The boat is leaking: why is the change to admissions at one of the oldest Cambridge colleges a problem?

This blog was kindly authored by Charlotte Gleed, former HEPI intern and current MPhil student at the University of Cambridge.

A Guardian article revealing that Trinity Hall College at the University of Cambridge will target elite private schools for student recruitment has ignited a fierce debate this week. The article reveals how Fellows at one of the oldest Cambridge colleges voted to change their admissions strategy to approach a select group of 50 independent schools. The intention is to improve the ‘quality’ of applicants, following concerns that ‘reverse discrimination’ is the cause of this quality issue.

But this diagnosis is a problematic one. And more concerning, it is a move which risks not only an interruption of access and widening participation efforts, but a radical setback.

Why has Trinity Hall, Cambridge made this move?

Trinity Hall claims that the change to their admissions policy is a ‘targeted recruitment strategy’. Their objective is to encourage students from the selected private schools to apply for undergraduate courses in a select list of subjects including languages, music, and classics. But this puts a – large and potentially destructive – spanner in the works for access to higher education.

Not only does this strategy support a small minority of a privileged few, given that 7% of the population in the United Kingdom is privately educated. It also focuses on subjects, like music, which state schools have long struggled to maintain at equal levels to their independent counterparts. There has been a 25% drop in pupils studying GCSE Music in England over the last 15 years, and Parliament debated the issue in July 2025 over cuts and underfunding to musical education.

A HEPI report from July 2025 raised concerns about the language crisis and the decline in uptake of students studying languages at school. So Trinity Hall are valid in their efforts to find ways to increase applications for languages, in particular. But their strategy of targeting the most – economically – selective schools is flawed.

If this policy is implemented in the 2026 / 2027 admissions cycle and beyond the gap between outcomes for state and privately educated students in higher education will widen. Not only could this decision reverse sustained efforts to widen participation to higher education, but it will ultimately mean that ‘privileged pasts become privileged futures’, as the Dearing Report warned almost thirty years ago in 1997.

Change to admissions policies is not always a bad thing. Back in 1965, Hertford College, Oxford devised, what is still a little known access programme called ‘The Tanner Scheme’. The programme was the first outreach initiative across Oxford and Cambridge: a revolutionary step for increasing accessibility to the most selective universities in the country – and the world. But its initial motivation was less egalitarian and philanthropic.

The first version of the scheme was targeted at a select few boys’ grammar schools in the north of England, whose students the college admissions tutors believed were untapped talent. But the hidden goal was neither to widen participation nor improve access for these talented students, but to improve the academic record of the college within Oxford. Having exhausted the pool of privately educated talent, the next best option was academic students with ability and potential, not wealth.

Sound familiar…? Only now potential and wealth are being combined.

There is a real concern that a new precedent could be set within Oxbridge colleges, which threatens the long-established practice of widening participation. Colleges at both Oxford and Cambridge have a degree of independence unrivalled compared to most other higher education institutions. The Office for Students requires all higher education institutions to have an Access and Participation Plan (APPs) which identifies access and participation gaps unique to their student cohorts. APPs have not only held these institutions accountable but taken the sector in a positive direction towards increased access.

But the Trinity Hall revelations show there is a loophole. Despite the Office for Students’ requirement, it appears that colleges can target what is an already overrepresented cohort without regulatory intervention. 29.0% of undergraduates accepted for the 2024/25 admissions cycle were privately educated, even though only 7% of the population is. While the majority of Cambridge acceptances come from ‘maintained’ schools (comprehensive and grammar schools, as well as sixth form and further education colleges) the disproportionate gap between the number of students attending independent schools and their acceptance of a place is troubling for access.

That loophole needs closing. The ramifications for access to higher education could be catastrophic if a new trend begins. The Guardian reports that one member of staff at Trinity Hall, Cambridge called the policy ‘a slap in the face’ for state-educated undergraduates. But there is an even higher stake than this. It could mean that higher education becomes more inaccessible for those whose life it could transform most.

The boat is not sinking – yet. But there is a risk it could.