Last week Ucas published its Future of Undergraduate Admissions report, the result of a consultation on reforming the university admissions process that kicked off in 2021.

The plans in the report cover five areas: grade transparency, the personal statement, references, personalised recommendations and a register of university outreach activities.

It is fair to say that some of these plans attracted more attention than others.

Ucas plans: university access and outreach

For example, creating a centralised data hub of access and outreach programmes aimed at widening participation in higher education - including Sutton Trust summer schools and other programmes - that can be easily accessed by students, parents and teachers, will no doubt be welcomed.

It is hoped that this database could go further in the future to allow universities to recognise participation in outreach activities organised by another university, because, of course, not every student decides to apply to the institution where they completed an access course.

Personalised course recommendations

The benefits of a personalised course recommendation tool to assist students in choosing courses, meanwhile, will largely depend on its execution.

After all, with recommendation algorithms a ubiquitous feature of modern society, there are clear potential benefits, but also potential pitfalls. It will be vital that Ucas prevents any such algorithm from deepening existing inequalities.

Course summaries and references

Accompanying course descriptions with a clear summary of the grades achieved by those previously accepted on to the course is a positive step for transparency, for applicants as well as teachers and advisers.

Research by the Sutton Trust shows that substantial numbers of students are accepted on to courses with grades below the published requirements. It should not come down to the “savvy” of applicants, teachers or families to figure out the likelihood of this happening.

Replacing the free text section of academic references with structured questions about the applicant will no doubt be welcomed by teachers and advisers spending an increasing amount of time writing extended references.

Reforming the personal statement

It was the plan to reform the personal statement that grabbed the most attention. The way the personal statement acts as a barrier to widening participation has been highlighted by many.

Work by Professor Steven Jones has been particularly influential, showing that grammatical errors, less access to high-prestige extracurricular experiences and a disconnect between the expectations of teachers and those of admissions tutors contribute to an advantage to those from higher socio-economic backgrounds and those attending schools with wide-ranging extracurricular activities and intensive support for applications.

While Ucas has resisted calls to abolish the personal statement entirely, citing research among applicants showing that many valued the opportunity to write about their motivations for studying, the free text statement will now be replaced by a series of structured questions.

Much of the initial reaction to the plan, particularly on social media, has focused on the proposed set of questions, which includes:

• Motivation and preparedness for the course.
• Wider experiences.
• Extenuating circumstances.
• Preparation for study and student life.
• Preferred learning styles.

While the inclusion of an explicit question on extenuating circumstances is a positive step for recognising applicants’ achievements in their context, it was the question on preferred “learning styles” that raised eyebrows.

Whether this was an intentional invocation of a controversial education theory (one that university applicants seem unlikely to be conversant with) or - more likely - clumsy phraseology intended to capture preferences for practical or interactive forms of learning, it seems likely this question will require some rewording at the least.

Despite this, these changes will make it easier for students lacking support to structure a personal statement and give them an idea of what topics are most likely to impress tutors.

However, other issues remain, including some students’ greater access to prestigious extracurricular activities that can be showcased. It has previously been suggested that the number of experiences cited should be limited in number, in order to curb its influence.

The questions will also need to be accompanied by further context on the types of things to include; for instance, experience as a carer as well as a work placement in a local business or participation in debating, in order to maximise the impact of the change.

While teachers will have a clearer remit when advising students on their application, it will still be important to give guidance to their students on how to answer the new questions and how best to showcase their abilities and potential.

The impact of AI?

However, Ucas’ report sidesteps a recent development that may undermine the concept of a personal statement altogether: the emergence of artificial intelligence text generator tools.

A convincing and well-written statement may now only be a few clicks away, posing an additional risk to the integrity of the statement. Many admissions tutors already ignore personal statements, but this may be the development that kills them off for good.

While AI detection mechanisms are also in constant development, it does raise the question of whether playing a cat-and-mouse game with artificial intelligence in order to save the personal statement is worthwhile.

So, ultimately, while the announcements made by Ucas represent a step forward, wider issues are still looming.

Carl Cullinane is director of research and policy at the Sutton Trust educational charity