With final exams looming, many university students are concerned about landing graduate posts with larger employers. Apprehension often centres around the extra requirements these companies are now seeking. Blue-chip graduate employers are asking for something besides the standard 2:1 degree - they are calling for a minimum 24 points at A level.
This is unwelcome news for graduates such as Rich Abrahms who went to a state school and college in Colchester. Despite not realising his potential at A level, he went on to gain a 2:1 in astrophysics at the University of Southampton.
"I'm looking for a graduate job at the moment, but most of the big recruiters require 24 points at A level," he says. "I am considering retaking an A level, because having finished my degree it would be so easy for me to just retake physics. I don't think I'd even have to really revise. But it seems so ridiculous to have to do that when my degree clearly shows that my physics is above A level standard."
Steven Rolls is the director for resourcing at Ernst & Young - a global firm of accountants whose graduate scheme carries a 24 point minimum. Why does he use these extra selection criteria' "The problem we have is that we get lots and lots of applications. We are looking for applicants who will pass exams with us and go on to be successful with clients. Our research shows us that a good indicator of those who do well in our exams are graduates who have gained between 22 and 24 points at A level."
Graduates who feel cheated by this selection process may have a fair case. Recent findings suggest that A level performance can be more indicative of privileged schooling than actual ability. Robin Naylor is researcher in economics at the University of Warwick. His investigations indicate that A levels are an inaccurate determinate of ability in comparison to degree result.
"Our research shows a difference in the A level performance of people from what are seen as less privileged (that is, state) schools. For those people, A level scores seem to underestimate their potential. Universities which take other factors, such as type of school, into account are justified by our research. This is not just a political point about widening participation. From a hard-nosed angle of simply picking the most talented students, universities would be justified in offering lower entrance grades to pupils from state schools."
These findings have already had an effect on university selection procedures. Bristol University now operates a widening participation campaign, which it believes will ensure them the best students.
"We regard A level performance as an important indicator of academic performance," says Barry Taylor, director of communications for the University of Bristol. "But we don't feel they are the be all and end all. We consider the context in which the person has been educated and the personal qualities and commitment of the person. We know that people with the best academic abilities exist in every corner of society, and we believe it is our duty to look for this ability wherever it exists."
But the research also seriously undermines the tactics of recruiters who use A levels to evaluate candidates. As Robin Naylor explains: "Our research also indicates that university performance is a better indicator of merit than school performance. There is one exception in that maths at A level seems to be an indicator of ability that is not necessarily overruled by degree performance. Recruiters might well be justified in taking this subject into account."
In terms of all other subjects, however, Robin is keen to point out the unfairness of graduate recruiters using A level grades. "It's counting twice. If A levels are counted once to get in to university and again at recruitment level, it does look unfair. Our research also indicates that schooling also seems to have an effect on recruitment, even though the statistics show that a degree is a better indicator of ability. Using A level grades for recruitment risks penalising people who have made up for a poor start."
What does big business think of these results' "The major problem is that we get around 12,000 applicants for a relatively small number of positions," says Ernst & Young's Steven Rolls. "We have to introduce fairly stringent criteria, otherwise we'd just drown under the weight of paperwork. Someone who hasn't done as well in their A levels is not going to get through our selection process - but, we do also take on experienced hires. We employ a number of graduates who have worked their way up in other companies."
A spokesperson for Capital One explains why some parts of the company demand a 26 point minimum A level standard. "The reason why we use A level points in selection is to do with the level of ability we are looking for. We, like many other recruiters, are looking to recruit the best of the best. We are also looking for candidates who are going to achieve a 2:1 at degree, and we make an offer before they achieve this. A levels are an indicator of students achieving a 2:1. Our research shows that the vast number of the employees we take on at graduate level have gained between 22 and 26 points at A level. In terms of research indicating the insignificance of A level points, we haven't seen it, so we couldn't comment on it."
State school graduates may have further cause for concern. Additional research by Robin Naylor also indicates a lack of equality in the workplace. His findings demonstrate that despite degree performance, employability is still advantaged by independent schooling. Whether this is partly due to attention paid by recruiters to A level results has not been proved, but it certainly can't disadvantage those from independent schools.
On a more positive note, around half of graduate recruiters don't have a UCAS point minimum. Alex Snelling, graduate recruitment manager at L'Oreal, explains the cosmetics giant's criteria. "We always take a broader view, looking not only at a candidate's education but also their work experience, participation in university societies or sports. We take into account the full spectrum of areas where they might have demonstrated their skills."
So, at least some recruiters make a fair appraisal of graduate skills - because, as L'Oreal would say, you're worth it.
