Impact on Universities

[BJames]

I appreciate this is unlikely to take place in the academic year 2020/21 but I came across a really interesting article this evening in the Guardian (also reported in the Telegraph) that discusses how they could overhaul the whole system and move university applications to after A-Level grades are awarded. You can see the article here: https://www.theguardian.com/educati...versity-applications-to-after-a-level-results

The education secretary is planning a radical overhaul of England’s university admissions system, with students applying after A-level results and the start of the academic year possibly being moved to January, the Guardian has learned.

Civil servants at the Department for Education (DfE), under Gavin Williamson, have modelled a shift to post-qualification admissions to improve social mobility and help disadvantaged school-leavers.

Under the current system, sixth formers in England apply to university in January using grades predicted by their teachers, before sitting A-levels in late spring and accepting university offers in June. Exam results are published in August, meaning those who missed out on their required grades face a frantic scramble to join clearing and find another course. Teacher grade predictions are notoriously inaccurate, adding to confusion for students and admissions staff.

Under the proposed change, school leavers and other applicants would only proceed with final university applications after their exam results, meaning they would have a clear understanding of the courses for which they qualify.

Ministers including Williamson are understood to believe that post-results applications would benefit disadvantaged young people, including students from black and minority ethnic (BAME) groups.

Article continues...

I personally would wholly support this and have thought for a few years that the whole application process is needlessly confusing and stressful for students and staff alike. Although this idea has been floated and dismissed before, this time it has a much bigger focus on helping disadvantaged students, including from BAME backgrounds. I think that changing this in light of the pandemic, if we're to build a "fairer" society, would make sense and could bridge the gap between Sixth Form and Higher Education, as well as better supporting those from different backgrounds. The rush to "clearing" for many after they get their A Level results is often ridiculous and incredibly stressful for many. It would be interesting to see how they could manage the start of term being moved from September to January, who goes to university in that period and what impact does it have on their courses etc.

As well as continued updates about their institutions' plans from September which I have found really useful and interesting, I would also be interested to hear others' ideas about this.

 

[EveningStar]

I'm a lecturer at a university, currently invovled in coordinating our teaching plans at a deparmental scale for 20-21. At the moment we're much like many of the other insititutions: planning in semster 1 for online lectures and a mixture of in-person/online small group teaching. In principle in-person teaching to be allocated at about 3 hours a week per student, but obviously this is not spread equally. Plans to be reviewed for semseter 2: plan with same restrictions, but with possibility of opening up to more in-person teaching if possible.

The main restrictions on in-person teaching are room size. Even with '1m plus' distancing, we're looking at 25-50% of normal in-person teaching capacity. So all our planning starts from there. At the moment we're working on maximizing in-preson teaching on core modules to try and deliver key skills/techniques that students should learn, and to try and make sure that first years in particular get to meet each other and some staff. We've not had any talk of 'bubbles' and I'm not sure how that would work.

We've been told that our incoming cohort is at about 75% in size of previous year... which is not too disaterous for us financially, as long things return to normal next year. I'm told that this number is about midway in our faculty (Arts, Humanities, Social Sciences): some are down to more like 50-60% while others are holding up at 90% of normal numbers. We've grown a lot in the last few years such that 75% of last year is about the size we were in 2014/15. So far surprsingly few incoming students deferring or current students asking to suspend: I am the member of staff who signs off suspensions in our department and of 455 first and second year undergraduates, just 1 has approached me about it so far.

Overall my insitution has told us that it's in a reasonable state financially, but (reading between the lines) this seems to be because it has access to a lot of cash, not because it isn't losing a lot of money. In other words, it's going to be dipping massivley into reserves and banking on income rebounding to close-to-normal levels by end of 2021.

Library and student computing facilities will be opening pretty soon - mid-July. Some buildings opening now though have just heard my office won't be available till September: some of the older buildings have had problems with water system caused by lengthy inactivity apparently!

As a programme leader tasked with delivering come September, have very similar challenges and facing implementing very similar solutions.

