Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Higher education

Talk to other parents whose children are preparing for university on our Higher Education forum.

Is Trinity Hall Cambridge right about elite schools?

1000 replies

mids2019 · 07/01/2026 20:19

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2026/jan/07/cambridge-college-elite-private-schools-student-recruitment

Interesting position but maybe there are those at Cambridge that think encouraging students from the state sector has gone too far? Wonder if other colleges will follow suit.

Cambridge college to target elite private schools for student recruitment

Exclusive: Trinity Hall’s new policy described as a ‘slap in the face’ for state-educated students

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2026/jan/07/cambridge-college-elite-private-schools-student-recruitment

OP posts:
Thread gallery
12
ElliesHamster · 10/01/2026 11:22

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

peacefulpeach · 10/01/2026 11:32

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

? The pp didn’t show any animosity towards other children. How bizarre you think they did.

ElliesHamster · 10/01/2026 11:34

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

HundredMilesAnHour · 10/01/2026 11:34

fairyring25 · 10/01/2026 10:02

@januarybikethief
Thanks for your comments. Your computer science colleagues' views are surprising.
Statistically computer science is harder than languages at A-level based on average GCSE results and final outcomes. I also believe you have to do Further Maths to do computer science at Oxford (if your school offers it) and this is statistically the hardest A-level. Your colleagues are saying they don't have enough candidates with good enough mathematical skills but maybe they can just be choosy with the very high number of candidates they get applying. The kids studying Further Mathematics that I know are the brightest students from when they were in primary school. More so than the languages students who tend to just be from bilingual middle class families.

Lies, damned lies and statistics eh?

How do you measure brightness? How can you say that students doing Further Maths are brighter than languages students? Isn’t this just trying to compare apples and oranges? Apples have higher demand at present so therefore apples are better than oranges?

Further Maths (or Computer Science) requires different strengths / aptitudes to MFL. Is there a published league table for aptitude values that shows abstract problem solving is considered more valuable than communication skills?

ScaredOfFlying · 10/01/2026 11:48

HowDidWeGetHome · 09/01/2026 17:53

I been feeling quite low as I've read this thread.

My kid's at Cambridge studying a humanitites subject. They've been educated through the state system and they achieved full A*s in their A Levels (a mix of science and humanities, all in subjects we used to call facilitating). They're in a college at Cam that has one of the lowest acceptance rates and they got their offer after interview ie they were not pooled.

It saddens me to read that my child can not compete with their privately educated counterparts from the outset, not because of intelligence but because they won't have absorbed anywhere near the amount of cultural capital necessary, or be trained to write essays that are considered stimilating. This is not something I'd thought about until reading this thread. I stupidly assumed because they are academically bright, hard working, able to rise to any challenge, they would be a perfect fit but seemingly no. And why? Because we could not afford to spend £100,000+ on a private school education.

We are living in a crazily unequal society and I can't help but think private schools help to perpetuate that.

I just want other parents to know, who may be reading this thread and feeling like me, that my kid is so happy at Cambridge, actually thriving. They love the fact they're being academically challenged, they love the high level of sport on offer and the social side of things. They are enchanted with the place and I cannot imagine them anywhere else. I am so thankful they have this opportunity. Admittedly, they have not found many people 'like them' - most are from wealthy backgrounds, from the south and they have had some shitty comments from kids looking down their noses - but they have made some great friends who I hope will be friends for life.

Edited

@HowDidWeGetHome please don’t feel sad for your child. I myself posted above that I realised while at Cambridge that many of my privately-educated peers were quite far ahead of me in terms of critical thinking and essay/debate technique, but it never particularly bothered me because I did absolutely fine, was happy with my 2:1 and, crucially, was never made to feel small or thick by anyone who was teaching me. And it made not a jot of difference socially.

