1. UCAS update and developments Mat Welbourn Professional Development Executive

2. The higher education landscape 320 35,000+ 653,637 6.9%  464,910 5.5% 

3. Source: UCAS End of Cycle Report 2012 (13 December 2012) The 2012 cycle in review

4. Source: UCAS End of Cycle Report 2012 (13 December 2012) 55,721 8.9%  55,721 8.9%  1,329 140.8%  1,329 140.8%  400,001 7.1%  400,001 7.1%  7,859 17.6%  7,859 17.6% 

5. 2013 cycle applicant figures Cumulative 95,465 5.4%  Cumulative 95,465 5.4%  Cumulative 558,898 3.5%  Cumulative 558,898 3.5%  Source: UCAS 2013 cycle applicant figures (30 January 2013)

6. Preparations for Confirmation and Clearing WhatNumber ‘Track-lite’ logins900,295 Full Track logins243,820 Course vacancy searches830,000 Emails 09:00 to applicants200,000+ Contact centre calls18,195 A level results day, 2012

7. Preparations for Confirmation and Clearing ▪Greater use of email in communications to applicants ▪Earlier release of GCE results to universities ▪More results delivered electronically through the ABL process ▪IT infrastructure and operating systems will be enhanced significantly ▪More systems will be delivered through cloud technology ▫Full Track ▫Weblink ▫Course Finder

8. The current (UCAS) admissions system ▪Does it put the applicant at the heart of the process? ▪Does it support different types of applicant? ▪Does it support different types of courses? ▪Does it support the best match of applicant to course? ▪Is it a fair admissions process? ▪Does it support the best admissions decisions? ▪Is it efficient? ▪Does it provide excellent service?

9. The APR Consultation ▪The APR Consultation proposed changes to the admissions process for undergraduate courses in the UK ▪It was launched 31 October 2011 and closed 20 January 2012 ▪Diverse, thoughtful and insightful responses received from across the education sector

10. APR research highlighted several big issues ▪Complexity ▪Young have to apply too early ▪Insurance ▪Clearing ▪Predicted grades

11. Proposals from the APR ▪Six categories of proposals: ▫Strong support and recommended for implementation ▫Amended in light of feedback and recommended for implementation ▫Support but further refinement required ▫International ▫Part-time ▫Limited support not recommended

12. Progress against recommendations ▪Improved information capture and data quality ▫Qualification search and capture ▪Personal statement enhancements ▪Revised personal statement in Extra ▪Pop-ups and wizards at key stages of application process ▪Improved terminology for applicants – CF, CI ▪Guidance for referees ▪Supporting documentation ▫Images of passports ▫Portfolio examples ▪Extending collection of results (BTEC, Access)

13. Proposals that required refinement ▪Single offer date ▫Minimise the need or perceived advantages of early applications ▪Disciplined deadlines and Service Level Agreements for decision making ▪Extra open to all applicants without two offers ▪Replacement of Clearing with a managed process of applications ▫Confirmation window ▫Clearing break ▪Developments in IAG

14. Developments in IAG – Course Finder ▪The new replacement for Course Search ▫Launching live for applicants in the second quarter of 2013 ▪Improved filtering of courses ▪Additional data fields (for example Entry Requirements) ▪Welsh language version ▪Smart links and recommendations ▪Other improvements to the site based on feedback and user testing

15. // www.ucas.com/prep

16. Questions Mat Welbourn Professional Development Executive  01242 544 958  m.welbourn@ucas.ac.uk // www.ucas.com/training