COMPETITION FOR ENTRY to university is at its most intense among the professional classes, particularly would-be lawyers and doctors.

Law and medicine remain the most demanding and competitive courses. Oxford, Cambridge and Manchester dominate, but Bristol, once among the elite, has sunk to 16th in law and 19th in medicine.

Five of the top six in law — Manchester is the exception — received 5* research ratings. So did Queen Mary in 19th place and Keele in 23rd, although both have entry requirements that are lower by as much as an A-level A grade.

Medicine’s requirements may seem uniformly forbidding, as none of the top ten accepts much below four A grades. But there is greater variation in teaching and research quality. Of the top five, Oxford and Cambridge have the lowest teaching scores, 21 each, compared with the maximum of 24 at the other three. Both, however, are the only ones in the top ten rated 5* in three of the four research areas.

As the A level pass rate climbs for the 22nd consecutive year, the most popular universities have embraced aptitude tests to cope with the overwhelming number of applicants clutching straight As in all their examinations. For the past five years Cambridge has used admissions tests to weed out the brilliant medics from the merely very good. Critics complain that such tests favour wealthier students who can afford coaching, but Geoff Parks, director of admissions, says that this is simply not the case. He advises applicants to try out the sample questions on the website instead.

“Performance rates have not risen since it’s been in circulation, which is reassuring,” he says. “The differences between independent and state- educated students have also diminished in recent years, so all indications are that it is coaching-proof.”

Dr Parks says that though most students score in the top third, interviews at Cambridge are equally important because the tests are limited to “identifying potential in scientific aptitude, but not whether you would be a good doctor with a good bedside manner”.

For those balking at further exams, Southampton’s medical faculty, which ranks third equal with Cambridge, relies entirely on Ucas information to assess applicants.

There are 4,500 applications for 240 places, and tutors say that interviews tend to favour girls who have been coached, rather than boys. Southampton, before making an offer, emphasises that non-academic criteria, including work experience, are as important as grades.

To distinguish between hundreds of A-grade candidates in law, 11 top faculties are sifting candidates with the aid of the new Law National Admissions Test.

University College London (UCL) is fourth in this year’s list, but tipped by insiders as the best law faculty in the country. Rodney Austin, who oversees law admissions, swears by the test.

He says: “It has enabled us to distinguish between candidates. But obviously we still take into account all the other factors, such as the reference, GCSEs, predicted A-level grades, work experience and of course, whether they read The Times Law Report.” The test was useful at UCL in whittling down the 2,500 wannabe lawyers who applied for a mere 150 places.

Of 4,700 candidates who sat the test at universities that require it, only four scored the top mark of 21 out of a possible 24, 100 scored 20 and about 200 scored 19. The average national score is 13.5 and candidates with less than 15 points are marginal.

Times recommends

• Graduates face debt and bleak job hunt
• Student of the Year Awards 2008 featuring Kelly Rowland
• Student bursary system 'penalises' the poor