also read that this is based in part on references. It reminded me of someone I once knew, who had not only been offered an unconditional place at medical school when he was 18, he hadn’t even had to apply. Such were the benefits of being the son of a doctor in the 1960s.

Bob Sapey

***

Dear subtext,

I have been following the debate over the revised Code of Conduct on Protests since criticisms were first made clear in subtext 185. I very much agree with the concerns over the content raised in that issue, and also by others such as Lancaster UCU. Despite following the debate, I still remain puzzled as to why a new, revised code is needed at all. What is the evidence that the previous version was inadequate or failing? University management’s only hint is their description of the previous code as ‘outdated’ and their saying that the revised version would be a ‘simpler document more tightly focused on… practical steps.’

While the justification for the revision is still slightly murky, one thing that is clear is a strength of opposition to the revised code. But mixed messages seem to have been given by the Strategic Planning and Governance department and no public statement seems to have been made in response. LUSU have told me that the university is now creating guidance for the implementation of the revised code (so much for a simpler document!). Meanwhile, the student collective snappily-titled ‘No to the new Protest Code of Lancaster University’ (or NTTNPCOLU for short) have revealed that Mr Simon Jennings, the Director of Strategic Planning and Governance, has ‘agreed to consider forming a committee representing staff and students to redraft the code document.’

Quite what the university is doing, if anything, as their response to the concerns, no one actually seems to know.

Yours,

Andrew Williams

***

Dear subtext,

Former University member of staff, student and Bailrigg FM MANCOM member here…

I’m not sure what the SU have been smoking, but the OFCOM fees for a long-term RSL on low-power FM, which is what Bailrigg FM falls under, is only £140 per year. See page 16 of:

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/112465/Tariff-Tables-2018_19.pdf

The only other saving I can see would be would be £548 per year for the PPL music licensing subscription.

Given that the studios, playout, and other costs would remain the same this would appear to be a hugely retrograde step for one of the oldest student radio stations in the UK and the first to hold an LPFM license.

Ian Anderson

***

Dear subtext,

I was bitterly disappointed to read your report outlining the cuts to Bailrigg FM.

Student Media at Lancaster University dates back to the 60s – with a tradition for holding the university and the union to account. Ronnie Rowlands’ piece on the importance of student media as a ‘playground’ for future journalists was spot on: but let’s not forget that student media has made a genuine impact on the student experience in its long and illustrious history. Exposing shoddy landlords, keeping students informed on strike action, questioning dubious university claims. Student media is, and always has been, a ‘pillar of democracy’ at Lancaster. Time and time again, they have shown their knack for making the university and the union sit up and take notice.

These cuts are the start of what will undoubtedly be a descent into oblivion for student media. With no FM licence, and SCAN gradually coming out of print, it won’t be long before student media ceases to be. How the full time officers allowed this to happen should astound me – but with a VP Campaigns & Comms who showed no regard for student media while campaigning, and an officer team that has a record for whiney facebook posts lambasting those that have the audacity to criticise them, I’m somehow not surprised.

That the Students’ Union stealthily made these cuts, without so much as a Facebook post for an explanation, is appalling and gutless.

Best wishes,

Michael Mander
Former Associate Editor of SCAN

UNCONDITIONAL LOVE

The practice, widespread across England, Wales and Northern Ireland, of making unconditional offers to applicants for undergraduate degrees is attracting the displeasure of ministers, VCs and, potentially, the new Office for Students (OfS). Sam Gyimah MP, Minister of State for Universities until he became a Brexit casualty on 30 November, described them on 26 July as ‘completely irresponsible’ and called on the OfS to take action. The VCs at Brunel, Buckingham, Chichester, Hertfordshire, King’s College London and the West of England led the signatories to a letter in the Times on 20 November, regretting that the practice was ‘detrimental to the longer-term interests of students, skews university choices and reduces the motivation and quality of sixth-form life in schools.’ Signatories particularly disliked so-called ‘unconditional if firm’ offers, also called ‘conditional unconditional’ offers, where universities put students under pressure by dangling an unconditional offer in front of them… but only if they pick that university as their firm choice, not their insurance choice.

Lancaster is unlikely to sign up to such sentiments – because business is booming in ‘unconditional if firm’ offers here! For some of our departments, the overwhelming majority of offers are now ‘unconditional if firm’, and as our admissions team will doubtless point out, they seem to work, especially when it comes to persuading applicants to choose us in preference to a close rival.

This competitive advantage only works if we’re doing it and our competitors are not, of course, and UCAS’s 2018 end-of-cycle report, published on 29 November, suggests that we’re fast approaching a no-score draw:

https://www.ucas.com/data-and-analysis/undergraduate-statistics-and-reports/ucas-undergraduate-end-cycle-reports/2018-end-cycle-report

It seems that 14% of offers made for 2018 entry were unconditional, this being made up of 7.1% genuinely unconditional offers and 6.9% ‘unconditional if firm’ offers. Overall, 34.4% of applicants received at least one unconditional offer last year. In a conclusion due to be filed alongside that technical report on ‘things bears do in the woods’, UCAS has found that ‘applicants who hold an unconditional offer as their firm choice are more likely to miss their predicted A level grades by 2 or more points, compared to those who are holding a conditional offer as their firm choice.’

It pains subtext that Lancaster is one of the pioneers of this coercive approach to recruitment; but it seems likely that we won’t be allowed to do it for much longer anyway. Last year, Swansea University published the following statement on its website, aimed at its 2018 applicants, and we really couldn’t have put it better ourselves:

‘Universities typically indicate that they are making an unconditional offer because they have been favourably impressed with the candidate’s application. As flattering as it can be to receive such an offer, we would suggest that you consider why a University is behaving in this way. In this situation you are being invited to enroll on a degree programme without having to demonstrate prior achievement or a relevant base of subject knowledge. This says quite a lot about the University and their lack of confidence in being able to attract strong students.’

Miaow! This statement is no longer on Swansea’s website – we wonder why?! – but is still available via the magic of the Google cache.