This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- Imperial,UCL vs Cornell, Columbia,UPenn,Brown international prestige/reputation?
- Am I good enough for Harvard?
- Are 7A*s and 3A*s good enough for Ivy League?
- Would you rather attend...?
- What would be your dream university ?
- Has anyone ever rejected Oxbridge?
- Online courses
- supercurricular ideas for mathematics and philosophy?!?!
- Applying to an IVY LEAGUE FROM UK
- Applying to American colleges as a Uk student
- Official US Universities Applicants Thread 2024
- Applying to foreign universities
- Imperial college questions
- US Law School- UK applicant
- Guardian/Daily Mail Uni/Times Rankings 2024
- A-levels for Ivy League Admissions
- University of Pennsylvania Online Msc in Computer Science
- Am I done for? - UNI
- LSE or UCL???
- Imperial Chemistry department 2022 - biggest scam in history of higher education???
Why doesn't Oxbridge post lectures online like Harvard and Stanford?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by umop apisdn
In my opinion, you have to earn the right to an education. Knowledge is what someone else has created, researched, and dedicated a lot of time to. To give that to everyone will make it seem worthless.
If Oxbridge made their lectures public, then people will stop paying to go there. Universities need money to help them further with research. The more they are paid, the more they can research, and the more people will benefit from that research.
And I don't agree with what you said about street corners. Everyone gets about 12 years of free education, what you do with it is your choice.
I think you're being extremely disrespectful to those who have worked their arse off to get to Oxbridge.
If Oxbridge made their lectures public, then people will stop paying to go there. Universities need money to help them further with research. The more they are paid, the more they can research, and the more people will benefit from that research.
And I don't agree with what you said about street corners. Everyone gets about 12 years of free education, what you do with it is your choice.
I think you're being extremely disrespectful to those who have worked their arse off to get to Oxbridge.
Of course people will still pay to go to Oxbridge, otherwise they won't get any official qualifications. I find the idea that knowledge can somehow "belong" to someone or to an institution very strange.
Original post by umop apisdn
In my opinion, you have to earn the right to an education. Knowledge is what someone else has created, researched, and dedicated a lot of time to. To give that to everyone will make it seem worthless.
If Oxbridge made their lectures public, then people will stop paying to go there. Universities need money to help them further with research. The more they are paid, the more they can research, and the more people will benefit from that research.
And I don't agree with what you said about street corners. Everyone gets about 12 years of free education, what you do with it is your choice.
I think you're being extremely disrespectful to those who have worked their arse off to get to Oxbridge.
If Oxbridge made their lectures public, then people will stop paying to go there. Universities need money to help them further with research. The more they are paid, the more they can research, and the more people will benefit from that research.
And I don't agree with what you said about street corners. Everyone gets about 12 years of free education, what you do with it is your choice.
I think you're being extremely disrespectful to those who have worked their arse off to get to Oxbridge.
You don't seriously think that anyone considers reading lecture notes an alternative to actually enrolling in university? You think MIT and Stanford's admissions numbers are significantly less than they would be if they didn't have public lecture material?
Original post by umop apisdn
In my opinion, you have to earn the right to an education. Knowledge is what someone else has created, researched, and dedicated a lot of time to. To give that to everyone will make it seem worthless.
If Oxbridge made their lectures public, then people will stop paying to go there. Universities need money to help them further with research. The more they are paid, the more they can research, and the more people will benefit from that research.
And I don't agree with what you said about street corners. Everyone gets about 12 years of free education, what you do with it is your choice.
I think you're being extremely disrespectful to those who have worked their arse off to get to Oxbridge.
If Oxbridge made their lectures public, then people will stop paying to go there. Universities need money to help them further with research. The more they are paid, the more they can research, and the more people will benefit from that research.
And I don't agree with what you said about street corners. Everyone gets about 12 years of free education, what you do with it is your choice.
I think you're being extremely disrespectful to those who have worked their arse off to get to Oxbridge.
This is such a selfish attitude. If you truly think that knowledge is worthless because someone gives it away then you have a messed up idea of what knowledge actually is and is for. I can't believe you honestly think that if oxbridge posted more lectures people would stop attending. Like it or not, people will still care whether you actually attended the educational institution because they know what type of student you had to be to get in there the first place. Anyone can take a course online and once again-- we're just talking about a few lectures (and unis are more than lectures). Online courses help educate the population--people who may not have been able to get the information otherwise. Why someone would want to deny education is beyond me. As far as being disrespectful to oxbridge students--- these students should be smart enough to know that taking a few courses online is not going to diminish the value of their full course load and subsequent degree from those unis.
Original post by Sharri5
Title. Harvard, Stanford and MIT post lectures online so that students from all over the world can benefit from them. Why doesn't Oxbridge or other popular universities in the UK do so? It it the facilities? Is it the setup of the courses? Are they selfish?
For the same reason that most writers don't post their books online so that students from all over the world can benefit from them.
It's not like Harvard et co post all their lectures online, they only post a very small number to give people a taste of how their lectures are and want to apply/study there more. It's a marketing strategy, really, they don't do it just because they think education should be available to all etc etc.
Original post by umop apisdn
In my opinion, you have to earn the right to an education. Knowledge is what someone else has created, researched, and dedicated a lot of time to. To give that to everyone will make it seem worthless.
If Oxbridge made their lectures public, then people will stop paying to go there. Universities need money to help them further with research. The more they are paid, the more they can research, and the more people will benefit from that research.
And I don't agree with what you said about street corners. Everyone gets about 12 years of free education, what you do with it is your choice.