Very few people get Firsts in Humanities subjects. Of course academics like @cantabsupervisorand @januarybikethiefwant to find and work with the exceptional ones who will spark off them and inspire their own research, who wouldn’t? But once you are there it is not a competition so why think of it in terms of being able or unable to compete? Your child probably doesn’t.

peacefulpeach · 10/01/2026 11:49

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

I really don’t think it was. I think the poster was a bit sad her daughter has done everything right, succeeding, only to read on here that her dd may even still be on the back foot because she hadn’t got the right background of years of xyz.

I can see it, I can. I’m a state school person done well. I sent my kids to private school because I’d grown up with the inequalities. My college (school finished at 16) didn’t even mention Oxbridge as an option (despite the fact several of us could realistically apply). It was something other people did.

Oxbridge have been trying to address it but its too late by the time kids are 17. It takes money and lots of investment into children from the very beginning. From Sure Start schemes to improving state schools.

What have Labour done? Closed grammars, Cancelled Latin and the IB, introducing tax on education - pathetic and so so sad.

Was it Labour who decided that all kids of all abilities should be in the same class??benefits no one and actually disadvantages some. Half a teachers time spent dealing with a kid who is disruptive. The other with kids who can’t read by age 10 etc etc.

Rather than trying to improve things, just reaping division for what?

RampantIvy · 10/01/2026 12:09

What have Labour done? Closed grammars, Cancelled Latin and the IB, introducing tax on education - pathetic and so so sad.

We all know that the grammar school system in Kent only benefits the more well off families who can pay for extra tuition to get their kids through the 11+, so I completely disagree that closing grammar schools was detrimental. I don't disagree with your other points though.

Was it Labour who decided that all kids of all abilities should be in the same class??benefits no one and actually disadvantages some. Half a teachers time spent dealing with a kid who is disruptive. The other with kids who can’t read by age 10 etc etc.

DD went to a comprehensive school and did extremely well, as did many of her peers. The pupils were put in sets for English and maths as mixed ability classes don't work for those two subjects. Most good schools recognise this.

Sending all the disruptive and less academic children to a secondary modern school doesn't benefit them either.

I feel that your blanket statements about the comprehensive system being shit are wrong.

ElliesHamster · 10/01/2026 12:18

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

peacefulpeach · 10/01/2026 12:21

RampantIvy · 10/01/2026 12:09

What have Labour done? Closed grammars, Cancelled Latin and the IB, introducing tax on education - pathetic and so so sad.

We all know that the grammar school system in Kent only benefits the more well off families who can pay for extra tuition to get their kids through the 11+, so I completely disagree that closing grammar schools was detrimental. I don't disagree with your other points though.

Was it Labour who decided that all kids of all abilities should be in the same class??benefits no one and actually disadvantages some. Half a teachers time spent dealing with a kid who is disruptive. The other with kids who can’t read by age 10 etc etc.

DD went to a comprehensive school and did extremely well, as did many of her peers. The pupils were put in sets for English and maths as mixed ability classes don't work for those two subjects. Most good schools recognise this.

Sending all the disruptive and less academic children to a secondary modern school doesn't benefit them either.

I feel that your blanket statements about the comprehensive system being shit are wrong.

Yes the sets for some subjects based on academic ability, was the only thing that saved my (and others) education at comprehensive school.

It’s more about all kids with many different needs being lumped together. Teachers today can have really horrible environments to work in. The kids don’t get what they need. The gvt is doing nothing about this obvious flaw.

Wrt grammar schools - yes today that is the case. They should be widespread. With technical colleges and other options for kids that aren’t academic.

ElliesHamster · 10/01/2026 12:28

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

Another76543 · 10/01/2026 12:28

DogAnxiety · 10/01/2026 10:12

Yeah. If the college really believes highly selective schools select the very best, then why are they not also targeting super-selective state schools?

I’d say the college’s outreach, selection and screening programmes aren’t working very well if they aren’t getting the highest quality students. Or maybe their offer isn’t that appealing. Maybe they should look at those things instead rather than taking the easy option and aggressively marketing at St Paul’s et al.