Reality is, most frustratingly for those posting here who are students or a parent (as I am) of students, we are finding our way with no or ever changing guidance in an ever changing environment, so if it feels like nobody has an answer or is vague, it is because we do not have an answer or what the future holds is unpredictable. For those here frontline on the railways, you will understand the same type of uncertainty in anticipation what will happen as we emerge from the pandemic. What cuccir posts almost represents my place and in my engineering faculty. Perhaps, the only significant difference is that we are totally reorganising delivery to semesterised rather than year long for most modules to ensure 'no detriment'. This is bringing a massive amount of problems, and for programme leaders such as myself a massive workload as we try to reorganise on the fly something that normally would take 24 months. It will work because we are good at what we do, yet it will be clumsy while it beds down.

'No detriment' is getting a pasting. It most certainly is not an excuse for anything such as grade inflation. In fact, the pressure is quite the reverse as TEL and discussions about how we admit come to fruition. Rather, it is a determination to ensure no student is disadvantaged, no matter how remotely, by the pandemic. There are two ways of looking at this ... either universities are scared of being sued by increasing litigious students or we really care. Most lecturers are the latter ... whereas first years are faces in the crowd, by final year they emerge as personalities, in some cases needing massive support as they learn and grow up simultaneously (not the easiest thing at times!), and we are not going to let a vile virus affect the grade they were going to get. No detriment covers a range of measures, from modelling pre and post pandemic mark profiles to increasing options for deferral rather than referral.

Must say most students have been brilliantly supportive of what we have been doing in the circumstances. Equally, the maturity and good sense displayed by the students is to their credit, and much appreciated. It might be that we are muddling through and each university will be asking for patience from the students, yet we will be doing our best.

Future viability of universities in the medium term is going to be problematic for some institutions. Our VC a while ago made increasing research income an important institutional strategy and that decision might actually prove to be crucial. There are rumours of some universities being unviable even before the pandemic, so we may see some casualties, including some surprises. What is certain is that zero hour and fixed term academics are at risk of getting dropped, which might have dangerous long term implications as junior lecturer posts are invariably fixed term posts, so will we lose a generation of expertise?

 

[cuccir]

I appreciate this is unlikely to take place in the academic year 2020/21 but I came across a really interesting article this evening in the Guardian (also reported in the Telegraph) that discusses how they could overhaul the whole system and move university applications to after A-Level grades are awarded. You can see the article here: https://www.theguardian.com/educati...versity-applications-to-after-a-level-results



I personally would wholly support this and have thought for a few years that the whole application process is needlessly confusing and stressful for students and staff alike. Although this idea has been floated and dismissed before, this time it has a much bigger focus on helping disadvantaged students, including from BAME backgrounds. I think that changing this in light of the pandemic, if we're to build a "fairer" society, would make sense and could bridge the gap between Sixth Form and Higher Education, as well as better supporting those from different backgrounds. The rush to "clearing" for many after they get their A Level results is often ridiculous and incredibly stressful for many. It would be interesting to see how they could manage the start of term being moved from September to January, who goes to university in that period and what impact does it have on their courses etc.

As well as continued updates about their institutions' plans from September which I have found really useful and interesting, I would also be interested to hear others' ideas about this.

I'd suppport the idea of post-A Level applications: you give the very good reasons for it. Predicted A-Levels are not particualrly reliable and there is lots of evidence that this plays a major part in wider social divisions, by setting minority ethnic and/or working class students (as cohorts) on more difficult paths than white and/or middle class equivalents.

In terms of the logistics of the whole thing: if I were in charge of the world, I'd go for a January start and make university 3.5 years. The first half year could be spent on taking a 20 credit module on different philosophies of knowledge, a 20 credit module on understanding and interpreting data (both quant and qual), and a 20 credit subject-specific skills introduction. This would enhance the 'levelling-up' effect of post A-Level applications by ensuring all students got this similar pre-degree introduction, and it would even-things out across disciplines too: physcis students would get a bit of an introduction to humanities' critical thinking and understanding qualiative data, english lit students would get something on stats and scientific method.

