1 / 19

APR International Comparisons

APR Evidence. APR International Comparisons. Research objectives. To review the higher education admissions systems and organisations in a range of countries and states Topics included: Key aims of the organisation How funded, application fee Services provided

amber-lopez
Download Presentation

APR International Comparisons

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. APR Evidence APR International Comparisons

  2. Research objectives • To review the higher education admissions systems and organisations in a range of countries and states • Topics included: • Key aims of the organisation • How funded, application fee • Services provided • Process post-grad/part-time applications • Application process , number of courses, acceptances, key dates etc • How effective is the system • Views on UCAS system • Other models we could learn from • Conduct research amongst applicants

  3. Methodology • Members of the International Association of Admissions Organisations asked for details of their country’s/state’s process via a questionnaire or fiche • 7 countries/states completed and returned the fiche • All members invited to take part in a telephone depth interview (regardless of whether or not they returned the fiche) • 11 countries/states participated in an interview • Interviews lasted approx 40 minutes and were recorded • Findings and verbatim quotations were collected in an analysis grid

  4. Eleven participants • 5 from Europe, 3 from Canada, 3 from Australia: • British Columbia, Canada • Croatia • Germany • Netherlands • New South Wales and the ACT, Australia • Ontario (colleges), Canada • Ontario (universities), Canada • Ireland • South Australia and the Northern Territory, Australia (not interviewed - fiche only) • Sweden • Victoria, Australia

  5. Main Findings: The Application Process • There are three main types of admissions systems • Mix of one, two and several entry cycles per year • All apply before exam results known – none have real PQA • Some allow HEIs to see other choices – some do not • All have MORE choices than UCAS – between 6 and 20. Unlimited in British Columbia and Germany • Most have fewer transactions per applicant than UCAS • No equivalent of the insurance offer • Many use additional tests to select elite applicants • All collect grades electronically • Some have consecutive rounds of offers – elite/mature students get places first • All online (or mainly online) systems • In all countries, applicants can accept one offer at a time/one per round • All feel their own system is effective and fit for purpose – none have plans for major review [With nine choices] the idea is that they can afford to be a bit aspirational with the first couple of preferences, try to be fairly realistic with the middle preferences and cover their backsides with the lowest preferences (NSW)

  6. Main Findings – Organisation detail • Other organisations much smaller and offer fewer services than UCAS – Only Sweden has more applicants • In some countries, lower level vocational courses are part of the system • Most websites provide basic course information • Most provide data to government/HEIs – either free or for a fee • Most do some research amongst applicants • Challenges facing orgs tend to be similar to those of previous years – esp IT legacy issues • None affected by major new issues comparable with UCAS • None cover more than one funding regime • Application fees vary considerably • Netherlands, Sweden and Croatia: 0 • Ontario Medicine: $210 to apply for medicine + $75 per medical school • In Germany, the application fee is paid by some HEIs • In the UK and Sweden there is a simultaneous finance application service • 6 countries operate a part-time application service • Some very positive perceptions of UCAS but some weaknesses identified too

  7. Comparison of Organisations (II) *Applicants can apply for full-time and part-time courses on the same application

  8. Number of transactions per applicant There may be no direct equivalent of UCAS transactions – especially in countries where there are no conditional offers

  9. The international admissions landscape • All countries confirmed that they were witnessing some level of growth in applications for higher education, whether that was due to rising birth rates (Australia, Canada) and/or to economic downturns (Ireland, British Columbia.) • Most countries allow applicants to change course after results are known with only UCAS and British Columbia not providing this facility. In Victoria, Australia, about 53% of current year 13s took advantage of this service in 2010/11. • Netherlands, British Columbia, Sweden and Croatia don’t currently have to adhere to any defined WP targets; Canada, Ireland and Australia have ether indicative/mandated target enrolment levels for a variety of target groups. • Canada confirmed that there was considerable interest in their country to deliver a more flexible programme re modes of study and UAC (Australia) has acknowledged that it should develop a more flexible business cycle that meets the disparate needs of the universities. • The range of qualifications pre-HE varied from 99% of Ontario college programs requiring one basic qualification to British Columbia processing qualifications from countries all over the world. UCAS seems to have one of the most complex mix of pre-HE qualifications.

  10. Type 1: Offers based on interim results • Ontario universities (OUAC) and Ontario colleges (OCAS) • Based on the UCAS system • Apply with results from completed courses and interim results • Interim results are not meant to predict final grades, but indicate the student's performance by that stage. • Conditional offer is usually based on completion of courses and maintaining the same grade average. Students rarely get worse final results than interim results. • Universities – 3 choices (+ 2 more at cost) per university – no limit to number of universities but pay per university • Deadlines and fees depend on division (type of course) • Colleges - 5 choices (ranked). No more than 3 at any one college. Can change choices, ranking and acceptance as often as you like (even after exam results known) [Our system] is probably easier for applicants because it's very easy to change [courses - even after results are out]. And nobody questions your reasons. And the institutions don't know the changes you've made, because we don't pass any of the history of the applicants behaviour to the institutions (Ontario colleges)

  11. Type 2: Application portal only • Germany • Can apply to unlimited universities. Number of courses depends on university • Customised to each HEI’s requirements – eg different deadlines • Often offers made on predicted grades • Netherlands • If meet entry requirements and course is over-subscribed, all go into a weighted lottery organised by government (weighting based on exam results) • 4 choices • No offers • Can apply for a different course if do not get a place in the lottery • British Columbia, Canada • Applications to some HEIs are directed to their own website • Unlimited choices • Customised to each HEI’s requirements – eg different deadlines • Offers made on interim grades – but offers rarely revoked • HEIs organise lottery for over-subscribed courses • Applicant can accept as may offers as they like, but have to pay deposit for each one - $250

