
Drop in state school pupils going to Oxbridge blamed on pandemic
There were fewer state school pupils admitted to Oxford and Cambridge this academic year, new figures show.
Both universities saw a decline in the proportion of their intake from state schools and an increase in those who were privately educated.
Oxford's UK state school admissions were at the lowest since 2019, falling from 67.6 per cent in 2023 to 66.2 per cent in 2024 while private school intake increased from 32.4 per cent to 33.8 per cent.
Of UK students at Cambridge, 71 per cent came from state schools in autumn 2024, down from 72.6 per cent in 2023, while the proportion from independent schools increased from 27.4 per cent to 29 per cent.
A breakdown of Cambridge figures showed 18.8 per cent of those who applied from state schools were successful — 15.9 per cent of applicants from comprehensive schools were admitted compared with 24.4 per cent from grammar schools. For independent schools, the success rate was 21.6 per cent.
Both universities said the pandemic had affected their state school intake in recent years. Cambridge said its long-term trend remained positive and Oxford said it had taken more pupils on free school meals.
• How Cambridge is making the most of Trump's war on Harvard
Dr Martin Thompson, director of undergraduate admissions at Cambridge, said the figures came after a period of rapid growth in state school admissions and remained above pre-Covid levels, when the state school intake was 68.7 per cent.
He said: 'We remain fully committed to widening participation. We saw several subjects become much more competitive. Students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds, and state school students, are more likely to apply to these courses. The secondary school sector [is] still grappling with disrupted education and attainment gaps.'
An Oxford University spokeswoman said that access for those from disadvantaged backgrounds was a priority and that the number of students who had been entitled to free school meals had increased to 8.1 per cent.
She added: 'Factors such as socio-economic disadvantage and school performance can make it difficult for some students to access their full potential before applying to university, and therefore we use a range of contextual information to help us to better understand students' achievements.'
More women were admitted to Cambridge, with the proportion up from 50 to 52 per cent. At Oxford, the proportion of women admitted fell from last year but was still at 51.9 per cent.
China was by far the biggest provider of students from outside the UK, with Cambridge taking 252 students from China and Oxford 566. At both institutions, this was followed by Singapore and Hong Kong.
However, applications from both EU students and the rest of the world had fallen from last year at Oxford.
Cambridge said that applications from EU students fell slightly but increased from the rest of the world.
Far more ethnic minority students were admitted than previous years, accounting for 30.8 per cent of those taken at Oxford and 35.1 per cent at Cambridge.
Oxford has seen a sharp increase in applications from students of Bangladeshi and Pakistani heritage, from 2 per cent of all UK students in 2020 to 3.2 per cent in 2024. The proportion of black African or Caribbean students is only marginally higher than last year, at 3.8 per cent.
The most competitive course at Oxford was economics and management, with 19 applications per place, followed by computer science and maths and computer science. Psychology, law and computer science were among the courses with the highest intake of deprived students while classics, geography and biomedical sciences were the lowest.
• I got a text about my student loan. A bit like an STI clinic calling
The most competitive courses at Cambridge were its graduate medicine course, computer science and psychological and behavioural sciences.
Those with the highest entry rates for applicants included classics, modern and medieval languages and music, but they also had very low numbers from deprived backgrounds.
Of those admitted to Oxford, 85.6 per cent were awarded A*AA or better at A-level and 45.5 per cent achieved at least three A* grades.
At Cambridge, 17.7 per cent of arts students and 39.3 per cent of science students achieved three A*s. A further 5,600 unsuccessful students went on to achieve at least A*AA in their three best A-levels.
The average amount owed by new graduates has broken through the £50,000 barrier for the first time, new government figures show. Graduates now owe an average of £53,000 as soon as they start repaying their loans, up from £48,270 a year ago.
The total amount owed to the government is £266 billion, by students who took out higher education loans in England.
