Centralise Oxbridge admissions to improve access, report urges

Admissions processes at the universities of Oxford and Cambridge should be centralised, rather than requiring students to apply to individual colleges, to make the system fairer, a new report has argued. 

The Higher Education Policy Institute (Hepi) found that the prestigious institutions’ collegiate model “damages the efficiency, parity and transparency” of both universities’ access and widening participation initiatives and their admissions procedures. 

The report notes that variation between colleges’ application procedures means that students “can have markedly different experiences and receive different outcomes, depending on the course-college combination of their application”.

Cambridge has 31 colleges while Oxford has 43. When applying to either university, prospective students must either select their preferred college or make an “open application”, in which case they will be allocated a college. 

While the report notes that both universities have “made significant progress in terms of their access and outreach initiatives”, research by the thinktank found that the amount of money spent on these schemes varies significantly between colleges.

Data obtained through freedom of information requests showed that the largest college-level budget for this work was about 12 times larger than the smallest at both universities. 

And, as access work is conducted at college level, this can lead to duplication in some geographical areas and gaps in others.

The report adds that navigating the college system is a “nightmare” for outsiders, making it difficult for teachers and schools to know how to engage. 

In particular, while all interviews at Oxford moved online after the pandemic, interviews at Cambridge can take place online or in person, depending on both the college and course the student is applying to. 

At Cambridge, grade entry requirements, interview formats and offer levels can also vary between colleges, meaning applicants may “face different outcomes depending on where they apply”.

This makes it “very difficult” for prospective applicants to understand the system and similarly challenging for access and outreach staff to explain the process to applicants, the report says. 

“The system’s complexity further entrenches the idea among students from widening participation backgrounds that Oxbridge is an unattainable and inaccessible place to study,” it continues. 

The report instead recommends adopting a centralised admissions process, as well as centralising access and outreach work within each university, supported by pooled contributions from the colleges.

“The academic staff of each college would still be required to participate in the interview process, but these interviews would be centrally organised,” it suggests, with a total number of offers then made for each subject across the university. 

“Currently, if one college receives an unprecedented number of strong candidates they may be physically unable to interview all of them,” the report says, adding that this means some candidates miss out on an interview owing to their choice of college.

“Oxford and Cambridge’s admissions systems are complex and uneven,” said Charlotte Armstrong, policy manager at Hepi and author of the report. “Variation between colleges, both with regard to admissions and outreach work, creates 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.”