From the 2025/26 academic year, the University of Cambridge looks set to stop telling students where they ranked in their subject cohort on their examination results. This was part of a report that, in light of a growing mental health crisis, criticised a ‘culture of overwork’ at the institution. Plenty of responses have denounced the likely loss of a tradition that stretched back to 1748 and the ‘competitive spirit’ it supposedly fostered. But this reform should instead be understood as a subtle shift towards a broader view of higher education – and a more supportive academic culture.

Exam rankings contribute to what students see as success. It tells students that they should aim to beat their ‘opponents’ (course-mates) and finish as highly as they can. Students no longer see the full ranking table – the practice of publishing this outside the Senate House was stopped in 2021 – but, nonetheless, students are aware of their own position.

“Students are more likely to prioritise their grade at all costs”

Students care about doing well, and how they define ‘success’ (a product of personal and family expectations, as well as institutional cultures) is informed by such policies. As a result, students are more likely to prioritise their grade at all costs, reinforcing the harmful idea that university is a purely transactional relationship.

Cambridge has much to offer beyond study – sports teams, media, politics and activism – to name just a few, all worthwhile. Even if we (cynically) see a degree as a mere passport into the workforce, the opportunity to meet people in interesting sectors – perhaps by going to that speaker event – may be as beneficial as adding another hour of solitary study to the day. This is especially important as students from non-Cambridge backgrounds, who are impacted by having less economic and cultural capital, and less familiarity with high-status circles, are being admitted in higher numbers than ever before. Amidst this change, a striking sixty-two per cent of Cambridge students claimed that ‘the intensity of the academic workload’ prevented them from ‘making and keeping friends’. This cannot continue.

Even if we rewarded a more diverse view of success, rankings remain deeply flawed as a means of comparing students, since they overlook important contextual factors. We know that female and ethnic minority students are less likely to take Firsts, for example. Comparing their results against more privileged students, especially when there are so many of them, can leave countless talented individuals with a feeling of inadequacy. While the gender gap is (slowly) closing, it is not for ethnic minorities and other disadvantaged students. Removing rankings won’t transform these attainment gaps, but it may help disadvantaged groups feel a greater sense of belonging.

“Achievement should not be seen as at the expense of others”

These flaws have detrimental impacts on students who don’t top the rankings, who are often more disadvantaged. These students have often worked hard to get into Cambridge but, eleven months on from meeting their offer, they can be branded as, for example, ‘forty-fifth out of forty-five’ in their year. In response, students are vulnerable to viewing themselves as the ‘worst’ in the cohort. At the same time, however, this student is more likely to be from a more disadvantaged background. They were more likely to have worked long hours over the vacations (or during term-time!), not have a family with an academic background, or have experienced explicit discrimination. Is this necessarily a worse achievement than someone who did not have to contend with these challenges and placed tenth? The student who placed forty-fifth, however, may return next year with a deflated sense of confidence, worth, and connection with Cambridge – despite performing at a high level – just not as high as some.

But what about rewarding those who earn their spot at the top? Fear not. These proposals do not prevent academic prizes from (rightly) being offered for the highest achievers. Nor do they prevent academic staff from knowing the rankings and being able to use this in references, for example for postgraduate applications. Moreover, achievement should not be seen as at the expense of others. Rather, everyone should be able to reach the highest standards, helped by a culture of community where students exchange ideas and support.

The university helps to set the terms of success. We want our students to care about their degrees, but I’m quite happy to remove the all-too-often damaging spirit of rivalry which tends to leave the most vulnerable students with a feeling of failure. Removing ranks brings those up from the bottom, by fostering a better atmosphere at the institution, without taking away the rewards for those at the top. We have a long way to go in establishing a supportive environment. But let’s support the small steps for now, especially amidst the mental health crisis and widespread disillusionment in higher education.