Yeah. If the college really believes highly selective schools select the very best, then why are they not also targeting super-selective state schools?

Selective state schools (including the super selective) often only have limited modern foreign language options, and don’t always offer Latin/Greek. It’s not unusual for the more academic private schools to offer around 7 languages, plus Latin and Greek. The college is targeting the schools which have lots of pupils studying these subjects.

Another76543 · 10/01/2026 12:35

Araminta1003 · 10/01/2026 11:10

I don’t really know why the discussion always ends up around private schools.
Because isn’t the more urgent question about the massive regional differences in educational attainment?
Rather than getting sidetracked by private/grammar, is it not far more urgent to understand why there are so many kids at Oxbridge from London/South East etc? Now of course some kids prefer to stay local to where they grew up. However, if there is you going to be more equality isn’t that a far more important question?

I agree. As well as the questions around regional
disparity though, we should also be asking why the state system isn’t, on the whole, offering the same opportunities in languages, classics and music. State schools often only have 1 or 2 language options, many don’t offer GCSE music, and the vast majority don’t offer Latin or Greek.

Comtesse · 10/01/2026 12:38

Another76543 · 10/01/2026 12:28

Yeah. If the college really believes highly selective schools select the very best, then why are they not also targeting super-selective state schools?

Selective state schools (including the super selective) often only have limited modern foreign language options, and don’t always offer Latin/Greek. It’s not unusual for the more academic private schools to offer around 7 languages, plus Latin and Greek. The college is targeting the schools which have lots of pupils studying these subjects.

Right - brainy state grammars will want to get students in for economics not theology!

I was a state school kid at Oxbridge, out of my depth socially a bit but kept pace academically. Didn’t do enough work to get a first, but II.i has been just fine.

Pacificsunshine · 10/01/2026 12:52

DogAnxiety · 10/01/2026 10:12

Yeah. If the college really believes highly selective schools select the very best, then why are they not also targeting super-selective state schools?

I’d say the college’s outreach, selection and screening programmes aren’t working very well if they aren’t getting the highest quality students. Or maybe their offer isn’t that appealing. Maybe they should look at those things instead rather than taking the easy option and aggressively marketing at St Paul’s et al.

Perhaps they are? I think Trinity Hall are targeting schools with excellent classics departments. Quite a lot of those happen to be private.

Their interest is in building and maintaining our knowledge of the classics.

EulersHat · 10/01/2026 13:28

januarybikethief · 09/01/2026 23:51

Actually, and very interestingly, rather the reverse. Never assume that you know exactly what statistics are telling you! 😀

My colleagues in computer science tell me every year that they find it extremely, extremely difficult to find any candidates who are equipped to do the course (it’s quite a niche and unusual course, not like at most universities — a proper old-fashioned computer science course requiring very high level maths, not coding or school computer science qualifications). It’s not unusual for them to interview lots of applicants and for nearly none of them to have the required level of maths or general ability (they despair every year….) Lots of A-level students take computer science, in both state and private sectors, and lots apply, but few get offers.

Whereas, the candidates who do apply for MML are heavily self-selecting and are normally extremely good. There just aren’t as much of them as the MML people would like. They want more of them applying! One of the major reasons is that you need at least one A-level language, but ideally two at a high level, as you apply to study two languages in the degree rather than one (you do eg. Spanish and German or French and Russian or French and Italian, for example). Students can take some languages ab initio, but often state students are unconfident about the idea of this because they fear it being too much work and that it will disadvantage them. Students in the state sector in particular suffer from not just the poor state of language teaching in state schools, which means that few state students take even one modern foreign language, and two is very rare.

So, actually MML would love more applicants; whereas my CompSci colleagues complain they’d like fewer but better ones.

Edited

This post about Computer Science at Cambridge contains the most bizarre info on higher education I have ever read on this board. What's the course for??? Clearly it's very misaligned with expectations in both directions.

