The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education has published the report of its evaluation of international pathway programs – programs designed to support the entry of international students into UK higher education courses.
The evaluation was commissioned by Universities UK in early 2024, following reports in the mainstream media of universities allegedly allowing international students into their institutions despite having lower grades than their domestic counterparts.
Subsequently, the review into entry requirements for pathway programs, as well as the standard of both International Foundation Programs and International Year One Programs, was conducted.
Vivienne Stern, chief executive of UUK, welcomed the “comprehensive review”.
She said the reason for the commissioned work was to give students, their families and the wider public confidence that university admissions processes are fair for domestic and international students.
“Although the number of students entering undergraduate study via an international pathway program represents a small proportion of the two million undergraduates studying in our universities, it was important to examine questions around these pathways.
“The review found that that providers are following their published entry requirements and that entry requirements are broadly equivalent. It also confirms academic standards on international pathway courses are of an expected standard in the vast majority of cases.
“However, while there are no systemic issues, the review has found some areas where more consistent application of best practice is needed, and this needs swift action.
“We will be discussing with our members the steps we must take as a sector to further strengthen the robustness and transparency of admissions.”
The review has found some areas where more consistent application of best practice is needed
Vivienne Stern, UUK
In QAA’s evaluation of entry requirements, out of 32 providers that delivered International Foundation Programs, 18 declared they had equivalent domestic programs. The equivalent programs that were identified by providers were mainly foundation year provision, the report highlighted.
Meanwhile, out of 20 providers that delivered International Year One Programs, 10 declared they had equivalent domestic programs and the equivalent programs that were identified were the first year of full undergraduate programs.
“As not all International Pathway Programs had equivalent domestic programs there appears to be a greater number of programs across the sector to facilitate entry for international students,” said QAA.
“Using these domestic equivalent program as a comparison, QAA found that there was broad equivalence between the entry requirements for both the International Foundation Program and their domestic equivalents, and International Year One Program and their domestic equivalents.”
QAA’s review found that the academic standards for both International Foundation Programs and International Year One Programs were being set in line with the expectations of a course at that level “in the vast majority of cases” and that students were achieving at an appropriate level.
QAA found notable differences in the rates of progression to the next level of study between International Foundation Programs and International Year One programs and their identified domestic equivalent programs within providers, but there was “no clear observable pattern within these differences”.
“These matters are likely worthy of further investigation by providers,” said QAA.
In the report, QAA makes a number of recommendations for the sector to consider, including that individual higher education providers “regularly assess progression rates for international and domestic students, and should ensure they are considering internal comparisons between both subject and international and equivalent domestic programs”.
UUK is working on updating its Fair Admissions Code of Practice and seeks to address relevant issues identified by the QAA as a priority and publish the updated code, said Stern.
Providers participated in the evaluation on a voluntary basis, leading to 34 providers taking part in the exercise, while QAA appointed 36 reviewers to undertake the evaluation activity.
In total, 185 programs were selected for evaluation, with over 20 different subject areas. The evaluation examined 2,731 individual student admissions records and 2,063 pieces of assessed student work, of which 1,427 were for International Foundation Programs and 636 for International Year One Programs.
A spokesperson for the Russell Group said it is “grateful” for the “thorough evaluation’”.
“We welcome today’s independent evaluation from the QAA, which has found that International Foundation and Year One programs used by some universities have entry requirements that are consistent with those for UK students on equivalent programs, and academic standards that are in line with other programmes at the same level.
“Our universities are committed to fair admissions and delivering high quality courses and successful outcomes for all students,” the spokesperson continued.
“While the QAA found no systemic issues with international pathway programs being delivered in the UK, it made several recommendations to strengthen practice in the sector.
“Our universities will be working with delivery partners to consider these recommendations to ensure best practice and that students, staff, government and sector partners remain confident in the standards of these courses.”
