The Sunday Times article about differential entry grades for international students1 to Russell Group university degrees sparked the usual defensive response from the UK higher education sector. There was plenty of obfuscation and claims that the newspaper was guilty of poor journalism but with little engagement about the core claims. There does, however, seem to be some substance to the claim that universities are working with commercial partners in ways that are not entirely transparent and do not seem equitable in terms of academic and language standards.
Specifically, International Year One (IYO) offerings (generally through private partnerships with universities, accept international students who fail to get the academic or language requirements for direct entry to a university undergraduate programme. If they pass the IYO course they progress to the second year of the degree programme in the university proper which means the IYO is accepted as the first year of the degree. The IYO courses are not open to UK students so they do not have this opportunity if their grades are below the direct entry requirement and so they are disadvantaged.
A Trick of the Tail
The issue, is not well defined by the newspaper, but it seems clear that international students can buy their way directly onto year one of UK university degree course via an International Year One programme operated by a private partner. The students can do this when they are not academically qualified to enter that programme directly and this opportunity is denied to UK students. Finding evidence for this is not easy because many International Year One’s advertised are Delphic, coy or deliberately elusive about stating the requirements.
What is consistent is that pathway operators are clear about the intention of International Year One courses:
“If you don’t meet the entry requirements to go to a UK university directly, degree preparation courses like an IYO can help you reach the level needed to start a bachelor’s degree….After successfully completing an IYO, you progress straight to the second year of a bachelor’s degree, so you save time and money.”
Study Group International Study Centre – Cardiff University says:
“The International Year One is an intensive programme that leads to year two of an undergraduate degree at Cardiff University. The programme is tailor-made for international students who are not ready to apply direct to the University, but don’t want to delay their studies.”
“Specifically designed for international students who show academic promise but who do not meet the University’s academic and/or English language requirements for direct entry to Year 1 of an undergraduate degree.”
There seems no doubt from the pathways providers that IYO is a substitute for year one of a three-year undergraduate degree and that those enrolled do not have to have the qualifications published by the university for direct entry to that degree. It is also true to say that this privilege is not available to UK students. Indeed, international students who are academically strong enough and have achieved the English language levels to enter direct need not have bothered because their achievements save them neither time or money.
The Sunday Times has representatives of several pathway operators rather proudly noting that it is a “back door”, that “you don’t have to worry too much about how difficult it is” and “..British students don’t have this kind of privilege.” One might argue that this is just sales talk but if so, it is a reminder that some commercial operators are not operating to the best standards in preserving the UK sector’s much vaunted reputation for integrity and quality. The operators’ representatives quoted are effectively trashing the brand of the university in question by indicating that this is a privileged, easy and hidden route to their awards.
Invisible Touch
Having established that the Sunday Times is correct about the nature of the International Year One it’s worth a look at the extent of the differential. As noted above the university and pathway websites are less than forthcoming, perhaps because they realise that it doesn’t reflect well on quality standards for admissions. The Sunday Times quotes its sources for a chart showing various anomalies between direct entry and International Year One requirements but they are not publicly accessible.
The Sunday Times also directly quotes pathway representative sfor INTO Exeter saying, “So your son that’s studying A-levels — to get on to the [International Year One] programme it would be two Cs and a D.” They note, “Applying through the Ucas system, the students would need AAB at A-level, she said.”
One publicly available source confirms a similar differential at another INTO partner, Queen’s University Belfast. The university website indicates that the BSc Economics degree requires ABB at A-level:
Source: Queen’s University Belfast website (28 January, 2024)
The INTO Student Portal shows the progression possibility to the Business Economics BSc from the International Year One in Management and Finance and that the entry requirement for the International Year One in question is DD at A-level:
Source: INTO Student Portal website (28 January, 2024)
Against this background it seems incomprehensible that the Russell Group of Universities has issued a statement trying to obscure and obfuscate the situation. Queen’s offers, through its private partner INTO, an International Year One that allows “progress to Year 2 of a professionally accredited undergraduate degree at Queen’s University Belfast.” It is not available to UK students.