Cambridge should make it a prerequisite for applicants to already have a first degree in Maths/Physics, otherwise it's complete nonsense to try to sell it to school leavers then claim that exceedingly high achievieng applicants from all schools in the UK cannot access it!

Hillarious · 10/01/2026 13:54

pinotnow · 09/01/2026 06:40

Sorry, I don't agree that @cantabsupervisor wins the thread. These comments seem to me to be complacent and defeatist:

the state school kids are failed - they never turn out as bright, and they drop out more than the indy ones;

Never? They never turn out as bright? Well, nearly 20% of them get firsts, so clearly some do. And why do they drop out? Doubtless sometimes it is because they can't keep up with the work but could there also be other factors? Financial difficulties perhaps (I know Oxbridge has more money for this than other places but I assume it's not limitless funds available) or feeling they don't fit in with the other students. I mentioned my ds being taken aback by how many students at his college are from private schools and even if not, are from London. It has been a massive culture shock and there have been some pretty crass comments from some of these students. Ds is pretty thick-skinned and also pig-headed but I can imagine some people struggling in that environment.

I suppose you could make a case that Oxbridge could start an intensive programme for state school students much earlier - but really this stuff needs to be lived and breathed. It can't be a few weekend courses here and there.

While I completely agree that it shouldn't be the responsibility of Oxbridge to fund all of these programmes, the quote seems to imply there's no point doing any of it anyway as unless you are from the right sort of home, none of it will stick. That's a horrendous outlook and would seem to amount to a shrugging of the shoulders.

Cambridge has done a lot to get state school kids to apply in the first place and numbers have increased. What the university needs to do on top of this is ensure all these kids feel they belong there. It’s a strange set up for many and takes a fair bit of getting used to.

Generous bursaries help those from low income families (who can realise up to £20,000 in loans and bursaries in a year), but I’ve seen some students on rare occasions feel obliged to help out their families at home and a household just over the £62,000 (or thereabouts) totally misses out on a bursary. For any student on basic loans, there’s a big gap in funding to fill, where working during term time isn’t banned, but frowned upon. Terms are short and intense , so focus on work is needed. If your parents can support you in full, you’re fortunate.

So before any college actively looks to fill its places with well coached candidates, they should put some focus into ensuring their “state school rough diamonds” are well looked after, have a sense of belonging and don’t drop out after two years with mental health issues. This is their one chance to get a degree - no-one can step in to fund them if their loan entitlement runs out. And that goes for any student on loans.

The word “teachable” springs up a lot in interview notes. Directors of Studies and supervisors need to focus on that.

EBearhug · 10/01/2026 13:57

I don't think there's anything wrong with grammar schools themselves, but the trouble with the system is that it wrote off a while load of other children at age 11, and certainly the old secondary moderns were very much seen as lesser by a lot of people- and some of those attitudes can be seen on this thread about comprehensives in grammar area's.

We still haven't got that sorted - there have been constant changes to try and cater for less academic children, especially now most are expected to be in education until 18 - BTECs, T-levels, apprenticeships. Obviously nothing will suit every child, as no two people are the same, but there is much more focus on academic education (which is also important, but not everyone is academic.)

Private schools can be selective, and the top schools are fiercely so. There is hierarchy in the private sector - when I heard where my godmothers boys were going, I had to bite my tongue and not say, "aren't they bright enough for somewhere better?" You also get hierarchy in the state sector, where there are big enough populations - certainly of the secondary schools in my town, some are more academic than others (but in my home town, there is only one secondary, with a large rural catchment.)

But what is really important, what we should aim for with all children, is they get a good grounding in a range of subjects. Some children are all-rounders, others are clearly artists, linguists, scientists, sportspeople. No one can known if they might have talent in music or hurdles or biology or French or poetry or whatever else if they simply don't get any exposure to these things. Having English and Maths are the foundation of most other subjects, the gateway in, but we need breadth as well as depth - we should be using them to unlock other things.