Graduates now repay 9 per cent of their salary once they earn above £21,000 and the loan is not written off until 40 years after they start paying.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Independent
34 minutes ago
- The Independent
What's the point of the UK talking to Tehran? More than you might think…
Europe's frantic diplomatic mission in Geneva may go down as one of its most arduous ventures on the world stage – and also one of its most consequential. The foreign ministers of Britain, France and Germany must persuade a battered Iranian regime to kow-tow to the US and Israel over its nuclear ambitions, or face likely annihilation. All three European powers would, of course, love to see the back of supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei's corrupt and brutal theocracy. But they rightly fear the regime's capacity to unleash death and destruction before it goes. If Trump joins Israel in the war on Iran with US bunker-busting bombs on nuclear sites, and it succeeds in killing Khamenei, there will still be plenty of Iranian hardliners left who will be willing to fight to the death. Previous inhibitions will not apply. That could mean use of a dirty bomb in the West, or chaos unleashed in the Strait of Hormuz, through which 90 per cent of the Gulf's oil passes. For the world at large, the stakes are that high. British foreign secretary David Lammy – after meeting his US counterpart, Marco Rubio, and presidential envoy Steve Witkoff in Washington on Thursday – said that the UK was 'determined that Iran must never have a nuclear weapon". He thinks a window now exists within the next two weeks to achieve a diplomatic solution, as Trump dithers over whether to attack the regime, as US neo-cons and Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu are demanding – or whether to heed the no-more-wars mantra of his Maga base. And so, in search of a diplomatic solution, Iran's foreign minister Abbas Araghchi is meeting with his European counterparts in Switzerland. But what can be achieved? For all their good intentions – French president Emmanuel Macron said the diplomats would make a "comprehensive, diplomatic and technical offer of negotiation" to Iran – the Europeans are unlikely to persuade the Iranians to pull back from the brink. At least not on their own. While one Iranian diplomat said Tehran was willing to pursue 'a balanced and pragmatic policy in its dealings with Europe, and engage rationally with both East and West', Araghchi said there will be 'no talks' with the US over Iran's nuclear programme while the Israeli bombardment continues: 'The Americans want negotiations and have sent messages several times, but we have clearly said that there is no room for dialogue.' But there is a useful point to holding talks on neutral ground with Tehran – and it's not simply to ask them nicely and face-to-face if they wouldn't mind stopping with their nuclear enrichment programme. Rather than relaying Trump and Netanyahu's demands to Iran, Geneva is about feeding back to the White House – translating Tehran's position for the US president. The Europeans aren't there to stop the war, they're Trump-whispering for the Ayatollah. It's not clear that European diplomats have the connections they need to have a greater role to play than this, useful though it will prove. But when it comes to a practical breakthrough, some of the Gulf states might, however. Behind the scenes, figures in what some dub 'Iran's deep state' – many of them members of the powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps – are talking to representatives of Oman and Qatar; it might be these Middle Eastern countries that can make the difference, in a second stage of dialogue. Qatar, for its part, will likely hold more sway over Washington than London or Paris. All the peacemakers, though, will be battling the plans of Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Nothing less that the obliteration of the regime in Tehran will satisfy him. Worryingly, Israel's premier appears to have been joined by an increasingly pro-war Fox News, with Sean Hannity this week declaring that Iran 'is the biggest existential threat to the entire western world'. The West should have learnt by now – after the disasters in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya – that enforced regime change in the Middle East is best avoided. Andreas Krieg, a leading Iran expert at King's College London thinks regime change in Iran would 'not be clean or peaceful'. If the current theocracy falls, there is no significant alternative political-social structure to lead this country of 92 million into the light. The IRGC, a ruthless military-industrial complex, would not easily cede control of the Iranian economy. Instead, with 190,000 personnel and a similar number of Basij paramilitaries to call on, it might well create a military dictatorship. The West and Israel would be back to square one. And the Iranian people would be no better off. Ironically, the last time the West brought about regime change in Iran – by booting out, in 1953, the democratically elected premier Mohammad Mosaddegh (for which we have British Petroleum and the CIA to thank) – it laid the groundwork for the emergence of the current Islamic Republic in the 1970s. In between rounds of golf, as he ponders his next steps in the Middle East, you can't help wishing Potus would be shown – by Lammy or anyone else – the relevant pages of a history book. It is within the president's power to unleash hell – or stop history repeating itself. After the Geneva talks, let's hope he listens to what the Trump-whisperers tell him.


BBC News
40 minutes ago
- BBC News
UK preparing to charter flights from Israel, David Lammy says
The UK is arranging charter flights to return British nationals from Israel once Israeli airspace re-opens, the foreign secretary has Lammy confirmed the government was working with the Israeli authorities to provide flights out of Tel Aviv airport, the number of which will be based on demand. Israeli airspace is currently closed due to the ongoing conflict with Iran. The two nations have exchanged waves of air strikes since Israel targeted military and nuclear sites, as well as military commanders and nuclear scientists, a week statement came as Lammy arrived in Geneva for talks with Iran, in the hopes of negotiating an agreement on Tehran's nuclear programme. British nations who wish to return home from Israel or the Occupied Palestinian Territories have been advised to complete a form with their email and UK passport number. Lammy said this was to "register their presence in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories to be contacted with further guidance on these flights". Flights will only be provided to those who hold a UK passport, the Foreign Office said. Land routes out of Israel remain open and Lammy said UK staff will be on hand to support British nationals who have crossed the border - including providing transportation to nearby the Foreign Office said families of staff at the UK embassy in Tel Aviv and the British consulate in Jerusalem had been temporarily withdrawn "as a precautionary measure".The talks in Geneva with Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi will also include top diplomats from the EU, Germany and France.
.png%3Fwidth%3D1200%26height%3D800%26crop%3D1200%3A800&w=3840&q=100)

The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Poll of the day: Do you support the assisted dying bill?
The assisted dying bill returns to Parliament today for its final reading amid growing controversy – and a vote that could determine whether the legislation moves forward or falls entirely. A group of Labour MPs dramatically withdrew their support on Thursday night, citing serious concerns about the removal of key safeguards, including the requirement for High Court oversight. They warned that the bill had been 'drastically weakened' and no longer offers enough protection for vulnerable patients. If passed, the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill would allow people in England and Wales with fewer than six months to live to apply for a medically assisted death. Approval would be required from two doctors and a panel including a senior legal figure, a social worker, and a psychiatrist. Campaigners are making a final push on both sides of the debate, and with a narrow majority at stake, every vote counts. MPs have a free vote and are not bound by party lines. Supporters argue that the bill offers dignity and choice to those in need. Meanwhile, opponents argue it opens the door to abuse and erodes trust in end-of-life care. With so much at stake and such deeply personal questions at the heart of this debate, we want to hear from you: do you support the assisted dying bill? Vote in our poll and let us know your thoughts in the .