Elite universities making contextual offers can have a ¡°significant¡± impact on widening participation and, while there is still an awarding gap compared to their peers, there is little evidence of these students being ¡°set up to fail¡±, according to a new study.

Amid calls to expand the use of contextual offers to help disadvantaged students in England, researchers have studied the impact of lowering entry requirements for those from non-traditional backgrounds at Durham University.

In common with many highly selective institutions, Durham has embraced contextual offer-making in recent years with a fifth of all its entrants now admitted this way, the paper published in points out.

But little was previously known about whether the process is achieving its goal of widening access, or how the students fared once admitted, says the study, authored by Vikki Boliver, a professor of sociology at Durham, and Karen Jones, who works in the academic office of the university.

̽»¨ÊÓƵ

Contextual offers have sometimes proved controversial, with critics claiming they disadvantage high achievers from more advantaged backgrounds, and that students admitted in this way will struggle in their studies.

The government¡¯s own social mobility watchdog, the Social Mobility Commission,?warned last year?that while the tactic may help a ¡°lucky few¡±, it has not had a ¡°noticeable impact¡± on tackling inequality more broadly.

̽»¨ÊÓƵ

The new study¡¯s analysis draws on the administrative records for 11,392?domestic students who entered Durham as first-year undergraduates in 2018, 2019 or 2020.

It finds that as the number of contextual offers increased, the percentage of entrants from the areas that have traditionally had the lowest rates of participation (known as Polar quintiles 1 and 2) increased from 15.4 per cent to 22.3 per cent.

Similar trends were shown with respect to other postcode-based measures of disadvantage but not by school type, with the proportion of entrants from state schools falling in the period from 60.7 per cent to 57.9 per cent, despite it being part of the university¡¯s contextual offer eligibility criteria.

The study says that ¡°substantial proportions¡± of those who received a contextual offer ¡°ultimately achieved A-level grades that were below the standard offer for their chosen course¡±, meaning they would not have secured a place at Durham without the lower entry requirements.

̽»¨ÊÓƵ

Looking at the academic achievements of those admitted, the study finds contextually admitted students had slightly lower pass rates and slightly lower average marks in all years of their degree programmes, compared to peers admitted via standard selection criteria.

They were also substantially less likely to graduate with a first and slightly less likely to graduate with at least an upper second-class degree. ?

However, these students did still perform well at the university with pass rates of 90 per cent or more and average marks of 60 or higher throughout their three years of study. More than 80 per cent graduated with at least a 2:1.

¡°Durham University provides a great example of how a serious commitment to making contextual offers can significantly widen participation without setting students up to fail at university,¡± said co-author Boliver.

̽»¨ÊÓƵ

¡°Contextual disadvantage doesn¡¯t end once students enrol, of course, and so it¡¯s crucial that universities support contextually admitted students to bridge knowledge gaps and develop the academic skills needed to realise their full potential.¡±

tom.williams@timeshighereducation.com