From Genesis to Revelation
The Sunday Times was unwise to bring the terms Foundation Programme and International Year One to the table in the same article. It seems perfectly reasonable that there should be Foundation level, pre-degree, preparatory programmes for students who do not have the required language level or academic qualifications for direct entry and/or may not have the 13 years’ schooling expected. There may be different things to be worried about in terms of Foundation programmes and particularly the covert nature of the agreements between university and private partner on the language and academic grades required to pass before degree entry.
Pathway operators mentioned in the article, INTO University Partnerships, Kaplan, Study Group and Cambridge Education Group (shown as OnCampus), all cut their teeth on Foundation Programmes. These have come under increasing pressure over time for competitive reasons and as the Chinese students who underpinned the growth of the early 2000s have declined. The International Year One response utilizes the gap between 5.5IELTS and 6.0IELTS with the former being the lowest level allowed for a visa to start a degree in the UK and the latter being the lowest most universities will accept for direct entry.
Language testing is complex and the gap between 5.0IELTS and 6.0IELTS is suggested to be that between a “modest user” and a “competent user”. One suspects that the UK visa regulations relating to degree study were simply chosen to reflect the Common European Framework of Reference of Languages (CEFR) which bands IELTS 5.5 to 6.5 together in the B2 category). In practical terms, however, most universities settled on 6.0IELTS for entry because it was a level which reflected teaching and learning priorities.
Calling All Stations
It is, of course, not only Russell Group universities that do this with International Year One and given the maelstrom in which INTO, Study Group, Kaplan, and CEG found themselves thrown it seemed only fair to have a quick look at Navitas. Of the big five the Australian giant does not work with any Russell Group universities but has built a decent UK portfolio since 2000, having been the first movers on pathway courses in Australia in the 1990s.
At Anglia Ruskin University, Navitas offer what they call a First Year Pathway (FYP) and say “Upon completion of the first year…you will seamlessly progress to the second year of your chosen degree with the University”. The language and description is a little meandering but we can be sure agents know what they mean and what commission comes with it. They are specific that “First Year with ARU College is only available for EU and International Students” and that it is for those who “don’t meet the entry requirements to enter university level study directly.”
Finding the entry criteria for the First Year Pathway is complex (so I would be happy to hear from ARU if I have this wrong and will correct it) but it looks as if the answer is “(EU & International nationals ONLY): 40. UCAS Tariff points at A/AS level.” This compares to ARU’s standard entry requirement of “96 UCAS tariff point from a minimum of 2 A levels (or equivalent)”. Basically this is the difference between AA at A-level and DE at A-level.
The Lamb Lies Down on Broadway
There are times when the UK higher education sector seems as aimless and innocent as a lamb deciding to take a nap on a busy thoroughfare. There are just too many occasions when it expects to be protected from harm while placing itself in perilous situations where it might be flattened by an oncoming juggernaut. It has allowed itself to be positioned as venal, arrogant and detached which makes it vulnerable to almost any action the Government of the day wants to take.
The Sunday Times piece comes on top of a number of reports and news items that just suggest universities are not in full control of their brand, their degrees or their finances. The recent National Audit Office report on private education providers franchised by universities had undertones of fraud and organised crime which were disturbing. The sense that international recruitment was allowed to spiral out of control with millions being paid to agents and reliance on international students is also strong.
There seems little doubt that all of these factors will play into the Migration Advisory Committee thinking as it reviews the graduate and student visa routes. Everyone has already seen the commentary from the chair of the Committee concerning low-quality students enrolling more for the option to work post-study than for the education. One might even think that the timing and placement of the Sunday Times story was intended to ensure that the terms of that Review are as tough and directive as possible.
NOTES
The title of this blog and the sub-headings are all taken from albums by Genesis. One take on the title “Selling England by the Pound” is that the band did not want to be thought of as “selling out” to America. But bassist Mike Rutherford has also been reported as saying it “..was partly about increasing commercialization and the sense that something was being lost in England.” It seems apt given the increasing incursion of private entities into UK higher education.
- The Sunday Times appears to have access not only to taped interviews but also to “grade entry requirement documents”. This blog does not attempt to fully replicate the work or assertions of the newspaper article or to endorse all of its assertions, graphics or quotes.
- I am grateful to Susan Fang for her insight on a specific issue related to this blog. Her insight and prompt response was extremely helpful. Any text or misunderstandings are entirely mine.
Image by Catherine Stockinger from Pixabay