  12. Type 3: Choices ranked and applicants ranked • Ireland • Croatia • Sweden • Victoria, Australia • New South Wales and Australian Central Territory, Australia • South Australia and Northern Territories, Australia • Apply before exam results known • Higher number of choices (6 in South Australia, 9 in NSW, 10 in Ireland and Croatia, 12 in Victoria, 20 in Sweden, unlimited in British Columbia) • This allows applicants to be aspirational as well as realistic • And meets the needs of those who have more than one career/subject choice • Applicant ranks courses in preference order • Qualifications converted to points (including foreign qualifications) • Each HEI sets the points range they will accept (or algorhythm for selection eg work experience/professional memberships may be considered/certain subjects weighted) • Applicants ranked in order of qualifications obtained • Applicant gets the one highest preference they are eligible for • Lottery amongst those who have exactly same number of points • Clearing equivalent only for those who do not get a place - HEIs ‘woo’ potential students by phone (Victoria and Sweden) • 2 entry cycles per year in Croatia, Sweden, Victoria and South Australia

  13. Type 3: Other Interesting Features • Ireland • Applicants can apply after exams taken, but not after results known • Applicants graded on their top 6 best subjects only • No Clearing system. There is a waiting list for those who don’t get a place but applicants cannot get onto any course they did not originally apply for • Croatia • Applicant ranking includes grades from 5 years’ exams at secondary school • Extra points given for achievement in sports/intelligence competitions • Priority given to (children of) war veterans and killed/injured in action and PwD • Sweden • Applicants are allowed up to 20 choices, but most make 6 or 7 choices • Another government agency involved in widening participation – encouraging applying to higher education • Victoria, Australia • Applicants can change course preference after results known • Offers published in newspapers and online • New South Wales and ACT, Australia • Can change course preference after results known • Points based on a student’s ten best units of study • Extra points given for disadvantage/geography – decided by HEIs • Offers published in newspapers and online

  14. Perceived Effectiveness of Organisations • All feel their application system is effective – and have no plans for major review We're the envy of some other jurisdictions. There's a high level of pleasure with our systems. We would be seen as a model (Ontario universities) We're going to stick with it, it works very well. The system is very, very transparent. [HEIs] can make a definite number of offers and that's how many [applicants] they're going to take, because they're not going to get an offer elsewhere. The guesswork is out of it (Ireland) I think UAC is generally perceived by both the universities and the general public as a fairly robust and equitable organisation. And that the system is overall fair and from the universities ' side, efficient (NSW) We think it is very efficient handling large amount of applicants. Almost all Swedish qualifications are collected electronically and the admission results are sent electronically to institutions and applicants as well (Sweden)

  15. Perceived Effectiveness of UCAS • Mainly positive views: • A widely respected model and organisation • Effective IAG/good relationship with applicants – ucas.tv, Facebook etc • Impressed by visits to UCAS: Constant striving for improvement • Tariff – used by other countries to check qualification equivalents of foreign students • Several say they may copy aspects of the UCAS system • Netherlands – may introduce system where HEIs select students • Ontario universities – interested in our commercial funding model • Victoria – may look at predicted grades for international students

  16. Some quotes It makes sense the way you do it. Your system is a model for many others (Ontario colleges) The advantage with your system is it is easier to attract and keep track of students. We've been looking at your website and we think you're very good at movies [ucas.tv], Facebook and things like that to explain how to apply, that's something we have to improve on (Sweden) We think the UK system can be used as a very good practice example for us. The UK system is much larger, [but] a lot of attention is dedicated to improvements of the system and I think that is really great (Croatia) I wish we had something like it for Canada in many respects, but wer'e challenged by education being a provincial responsibility (British Columbia) I think you have quite a good system. I visited UCAS two years ago; I was impressed! They like the fact that both unis and students can choose what they want and UCAS is matching their wishes in the most appropriate way for both parties. That looks quite nice (Netherlands)

  17. Perceived Weaknesses of UCAS system • Long process – lots of transactions • Students have little time between exam results and starting university • Offers before exams/insurance offer - HEIs uncertain about how many students they will get • Website is confusing – tries to do too much: applicants, parents, advisers • Applicants can’t change course choice after taken exams • Low number of choices (Ontario colleges) • Unfairness of Clearing – someone with good grades can walk into a course they did not apply for (Ireland) • A Levels not finely grained enough to distinguish between applicants – and discriminating on basis of personal statements is not efficient

  18. Some quotes We used to have a [web]site like yours and it gets confusing for any customer group when there are too many things going on. The generation that grew up using good websites generally doesn't believe anything has to be explained, it should just all be intuitive, it should work flawlessly the first time (Ontario colleges) The ATAR is a finely grained ranking between 0 and 99.95 on steps on 0.5, the A Levels is a much coarser grain (NSW) One of the things we don't like about [your system and ours], is the low number of choices we offer to start. We think it's not fair to applicants because the number of choices of career is five-fold what it was [when we started]. If we gave them the opportunity to apply to maybe ten choices they could apply to some choices for each of those completely different areas (Ontario colleges)

  19. Challenges Facing Organisations • Similar to those of previous years: • IT systems need updating • Persuading more HEIs to join • Historically low budgets • Difficulties dealing with government • HEIs demanding more services • Increase in applicants due to recession • Declining college-age population due to lower birth rates • Australia – Bradley Review has removed cap on places, stressed need for widening participation and set target for 40% adults experienced higher education Budgets are always an issue, but it's not like you've been having in the UK lately [austerity measures] (Sweden)

More Related