‘Crude and unfair’ CAO system must change, say school principals

Secondary school leaders have criticised universities for standing over a “crude, outdated and unfair” Central Applications Office (CAO) process for selecting students on to higher education courses.
The National Association of Principals and Deputies (NAPD) said the system for awarding college places had the “appearance of fairness and transparency, but in reality, does not serve students’ best interests”.
It said cases of students who secured maximum Leaving Cert points – 625 – losing out on their preferred college courses this year underlined the unfairness of the system.
[ ‘Cruel lottery’: students on top grades who lost out on chosen CAO courses are heartbroken. Is there a fairer system?Opens in new window ]
[ ‘She couldn’t have done better’: Student with maximum points misses out on course due to lotteryOpens in new window ]
The association’s comments come as thousands of school-leavers begin college this week while others are waiting on the CAO’s round two offers on Monday afternoon to see if they have secured a higher preference course choice.
NAPD director Paul Crone said principals and school leaders – who are supporting students, particularly those who have not secured their desired courses – were troubled by universities’ lack of meaningful engagement with these students.
“The current method of awarding places through the CAO, which is owned and operated by the universities, is a crude and outdated system which has the appearance of fairness and transparency, but in reality, does not serve students’ best interests,” he said.
“Currently, universities offer places without knowing anything about the student beyond their exam results, which can lead to mismatches between students and courses, and contribute to high dropout rates.”
The NAPD also called for “full transparency” by universities regarding the number of places they offer and how they calculate points requirements.
“The fairness of the CAO system is in question, particularly given the increasing influence of the grinds culture, which is distorting the true academic ability of students,” he said. “We need to examine what’s really happening within the universities.
[ Have your say: Did the CAO work for you?Opens in new window ]
“The number of places offered, the proportion reserved for overseas students, and the justification for random selection all need to be scrutinised. Universities must stop using claims of grade inflation as a tool to influence senior cycle redevelopment and avoid engaging directly with the students applying to their institutions.”
He said a “straightforward” solution was to offer more general entry courses where a student interested in science, for example, could enter a general science programme and then specialise after their first year, based on their interests and aptitudes.
He called on universities to “engage meaningfully” with school leaders to create a system that recognises students’ aptitudes, abilities and interests alongside their academic performance.
The CAO declined to comment in response to the NAPD’s comments, but the Irish Universities Association (IUA) rejected much of the criticism.
Lewis Purser, the IUA’s director of academic affairs, said universities did everything possible behind the scenes to minimise the use of random selection.
However, the Minister for Education’s decision to keep grades inflated made it more difficult to differentiate between candidates due to the bunching of students on top grades.
He also said universities successfully moved to create more general entry courses for entry to higher education since 2012, while the use of access schemes for candidates with disabilities or from less well-off backgrounds had boosted the number of students from underrepresented backgrounds.
Mr Purser said the Leaving Cert’s narrow form of assessment of students limited options available for selecting students, as did the late release of Leaving Cert grades.
While the CAO system could be “harsh and anonymous”, Mr Purser said an interview-based system for college entry would negatively impact more disadvantaged students who lacked the social capital of more affluent students. “It would move Ireland back to the 1970s, where it’s a case of who you know rather than what you’ve done,” he said.