November 2005/47 (web only)
Issues paper
This report is for information
Higher education admissions: assessment of bias
This study re-examines previous research carried out by Shiner and Modood that suggested particular biases in higher education admissions.
| To: | Heads of HEFCE-funded higher education institutions Heads of universities in Northern Ireland |
| Of interest to those responsible for: | Admissions, Widening participation, Equal opportunities |
| Reference: | 2005/47 |
| Publication date: | November 2005 |
| Enquiries to: | Mark Gittoes tel 0117 931 7052, e-mail m.gittoes@hefce.ac.uk |
Summary
Purpose
1. This study re-examines previous research carried out by Shiner and Modood that suggested particular biases in higher education admissions.
Key points
2. Previous research found evidence that, when applying to 'old universities', applicants from ethnic minorities had been penalised. In our investigation the data underpinning that research has been reanalysed, and it is concluded that the apparent general bias against ethnic minorities at 'old universities' was, in fact, the result of an inadequate specification of the original statistical model.
3. Although our further analysis shows that a general 'ethnic penalty' specific to 'old universities' does not exist, it has found that Pakistani applicants have a slightly lower than expected offer rate across the whole higher education sector. It should be noted that this assessed disadvantage for Pakistani applicants is much smaller than that estimated by Shiner and Modood.
4. In a limited investigation of particular subjects we showed that applicants from all ethnic minorities, apart from Chinese applicants, have lower than expected offer rates when applying to study law. Previous work by McManus showed that applicants from ethnic minorities are disadvantaged when applying to certain medical schools. The data used in this analysis is insufficient to confirm these findings, though we do show that the statistical model we developed is consistent with these results.
5. It is possible that our results are also due to limitations in the data, or weakness in the specification of the model. Even so, we make the following recommendations because we have shown that some biases in the admission process may exist. We recommend that:
further analysis be undertaken with larger, more recent, datasets, to see if the results we found are confirmed
the University and Colleges Admissions Agency (UCAS) take steps to ensure that more information can be efficiently extracted from the application process to enable fuller analysis and monitoring to be carried out in future
the Committee of Heads of Law Schools (CHULS) should commission, or provide input to, an investigation into applications to study law.
6. Ethnicity may be identified through the applicant's name and so we recommend that UCAS gives urgent consideration to a long standing proposal to withhold applicants' names for the first stages of the application process. This would reduce the possibility of discrimination being exercised and would build confidence in the application process.
Action required
7. No action is required in response to this document.