I went to a comprehensive state school, and in my days, I got to try different languages (Latin to A-level,) I tried many different sports, I tried art in different media, I was exposed to different styles of music and had free violin lessons. I did maths and science. Other people stayed on in 6th form doing extra numeracy and literacy, so we weren't only catering for the academic ones. I learnt all sorts of things - and I was entirely state educated. It's how education ought to be, and we are failing if we can't offer it like that. Not everyone will end up musical or artistic or as linguists or scientists, but they should all be learning these things exist and be given the opportunity to try them, to find out where their strengths lie.

But if schools aren't offering all that, then places like Tit Hall have to go where those with the entry requirements will be found.

80smonster · 10/01/2026 14:09

The most educated pupils come from expensively educated backgrounds. You’ll have to pardon me for not falling off my chair in surprise. Labour can only level down education so far, until it creates brain drain. What has been most shocking is those who can’t or won’t see the dumbing down for what it is.

ElliesHamster · 10/01/2026 14:35

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

HowDidWeGetHome · 10/01/2026 14:38

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

@ElliesHamster

How am I showing resentment and animosity?

pinotnow · 10/01/2026 14:41

80smonster · 10/01/2026 14:09

The most educated pupils come from expensively educated backgrounds. You’ll have to pardon me for not falling off my chair in surprise. Labour can only level down education so far, until it creates brain drain. What has been most shocking is those who can’t or won’t see the dumbing down for what it is.

I mean both @HowDidWeGetHome and I have said our state-school educated dc at Oxbridge have encountered disparaging remarks from ps/wealthy peers. My dc has been amused that students from London (who make up the vast majority of the student body where he is) have absolutely no awareness of the geography of the rest of the country. Others have made comments about other students' holidays/clothing/being in receipt of bursaries/wanting to have the rooms priced up differently according to size, or just display an expectation everyone will of course be able to afford a particular bar/restaurant/society membership that costs a small fortune, and are aghast when they find that some cannot. Of course, others are perfectly lovely and some who make these comments are perfectly nice once dc has got to know them better, which is a wonder in itself if most parents are anything like @ElliesHamster . I'll tell you what, I'd be bloody furious if I'd shelled out thousands for an expensive education for my dc only for them to be blissfully unaware that, shock, horror, some people have never been out of the UK and to be rude enough to express that shock to the person in question.

But still - why do we believe that 'cultural capital' and being well-versed in classical literature/the arts etc is so much more important than other kinds of knowledge and skills? I know that in the context of Oxbridge intellectual prowess obviously has to be at the forefront, but why must it go hand in hand with this very narrow definition of what is considered worthwhile knowledge and I don't think questioning that at least amounts to 'dumbing down.' Moreover, if students are reading subjects like English etc they will have to read widely and read around the texts they are specifically studying and if they are doing that thoroughly, as the course progresses they would presumably have increased their 'cultural capital' sufficiently to do well.

Like @HowDidWeGetHome , my dc is at a very competitive college and one of my fears was that he might feel out of his depth when he got there, having been a big fish in a small pond throughout his schooling. I have asked him about this and he has said categorically that he does not and is loving the course, his tutorials, and the wider experience, despite the culture shock mentioned. I have to say, this thread has made me angry rather than sad.

pinotnow · 10/01/2026 14:41

HowDidWeGetHome · 10/01/2026 14:38

@ElliesHamster

How am I showing resentment and animosity?

You're not. The other poster on the other hand...

DogEard · 10/01/2026 14:46

"Further Maths (or Computer Science) requires different strengths / aptitudes to MFL. Is there a published league table for aptitude values that shows abstract problem solving is considered more valuable than communication skills?" from post above

The jobs market does that @HundredMilesAnHour -

In both the demand and pay on offer.

ElliesHamster · 10/01/2026 14:53

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

ElliesHamster · 10/01/2026 15:01

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread