Trinity Hall’s Admissions Policy; Educational Inequality and Social Mobility

Image - Chris Boland

Earlier this year, Trinity Hall college at the University of Cambridge faced backlash for its policy to increase outreach to elite private schools. Whilst some defend such a decision as a valid response to declining applicants, others express shock and anger, describing the policy as a ‘slap in the face’ for state-educated students. 

The news broke out after a memo outlining a ‘targeted recruitment strategy’ was leaked to the Guardian. The memo reveals plans to individually approach 50 private schools mainly located in the south of England, including St Paul’s Girls, Eton, and Winchester, as the college attempts to boost applicants for subjects such as languages, music, and classics.

Marcus Tomalin, the director of admissions at Trinity Hall, expressed concerns of ‘reverse discrimination’. He feared private school students may be ignored and marginalised due to policies that seek fairness in admissions, which "would risk overlooking potential offer holders who are not only exceptionally well qualified but who have been encouraged to engage critically and independently with their subjects in a way that Cambridge has historically prized.” 

Starting in the academic year of 2023/24, Trinity Hall launched a widening participation programme called ‘You’ll Fit In’. Aimed to increase representation within the university, the programme provides admissions support for year 12 students who identify as part of an underrepresented ethnic group and have fulfilled a set of academic requirements. Additional social criteria such as having been a recipient of Free School Meals in secondary school can be counted as ‘contextual flags’, which may put the candidate on the programme priority list. 

Trinity Hall raises its ongoing widening participation programmes, including ‘You’ll Fit In,’ in their statement responding to the admissions policy scandal, highlighting their continued efforts to cultivate a welcoming environment for all. They clarify that their overall admissions policy will not change, despite the proposal “to add some schools to the email lists.” 

The public reaction to the news has been mixed. Some defend outreach policy as a relevant response to recruitment pressures, rather than an effort that should be negatively perceived as an action to increase intake of privately-educated students. David Kernohan from Wonkhe, states that “Trinity Hall (like providers of all types) is looking to maximise recruitment by making an effort to encourage students already likely to apply.” He explains that many applications come from private school students regardless, and thus it makes sense for Trinity Hall to approach such a pool to win the admissions competition amongst the Cambridge colleges. 

Others also agree that outreach towards private schools are necessary, especially if a “big noise” is being made regarding diversifying admissions. Focusing on state school outreach, says Ross Clarke from The Spectator, will leave independent school pupils feeling unwanted. “They will apply elsewhere because they will get the impression that they will be turned away purely on account of their background,” particularly those on bursaries at independent schools. 

Private school students who are on bursaries were also mentioned in Tomalin’s note, where he highlighted that a “significant minority of students at leading independent schools are on full bursaries”. However, numbers show otherwise. According to a survey carried out in January 2025 by the Independent Schools Council (ISC), only 6.8% of all pupils at ISC member schools have contributed to fees through means-tested bursaries. 

On the other hand, there has been much negative response. A group of students at Trinity Hall express anger towards the policy, describing it as “a step backwards, risking a return to the university’s historic privileged and exclusive reputation.” They are compiling support against this decision via a petition asking for their college to halt targeting elite private schools for student admissions. 

Lee Elliot Major, a professor of social mobility at the University of Exeter, says “Cambridge should know better.” Regardless of the policy’s intentions, he points to the bigger message, an unspoken assurance regarding private schools that “academic quality is most reliably found there, and moving beyond this clique risks lowering standards.” 

He emphasises how educational resources to pursue the world of languages, classics, and music - subjects mentioned in their memo - remains gatekept for the privileged; “To treat these unequal starting points as evidence of unequal ability is to mistake years of private rehearsal for natural merit.” 

Whilst private schools have seen substantial investment into creative subjects, state schools have suffered a steady decline in arts provision in the past decade. Creative subjects tend to fall victim to budget cuts, as seen in recent years. In 2025, the government called off funding for a programme that supported Latin education in state schools, leaving students with no choice but to drop the subject or continue the subject self-taught. 

To illuminate the wider resource gap between such schools and state schools, tuition fees alone at private schools are on average £15,800 for day schools, and £35,300 for boarding schools. This is approximately 2.6 to 5.8 times higher compared to the average £6,125 spent on state school students in England, a price that is mainly paid through the school or by local authorities. 

Leading up to when such data was derived in 2020, there has also been a fall of 9% in spending per student in real terms. While state schools face such cuts, private school students may also have access to resources beyond that provided by tuition fees, such as via wealth holdings and charitable donations. Such gaps manifest in inequalities regarding general infrastructure, class size, and the ranges of activities that students can access. 

With the new 20% VAT charges on private schools executed in January 2025, sending a child to private school has become even more exclusive. The inaccessibility to the wider public is evident when comparing the tuition fees alone to the average salary for UK full-time employers, which stands at £39,039 in 2025. With the VAT in place, ISC reports that there has been a 2% decline in total pupil numbers in private schools, with an over 5% decline in the main intake years.

Cambridge admissions data based on school types is reflective of such existing educational inequalities. Based on school types (excluding overseas schools), the 2024 applicant demographic split into a 30:70 ratio between private schools and state schools. Putting this into perspective, this is disproportionately high in comparison to the 7% private school enrollment rate amongst the general population. 

The Sutton Trust’s chief executive, Nick Harrison, emphasises the connection between higher education and social mobility. The organisation reports that 36% of British elites, people in roles with highest prestige and wealth as well as holding substantial power and influence over people’s lives, have attended private school. University also serves as a crucial ‘pipeline’, a key stepping stone, to securing an elite position in British society. 

Statistically speaking, members of the elite were “over 5 times more likely to have gone to a Russell Group university and 21 times more likely to have gone to Oxbridge than the general population.” Just under 25% of the British elite have such a higher education background combined with a private school background, making the private school and Russell Group university (including Oxbridge) combo the most common passage to entering elite roles. 

Prior to the recent admissions scandal, Cambridge also scrapped an admissions target of admitting 69% of its students from non-private school settings. While they claim to focus on a variety of socio-economic factors rather than placing value on reaching a numerical target, admissions targets have not yet been released.

Under the current British society where education is closely intertwined with future prospects, a university’s admissions policy may symbolise something beyond that of education, possibly a bigger picture of social mobility. Regardless of the college’s intentions, it remains a question whether the elite university will cling onto its meritocratic traditions or progress towards eradicating the inequalities that such traditions a blind eye to.