UNIVERSITIES should drop entry requirements by up to two A level grades for students from “disadvantaged” backgrounds in order to widen participation, according to a government-commissioned study.

Admissions tutors should lower the bar for pupils in care, those attending poorly-performing schools, those who suffer from long-term disability or sickness and those who have to look after sick relatives, it said. The tutors should also collaborate with each other to ensure that more deprived children enter the top universities.

Academics at Leeds University found that while most universities had a programme to encourage more applications from working-class backgrounds, systems varied and only a few hundred were recruited annually by this route.

The study, published tomorrow, follows the release of Ucas figures last week that showed that 5,400 fewer students from “lower-income backgrounds” had started university this year, amid fears of increasing debt over higher fees.

The authors of the study praised those universities that chose pupils on the basis of their potential, even if their grades were lower than the entry requirements.

“We know of heavily oversubscribed courses where admissions tutors have made offers of an A and two Bs to impressive applicants in disadvantaged circumstances who have demonstrated appropriate personal qualities, while rejecting other applicants with three predicted As,” they wrote. “Admissions tutors prepared to do this have our strong support.”

The researchers acknowledged fears that students being turned away with higher grades could mount legal challenges, but pointed out that most disadvantaged students admitted on this basis showed “no significant differences in their referral and withdrawal rates as compared with the university average”.

Paul Sharp, co-author of Opportunity and Equity: Developing a Framework for Good Practice in Compact Schemes, said that universities put a lot of effort into widening participation, but needed to publicise it more and share good practice. He refused to endorse a compulsory scheme of lowering grades.

In 2003, the Government’s White Paper on Higher Education pointed out that young people from the professional classes were “over five times more likely to enter higher education than those from unskilled backgrounds”.

The next year, according to the Higher Education Statistics Agency, the proportion of state students decreased in 14 of the 19 leading Russell Group universities, with only 53.4 per cent of Oxford admissions coming from state schools.

Geoff Parks, director of admissions at Cambridge, said that the report set out good principles but threw up several “potential minefields”. Although he supported sharing good practice, there also came a point when colleges competed for the best students, he said.

Under the Cambridge Special Access scheme, the university already accepted students with lower grades, he said.

“But at the moment there needs to be a very large disadvantage to make it a B rather than an A,” he said. “Unless we move to a system where the offers could be more finely graduated, it would be very difficult to make those adjustments.”

An aide to Alan Johnson, the Education Secretary, said that he favoured the idea of universities assessing an applicant’s potential and awaited the report with interest.

HELPING HAND

They should highlight help for the disadvantaged on websites

Times recommends

• 'Quack' degrees will damage our university say academics
• Graduate gains wiped out by student debt says report
• Creative degrees ‘must be treated like science’