In terms of what's being proposed, a January start keeping uni as 3 years would require quite an overhall: presumably a shorter summer break and a longer Christmas vacation. I'd have thought the unions would be against it, because lots of working parents appreciate the uni holiday incorprating school holidays. Lots of other cycles would be disrupted too. A late October start would be more achievable, given that most unis currently end in early June so the whole thing could be pushed back a month without huge disruption: the question is if the offers process can happen in that window. I think that this is probably the best option, if the admin can be sorted. But I'd guess that the likely proposal will be the 'apply before A Levels, offer afterwards' approach, which is the least satisfying all round but also the least disruptive.

To keep losely on thread: I think it'd be a mistake to run into anything too radical while covid-19 aftermath is playing out. Even though there are good reasons for changing, I'd hold off until we've had at least one 'normal' academic year for all involved, which is probably after 2021/22, given that that year will have to do a lot of catching up for changes being made now. So I'd be looking at students applying during 2022/23 for a start in 2023.

 

[BJames]

I'd agree with that - at least by that time I'd be done with undergraduate anyway

 

[Huntergreed]

I just received further correspondence from my university confirming that ALL of my teaching in term one (until Christmas) will be fully online and that this is not going to change. Gutted to say the least

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

I just received further correspondence from my university confirming that ALL of my teaching in term one (until Christmas) will be fully online and that this is not going to change. Gutted to say the least

What made them come to this conclusion? Seriously hope my University doesn't go down this route...

 

[Huntergreed]

What made them come to this conclusion? Seriously hope my University doesn't go down this route...

'Due to the uncertainty we face and the fact that we need to finalise modules for next year as soon as possible, we have had to take the difficult decision to move all teaching and learning online for term one of the academic year.'

They said a lot that they 'didn't want to compromise our safety or education', which sadly I think to the latter is going to happen.

 

[6862]

I just received further correspondence from my university confirming that ALL of my teaching in term one (until Christmas) will be fully online and that this is not going to change. Gutted to say the least

That's terrible. Not much more I can say, but I hope you can make the most of it anyway.

 

[BJames]

'Due to the uncertainty we face and the fact that we need to finalise modules for next year as soon as possible, we have had to take the difficult decision to move all teaching and learning online for term one of the academic year.'

They said a lot that they 'didn't want to compromise our safety or education', which sadly I think to the latter is going to happen.

They don't seem to remember that education isn't quite the same online. And that the risk to safety of holding seminars in person, especially in large lecture halls, is incredibly low. It's a huge shame they've gone down this route. I hope common sense would prevail and they'd change their minds, it's a shame to be so set in their decision at this stage.

 

[HSTEd]

Reports saying that schools are to suspend all subjects apart from Science, Maths and English for two terms at least....

 

[Huntergreed]

Reports saying that schools are to suspend all subjects apart from Science, Maths and English for two terms at least....

I can't even begin to describe how wrong that is...

 

[Scotrail12]

Reports saying that schools are to suspend all subjects apart from Science, Maths and English for two terms at least....

As someone who did not do particularly well in these subjects (I was awful at science, mediocre at Maths, OK at English), this really annoys me. Why are they deemed more important?

What about kids doing A-Levels? Do they suddenly only get to do Maths, English and Science?

I have a LOT of gripes with the education system in the UK as it is but this pushes me over the edge.

 

[Huntergreed]

As someone who did not do particularly well in these subjects (I was awful at science, mediocre at Maths, OK at English), this really pisses me off. Why are they deemed more important?

What about kids doing A-Levels? Do they suddenly only get to do Maths, English and Science?

I have a LOT of gripes with the education system in the UK as it is but this pushes me over the edge.

As someone who is studying music education and recognises the real 'importance' of the subjects often looked at as 'less important', I couldn't agree more with every word you said.

 

[BJames]

As someone who did not do particularly well in these subjects (I was awful at science, mediocre at Maths, OK at English), this really annoys me. Why are they deemed more important?

What about kids doing A-Levels? Do they suddenly only get to do Maths, English and Science?

I have a LOT of gripes with the education system in the UK as it is but this pushes me over the edge.

Precisely! This is just another ridiculous response to the situation: schools reopen as usual, keeping people in their year groups and within their classes where possible. Not opening up other subjects doesn't exactly meet the "all children in school full time" goal - where are the extra maths, english and science teachers coming from?

Was this aimed more at primary schools? It could work a bit better there although I fail to see the benefit covid-wise.

