Admissions and Recruitment Offices Editing and Proofreading Services

Admissions offices publish the terms on which someone's future is decided, to an audience that includes seventeen-year-olds with no one at home who has been through this, and applicants whose school system does not map onto the one the requirements were written for. Every ambiguity in an entry requirement produces applications that should never have been made and, more damagingly, applications that were never made by people who would have been admitted.

We edit what admissions and recruitment offices produce — entry requirement statements and qualification equivalencies, prospectus and course page copy, offer letters and condition statements, conditional and unconditional offer explanations, rejection and unsuccessful applicant correspondence, contextual admissions policy and its public explanation, widening participation and access material, English language requirement information, credit transfer and recognition of prior learning guidance, interview and portfolio guidance for applicants, deferral, deferment and reapplication information, appeals and complaints procedures, agent and adviser briefing material, and open day and applicant event content. Our editors check that a requirement can be applied by the applicant to themselves.

The entry requirement is the sentence with the most consequences and it is routinely written for the admissions system rather than the reader. A requirement expressed only in one country's grades, or in points nobody outside the sector can compute, or with a subject condition buried in a footnote, produces exactly the pattern institutions then commission research about: strong applicants from unfamiliar backgrounds concluding they are not eligible. We write these so the requirement appears in the terms the applicant holds their own results in, with the common equivalents given rather than linked; so any subject-specific condition sits with the grade rather than below it, since that is where the applicant stops reading; so the difference between the standard offer and what the department will actually consider is stated honestly, because a published minimum that is never the real threshold misleads in one direction and a stretch figure misleads in the other; and so contextual admissions are explained as a rule an applicant can check against their own circumstances rather than as a commitment to fairness.

Everything you send is treated in confidence, including applicant data and material in draft. We are editors rather than admissions professionals or immigration advisers, and we offer no view on any admissions decision, qualification equivalency, or visa requirement. What we can do is make requirements and correspondence clear enough that the right people apply and know where they stand.