Fairer for All: Towards a centralised model of admissions and access at Oxford and Cambridge

Why centralising admissions at Oxford and Cambridge would be ‘fairer for all’.

A new report published by the Higher Education Policy Institute (HEPI) calls for undergraduate admissions and access work at the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge to be centralised, arguing this would improve fairness, transparency and efficiency.

The report, Fairer for All: Towards a Centralised Model of Admissions and Access at Oxford and Cambridge (HEPI Debate Paper 47) by Charlotte Armstrong, finds the current collegiate system – while valuable for the student experience – creates significant barriers for applicants, teachers and schools navigating the admissions process.

The report reveals stark disparities in access and widening participation funding between colleges. Freedom of Information request data show the highest-spending colleges allocate 12 times more to widening participation and outreach than the lowest-budgeting colleges, with some colleges allocating less money than others, despite having larger endowments.

According to the report, these differences contribute to an uneven national landscape of support for prospective applicants and risk disadvantaging some students with the greatest potential, particularly those from underrepresented backgrounds

Key findings:

• Huge variation in outreach funding: The highest-spending colleges allocate around 12 times more to access and widening participation than the lowest-spending colleges, leading to uneven support across the country.
• Inconsistent admissions processes: At the University of Cambridge, grade entry requirements, interview formats and offer levels vary between colleges, meaning applicants can face different outcomes depending on where they apply.
• A complex and opaque system: The collegiate structure makes it difficult for applicants and teachers to understand and navigate the admissions process, particularly in schools with limited capacity.
• Fragmented outreach provision: Access work is split across colleges, leading to duplication in some geographical areas and gaps in others.
• Poor institutional coordination: College outreach activity is not beholden to institutional Access and Participation Plans but instead operates on a trust-based system.

The report concludes that these features risk disadvantaging capable applicants – especially those without access to detailed guidance on navigating the system.

To address these challenges, the report recommends a phased programme of reform. It first calls for greater standardisation of admissions practices across colleges – removing the current inconsistencies in interviewing style and grade offer level, among others. Following this stage, the report calls for the introduction of a fully centralised system in which applications are assessed by departments rather than colleges.

The report also recommends centralising access and outreach work within each University, supported by pooled contributions from colleges, to ensure more consistent and targeted provision.

The report notes that elements of centralisation already exist within current practice and argues these could be expanded to deliver a more consistent, transparent and equitable admissions system.

Charlotte Armstrong, Policy Manager at HEPI and author of the report, said:

Oxford and Cambridge’s admissions systems are complex and uneven. Variation between colleges, both with regards to admissions and outreach work create an inconsistent and unfair system. At present, factors such as which college a student applies to can shape their experience of the process – and potentially their chances of success. That should not be the case.

Similarly, the variation in resources and buy-in between colleges with regards to access and widening participation work means that different areas of the country are receiving different levels of support. Centralising admissions and outreach would help ensure that all strong candidates are considered fairly, while maintaining the benefits of the collegiate system once students arrive.

Reports:

Read the full report (PDF)

Notes for editors

• HEPI was founded in 2002 to influence the higher education debate with evidence. We are UK-wide, independent and non-partisan. We are funded by organisations and higher education institutions that wish to support vibrant policy discussions, as well as through our own events. HEPI is a company limited by guarantee and a registered charity.
• The author of the new report, Charlotte Armstrong, is Policy Manager at the Higher Education Policy Institute (HEPI), where she is responsible for managing the HEPI blog and supporting the Institute’s programme of policy analysis and engagement. Before joining HEPI, Charlotte worked on access and widening participation as School’s Liaison Officer for Queens’ College at the University of Cambridge.