Should Oxbridge be abolished? Today, UK exam boards start checking grades. Critics say students from private schools have an unfair advantage when applying to top universities.

But some believe it is already unfair. New data shows a small number of elite, fee-paying schools took the lion's share of offers from the country's top two universities, Oxford and Cambridge, between 2018 and 2020.

Trinity College, Cambridge, offered 22 places to pupils at Westminster School, the highest number made by one college to a single school. Nine Oxford colleges handed out the most offers to Eton College, the former school of 20 prime ministers, including Boris Johnson and David Cameron.

Oxford and Cambridge are collectively known as Oxbridge. Critics like the Labour MP David Lammy call them: "a bastion of white, middle class, southern privilege." In 2017, Oxford accepted more pupils from Westminster than Black students from the whole of the UK.

Labour says this "exclusive route" harms social mobilityA person's ability to move between classes. In 2013, more than 161,000 people took part in the Great British Class Survey, which revealed that there are seven classes in Britain, ranging from the 'elite' down to the 'precarious proletariat.'. Evidence compiled by the Sutton Trust shows a direct "pipeline" from independent schools through Oxbridge to the most high-paying and high-status jobs in the UK. The trust calls it elitism.

Oxford's vice-chancellor disagrees. Louise Richardson says: we are "an elite institution - but we are not elitist". She continues that there have been record admissions from state schools and Black and ethnic minorities and that "there has been a sea change".

She says it is "crude" to criticise the universities. Private schools can charge over £30,000 a year but also give financial help to "poor, smart kids" who are then accepted by Oxbridge. They reflect wider inequalities and can't be expected to change society.

Others disagree. Writer Owen Jones, an Oxford graduate, says that the "public school ethos" of Oxbridge puts off people from less privileged backgrounds. He recalls sitting exams in "silly costumes", Latin prayers and standing up "when the Master of your college walks in".

An Eton mess

He says the interview system is also a problem. Private schools prepare their students to be "confident, self-assured and able to hold their own in a debate". Journalist Phil McDuff goes further: Oxbridge produces too many "overconfident" graduates lacking in "ability".

Their solution: close the gates to new students and focus on research. Canada, Australia and Sweden all have better social mobility than the UK and benefit from having no "world-beating universities" but plenty of good ones.

In a world without Oxford and Cambridge, no degree would be an automatic "passport" to high-status positions. And a rejection letter would not feel like the end of the world.

But this opens a debate about the role of universities. The physicist Bertram Bowden said we must drink "from a running stream" not a "stagnant pool" and teaching and research belong in the same institution. Separate them and both will suffer.

So should Oxbridge be abolished?

Some say no, getting rid of Oxbridge would not solve society's problems. It would deny intelligent young students the right to study at a world-class institution. Instead of abolishing Oxbridge, it should be opened up to more people so that the whole of society can benefit from its resources. There is nothing wrong with an educated elite if everyone has the opportunity to be a part of it.

Others say yes, Oxbridge is unfixable and distorts society. It belongs to a bygone era when a small ruling class controlled society. Its traditions and subjects are old-fashioned and do not prepare students for real life. By valuing Oxbridge degrees over other qualifications, society promotes people beyond their ability whilst removing opportunities for talented non-Oxbridge graduates.