 

[Scrotnig]

I will sound like a stuck record, but what you're seeing here is yet another manifestation of the government making a headline-grabbing promise, then altering the facts to ensure it can be claimed to have been delivered. It must be remembered that the government is no longer remotely interested in anyone's education or life chances, because it is only interested in the deadly killer virus. *Everything* else has been abandoned in all but name.

 

[Yew]

I will sound like a stuck record, but what you're seeing here is yet another manifestation of the government making a headline-grabbing promise, then altering the facts to ensure it can be claimed to have been delivered. It must be remembered that the government is no longer remotely interested in anyone's education or life chances, because it is only interested in the deadly killer virus. *Everything* else has been abandoned in all but name.

Almost makes you wonder what we could swing if we could get them to think it would help... "Nobody has ever caught covid on a Blue Pullman. Quick, get the drawings out and send them to Bombardier!"

 

[MikeWM]

I see Oxford Uni have said their December interview round will be done online (that's over 5 months away, folks...)

 

[NorthOxonian]

I see Oxford Uni have said their December interview round will be done online (that's over 5 months away, folks...)

Particularly odd since they're planning to have at least some teaching in person by October (if they aren't they haven't told us). Tutorials are very similar to interviews, so surely if one isn't happening the other shouldn't be either?

Having said that they might be worried about what happens outside the interviews. Most of that time is spent hanging around or interacting with other applicants, and that could lead to transmission.

 

[HSTEd]

Having said that they might be worried about what happens outside the interviews. Most of that time is spent hanging around or interacting with other applicants, and that could lead to transmission.

Interviews might also be made problematic by continuing movement restrictions.

 

[al78]

As someone who did not do particularly well in these subjects (I was awful at science, mediocre at Maths, OK at English), this really annoys me. Why are they deemed more important?

They are classed as the core subjects. It is difficult to find a decent job which doesn't require a reasonable ability in at least one of those subjects. English: language, communication and creativity. Maths and science: a fundamental understanding of how physical things in our world work and logical thinking.

 

[Scotrail12]

They are classed as the core subjects. It is difficult to find a decent job which doesn't require a reasonable ability in at least one of those subjects. English: language, communication and creativity. Maths and science: a fundamental understanding of how physical things in our world work and logical thinking.

You can learn basically all of those things through other subjects. I won't go into detail since I could go on all day about the UK education system but I just think that the current education system and it's emphasis on certain subjects is frankly outdated.

FWIW, I have a total of 7 Scottish Highers and not a single one is in Maths or any of the sciences. Hasn't hurt me so far. I do have an English Higher but I'd say that I actually gained things such as language, communication and creativity through politics and to an extent, modern languages. I gained basically nothing from English.

 

[Huntergreed]

Received some further correspondence from my university today. It essentially said that all of term one (until Christmas) will be fully online, and then in term two, they MAY (they emphasised it’s conditional on the virus being eliminated or suppressed sufficiently in Scotland) be able to move to a blended model, but that full face-to-face teaching/learning will not resume.

I’m gutted by this, and it’s certainly not what I wanted or expected for my university experience (indeed some of my friends are paying £9,000+ for this!). Most people on my course seem happy that they’re playing it safe (some even say term two is “too soon”), but I’m afraid I share a different view and I’m very disappointed with this news.

Anyone else been updated further?

 

[al78]

Received some further correspondence from my university today. It essentially said that all of term one (until Christmas) will be fully online, and then in term two, they MAY (they emphasised it’s conditional on the virus being eliminated or suppressed sufficiently in Scotland) be able to move to a blended model, but that full face-to-face teaching/learning will not resume.

I’m gutted by this, and it’s certainly not what I wanted or expected for my university experience (indeed some of my friends are paying £9,000+ for this!). Most people on my course seem happy that they’re playing it safe (some even say term two is “too soon”), but I’m afraid I share a different view and I’m very disappointed with this news.

Anyone else been updated further?

Same with my university. I've got a meeting tomorrow to talk about the upcoming academic year but so far, it looks like all the lectures will have to be virtual, my best guess being that we get filmed giving the lectures which is then passed on to the students.

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

Anyone else been updated further?

