‘ An excellent student’ – you can’t be serious
As a university admissions tutor, Julia Thomas has read around 500 references this year. Very few were worth the paper they were written on
Each autumn, teachers spend many hours writing references in support of their pupils’ university applications, and university admissions tutors subsequently spend many hours reading them.
Indeed, the official advice is that when there are more qualified applicants than can be accommodated, or when applicants’ suitability for professions is being assessed, admissions staff should consider “ additional information, including references”.
Nevertheless, I cannot be the only person disillusioned with the quality of these references. The pressure to widen access, the legislation governing the handling of information and the atmosphere created by targets and league tables have all brought us to the point where references are hardly worth the paper they are written on.
Of course, some applicants’ results may not do them justice and will not therefore be an accurate predictor of future achievement; other pupils may have faced a particular disadvantage. However, the almost total absence of anything but positive comments from referees in the 500-plus Ucas applications I have read this year makes it impossible to distinguish between such applicants and those for whom higher education may be a step too far.
Consider the following, which all relate to those applying this year for admission to a professionally validated honours degree: Þ “ A very capable and enthusiastic student whose academic ability is demonstrated by a good set of AS results.” AS- level results: one grade E, one grade U. Þ “Very pleasing GCSE results.” GCSEs results: five Cs, two Ds, two Fs. Þ “Sound academic progress; I have no hesitation in recommending him to you.” GCSE results: five Cs, two Ds, one E. Þ “M gained a good grade in GSCE maths, which is evidence of her ability to meet challenges in a positive and proactive manner.” GSCE maths: grade D. Þ “Excellent all-round student.” GCSE results: four Cs, three Es, two Fs; AS-level results: two Es, one U. Þ “ A student of high academic ability.” GCSE results: one B, three Cs, two Ds, one E, one F. Þ “ A capable, conscientious student.” GCSE grades: two Cs, two Ds, four Es, one F. Þ “ A very good student who is a keen learner. She will be an asset to any educational establishment.” GCSE grades: five Cs, four Ds, one F.
It is the same story with access courses, which provide an opportunity for those who left school without qualifications to develop their confidence and study skills. Not all access students will be able to achieve a higher education qualification, but I cannot recall one who was not predicted by his or her access tutor to pass with flying colours and be an ideal candidate for higher education. Sometimes I receive identically worded references for different students, but the requested substitutes are not much better. One tutor wrote: “She would be suitable for any course that you can offer her.”
Taking up referees’ invitations to contact them for more information, in the hope that this may indicate that they are wishing to say something they are not prepared to write, rarely proves fruitful. I am repeatedly told that they are “not free to talk”, or they express discomfort at being asked for specific information. “I’m sure you see how difficult it is for me”, “I don’t really know her that well” and “I rather wish you hadn’t asked me that” are among the most common responses.
Other referees are unsympathetic: one sharply reprimanded me for referring to five C grades at GSCE as “ average”. In his view they were “ outstanding”. Maybe they were for that particular pupil, but as evidence of potential ability to study at higher education level, I still think that “ average” was a generous description.
Even university tutors are not above stretching the truth. One stated that an applicant had “ gained passes in four modules and then decided to leave the course”. Further inquiry revealed that he, and another who “ came to the view that teaching was not for her”, both left because they had failed. I also suspect that the student who “has many skills and qualities that, unfortunately, are not easily demonstrable through our system of academic assessment” was heading in a similar direction.
The result is that we admissions tutors try to “read between the lines” of academic references, or else disregard them altogether. But this is not fair to applicants, or indeed to conscientious teachers.
A referee who writes that “ she has taken time to settle into the sixth form” may indicate a pupil who is a complete nuisance, one who has overcome external difficulties, or any number of possibilities in between. Does “ quiet” mean “takes no part in lessons” or “well-behaved compared to other pupils”?
If a pupil has “faced the challenge of A- level work”, is he or she rising to it or not? A pupil’s “ determination to succeed” could mean a high level of motivation or unrealistic ambitions, and I wonder what befell the applicant who “if circumstances had been different would have made an excellent head boy”.
This is like trying to communicate in an unfamiliar language. Since in most cases we cannot establish what is meant, let us abandon the whole system of academic references for university entry and save us all the time and effort.
We cannot rely either on the Ucas form’s “personal statement”, since it could have been bought for £ 11 ·95 from a company that advertises itself as “ a group of academics and writers who have extensive experience of writing personal statements for individuals wanting to apply to universities and colleges”.
Why does “first come, fi rst served” spring to mind as the obvious solution to university admissions, even though I could be talking myself out of a job? Þ Julia Thomas is a pseudonym. The author is a university admissions tutor for social work