Much has been made of the case for and against students receiving unconditional offers for university places. The arguments are often complex, and competing considerations can include reputational, academic and fiscal factors. However, when addressing the recent huge rise in the number of unconditional offers, we need to look at one aspect above all else: the student.

Since 2014, the number of 18-year-olds receiving at least one unconditional offer has risen almost fivefold. That means that almost a quarter of these prospective HE students in England, Wales and Northern Ireland can be assured of a place, irrespective of grades. The repercussions have been dramatic and wide-ranging.

 One of the most notable arguments against unconditional offers is that students “take their foot off the gas” - which causes great frustration among teachers. It’s not just anecdotal: the Office of Students found evidence to show that applicants, having accepted an unconditional offer, were more likely to underperform by two or more grades compared with those receiving an offer with conditions. 

Let’s be clear. This isn’t good for the university, the FE provider or the student.

If you speak with those in the HE sector, many will tell you that they don’t approve of, or like, the strategy of institutions handing out unconditional offers - but that they are driven by financial necessity. 

Universities are commercial entities and have an underlying need (and responsibility) to be well-run and financially viable. However, that can never be at the expense of the teaching experience. The “everyone else does it” approach simply doesn’t wash, and it leads to a situation of perpetual underperformance. 

The idea that unconditional offers can help to boost social mobility doesn’t stack up.  In reality, unconditional offers are often based on a variety of factors - prominent among which are the highest attainers. 

This means that there is often no correlation with social mobility, and those who are from traditionally less well-off backgrounds can be marginalised further and receive a raw deal.

Educational institutions are facing constant threats to their financial stability, and it’s understandable that providers want to guarantee students on seats. However, this mustn’t be done to the detriment of their integrity. It has unacceptable knock-on effects further down the line, both at FE level and secondary, but, most importantly, for the individuals at the heart of the equation.

Bill Jones is the deputy CEO of Leeds City College