My University are still preparing for a "blended mixture of online and face-to-face teaching". In true "route-map out of lockdown" style we probably won't find out what's actually happening until about 10 days before the semester starts.

 

[BJames]

Received some further correspondence from my university today. It essentially said that all of term one (until Christmas) will be fully online, and then in term two, they MAY (they emphasised it’s conditional on the virus being eliminated or suppressed sufficiently in Scotland) be able to move to a blended model, but that full face-to-face teaching/learning will not resume.

I’m gutted by this, and it’s certainly not what I wanted or expected for my university experience (indeed some of my friends are paying £9,000+ for this!). Most people on my course seem happy that they’re playing it safe (some even say term two is “too soon”), but I’m afraid I share a different view and I’m very disappointed with this news.

Anyone else been updated further?

Thanks for this update. I'm disappointed to hear this, but I would say there's always time for them to change their mind based on the amount of progress we've made. If social distancing is scrapped by November as Boris has suggested (but realistically, any time before the start of Term 2), it makes no sense whatsoever to have a blended model. It's back to full in person teaching as far as I'm concerned.

For mine:

-Blended model in September. The final decision has been made on this and we will be using lecture theatres for seminars and small group teaching, and the smaller teaching rooms for 1-2-1 (if applicable). Meetings probably in person but all lectures online.
-Term 2: It looks like a decision will be taken around the November time (hence why I'm surprised yours has set out their plan already). However, they are still expecting students who are studying abroad for a semester to be able to do so in January, so I suspect we have a "plan for the worst and hope for the best" mentality at the moment, hoping we can get back to full teaching in January but accepting that it really will depend on what progress has been made by then.

Funding wise - as I'm studying in England I'm paying the full £9,250, but international students are paying well into 5 figures for this. It makes little sense. The petitions committee in parliament is writing recommendations to the government that they don't automatically refund any students, as the universities have worked really hard to make this work, but that applications for compensation should be made much easier and streamlined if students feel their courses have not been up to scratch. I shall be following this route, I do not believe for one second that this is worth >£9k and compares in any way whatsoever to a normal year of teaching. Obviously these are exceptional circumstances but the funding must reflect this.

Note: link to the petitions committee report: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5801/cmselect/cmpetitions/527/52702.htm

 

[AdamWW]

Funding wise - as I'm studying in England I'm paying the full £9,250, but international students are paying well into 5 figures for this. It makes little sense. The petitions committee in parliament is writing recommendations to the government that they don't automatically refund any students, as the universities have worked really hard to make this work, but that applications for compensation should be made much easier and streamlined if students feel their courses have not been up to scratch. I shall be following this route, I do not believe for one second that this is worth >£9k and compares in any way whatsoever to a normal year of teaching. Obviously these are exceptional circumstances but the funding must reflect this.

I understand your view completely and would feel the same way myself.

However, universities aren't saving money by doing this and of course setting this sort of thing all up takes up a lot more staff time (not that this in itself costs more, it just means they have to drop other things to prioritise teaching preparation).

So as with many things at the moment, the only answers seem to be that the government pours money into it or someone suffers (either students for paying for things they don't think they're getting, or universities having to make massive cuts, assuming they can stay solvent - neither of which will probably improve the student experience in the long term).

 

[Tetchytyke]

I do not believe for one second that this is worth >£9k and compares in any way whatsoever to a normal year of teaching. Obviously these are exceptional circumstances but the funding must reflect this.

I appreciate the frustration, it's a rough situation. But you are paying for your lecturers' time and, regardless of whether your lectures are delivered in person or via Zoom, you are receiving your lecturers' time. Universities' costs are not reduced during Covid.

I'm told from former colleagues that student funding applications for next year are 40% down on normal, as freshers look to defer their place. That has a massive impact on universities too.

 

[BJames]

While I do agree with that, there are some issues, specifically around "Paying for lecturers' time" - if only! Most of them are just uploading last year's lectures (hence why I shall be requesting a refund - I have already complained about this twice). Only a select few are choosing to re-record and in most instances it's because they didn't record any last year so they have no choice. Seminars are sometimes delivered via Microsoft Teams (we're not using zoom because the University had privacy concerns with them at the start) but even these seem to have dropped in number.

On a positive note I will be very happy if the University can deliver in person small-group teaching in September, this will significantly improve the support being offered and as long as they record new lectures for the autumn term it will be better than it has been. I think they will though - a lot of students have been pushing for the lecturers to stop using old lectures, we're supposed to be a Russell Group university with "TEF Gold" and "Research-led teaching" - if we're paying full price, despite the global situation I think we're entitled to get a proper lecture, not one relevant to last year's students.

This is a really difficult situation because while I don't think the government should have to fork out for everyone, at the same time we are being disadvantaged too and having to continue to pay full price for the privilege is not really acceptable. The report I linked to above suggests that although universities are autonomous institutions, the government needs to also remember that it is not their fault that they had to close - it's not really the government's either but the restrictions did come from them.

But maybe it's time for a funding overhaul anyway. This was discussed in a private conversation I had with a Labour MP the other week - he wants us to move to more of a "Graduate Tax" rather than immediately putting all students in debt. This came up ages ago under Owen Smith's labour leadership bid - although to be honest, I'm not sure if this would benefit students in the long run or not.

 

[AdamWW]

But maybe it's time for a funding overhaul anyway. This was discussed in a private conversation I had with a Labour MP the other week - he wants us to move to more of a "Graduate Tax" rather than immediately putting all students in debt. This came up ages ago under Owen Smith's labour leadership bid - although to be honest, I'm not sure if this would benefit students in the long run or not.

So far as I can see the current scheme is carefully designed to be a graduate tax without looking like one, in that it's set up to be almost impossible to pay off - once you start earning enough that it might be possible, the interest rates go up to put it out of your reach. The only real difference is that if you have a large enough lump sum you can buy your way out of it - and of course there is a psychological and real difference about having an actual debt against your name - there's no guarantees that the rules won't change on how it's to be paid back.

 

[takno]

While I do agree with that, there are some issues, specifically around "Paying for lecturers' time" - if only! Most of them are just uploading last year's lectures (hence why I shall be requesting a refund - I have already complained about this twice). Only a select few are choosing to re-record and in most instances it's because they didn't record any last year so they have no choice. Seminars are sometimes delivered via Microsoft Teams (we're not using zoom because the University had privacy concerns with them at the start) but even these seem to have dropped in number.

On a positive note I will be very happy if the University can deliver in person small-group teaching in September, this will significantly improve the support being offered and as long as they record new lectures for the autumn term it will be better than it has been. I think they will though - a lot of students have been pushing for the lecturers to stop using old lectures, we're supposed to be a Russell Group university with "TEF Gold" and "Research-led teaching" - if we're paying full price, despite the global situation I think we're entitled to get a proper lecture, not one relevant to last year's students.

This is a really difficult situation because while I don't think the government should have to fork out for everyone, at the same time we are being disadvantaged too and having to continue to pay full price for the privilege is not really acceptable. The report I linked to above suggests that although universities are autonomous institutions, the government needs to also remember that it is not their fault that they had to close - it's not really the government's either but the restrictions did come from them.

But maybe it's time for a funding overhaul anyway. This was discussed in a private conversation I had with a Labour MP the other week - he wants us to move to more of a "Graduate Tax" rather than immediately putting all students in debt. This came up ages ago under Owen Smith's labour leadership bid - although to be honest, I'm not sure if this would benefit students in the long run or not.

I understand your frustration, and it's always seemed a nonsense to me that the majority of courses outside of STEM, or even a lot of the theory-heavy courses within STEM, cost anything like 9k per seat to run. Even if lecturers do front up and do the lectures in person they are often delivering a course which is several years old, and they're rarely invested the time upfront to build a product which is fit for re-use or iterated on it based on feedback from previous years. In essence I don't think you are actually missing out on anything much by getting this stuff delivered online, it's just that the value-for-money has always been awful.

The biggest factor for me would be (if I wasn't safely 15 years out of uni) the lack of access to other students to discuss the course with and build a social life. I'm not 100% sure in that I would feel like it was worth going next year even if the course was free, and ultimately I'd probably be making the decision based more on my chances of getting a job or doing anything else worthwhile in the next year, rather than based on some value-for-money analysis on fees which you may well end up never repaying anyway.