I think you're being extremely disrespectful to those who have worked their arse off to get to Oxbridge.
If Oxbridge made their lectures public, then people will stop paying to go there. Universities need money to help them further with research. The more they are paid, the more they can research, and the more people will benefit from that research.
And I don't agree with what you said about street corners. Everyone gets about 12 years of free education, what you do with it is your choice.
I think you're being extremely disrespectful to those who have worked their arse off to get to Oxbridge.
Then nobody in the third world should be educated because they haven't really done anything to earn that right.
No they wouldn't because you still need the degree from there. Buying their books and watching their lectures doesn't give you a degree. And, of course, you would still have the elitists who go there just for the status.
I believe it's just plain elitism no matter which way you spin it. As I've already mentioned, only the people who are physically there will still get the degree so why should knowledge be withheld? The people who are still there will get their degree, and that's what counts for employers, family members, etc after university.
Original post by hobnob
So how long have they been around for, then? Three years, maybe? That's hardly a long time...
Also, if you had clicked the link in the very first reply to your thread, you'd have seen that Oxford do actually offer a series of podcasts, some of which are recordings of regular lectures.
Also, if you had clicked the link in the very first reply to your thread, you'd have seen that Oxford do actually offer a series of podcasts, some of which are recordings of regular lectures.
I remember watching a series of lectures on quantum mechanics that they published.
Bit of history... The ou used to broadcast lecturers on the bbc's deadtime... Imo a shame it stopped really. They were a lot better planned than most of the brick uni lectures I've had to put up with tbh.
Also they were more interesting than most of the proper programmes, they'd juxtapose some renaissence art history with stats for social sciences and particle accellerators.
Also they were more interesting than most of the proper programmes, they'd juxtapose some renaissence art history with stats for social sciences and particle accellerators.
Original post by Sharri5
I've already said that I guess they are there, but the setup is strange to me. Why do they have a different professor for each lecture?
So what the set up is strange to you? It's still there... just because it's not exactly like you wanted it to be.
Original post by umop apisdn
In my opinion, you have to earn the right to an education. Knowledge is what someone else has created, researched, and dedicated a lot of time to. To give that to everyone will make it seem worthless.
If Oxbridge made their lectures public, then people will stop paying to go there. Universities need money to help them further with research. The more they are paid, the more they can research, and the more people will benefit from that research.
And I don't agree with what you said about street corners. Everyone gets about 12 years of free education, what you do with it is your choice.
I think you're being extremely disrespectful to those who have worked their arse off to get to Oxbridge.
If Oxbridge made their lectures public, then people will stop paying to go there. Universities need money to help them further with research. The more they are paid, the more they can research, and the more people will benefit from that research.
And I don't agree with what you said about street corners. Everyone gets about 12 years of free education, what you do with it is your choice.
I think you're being extremely disrespectful to those who have worked their arse off to get to Oxbridge.
As an actual student AT Oxford, I don't feel disrespected by the person you're busy arguing with...Anybody with a brain could tell you having access to the notes from the lectures at Oxbridge is nothing like the equivalent to the combined knowledge garnered via tutorials, seminars and lectures combined, not to mention all of the other opportunities to broaden your horizons via the work experience/extra-curricular activities offered to students actually at the university.
I mean the lectures aren't even compulsory for students, unlike tutorials, lab sessions and most seminars. I say let them put the notes online- at the end of the day, your argument is most flawed owing to the fact that at MIT, Harvard etc, the fees are like £24,000 a year, whereas here, they're just over £3,000- even at the new higher level they'll only be £9,000- "only" because this still isn't even half of what American students pay at their universities. Doesn't make it right that it costs so much, but it does punch a hole in the argument that Oxford shouldn't publish their lecture notes based on the fees that students pay, when American universities do this despite having much higher fees.
one big problem is, unlike in other universities and countries (esp. cf. america) there is not a culture for recording lectures, in oxford at least. for instance no medical sciences (although some clinical school ones are) lectures are routinely recorded to be put up online and there is a strong will to not go down that road (with reasonable argument).
Oh anyway the defining feature of oxbridge at undergrad is supposed to be the tutorials isn't it? The lecturers are probably very similar to the equivalents elsewhere... Quite possibly WORSE in places since they hire academics to do research rather than be good communicators.
Might put off lucrative american students if they saw how un-slick british academics are.
Might put off lucrative american students if they saw how un-slick british academics are.
Original post by umop apisdn
In my opinion, you have to earn the right to an education. Knowledge is what someone else has created, researched, and dedicated a lot of time to. To give that to everyone will make it seem worthless.
If Oxbridge made their lectures public, then people will stop paying to go there. Universities need money to help them further with research. The more they are paid, the more they can research, and the more people will benefit from that research.
And I don't agree with what you said about street corners. Everyone gets about 12 years of free education, what you do with it is your choice.
I think you're being extremely disrespectful to those who have worked their arse off to get to Oxbridge.
If Oxbridge made their lectures public, then people will stop paying to go there. Universities need money to help them further with research. The more they are paid, the more they can research, and the more people will benefit from that research.
And I don't agree with what you said about street corners. Everyone gets about 12 years of free education, what you do with it is your choice.
I think you're being extremely disrespectful to those who have worked their arse off to get to Oxbridge.
My goodness please stop talking, you're embarrassing yourself.
In case you weren't aware, Oxford has online podcasts made widely available to the public, so that makes your point pretty moot. Knowledge is not rendered worthless because it is widely shared. In fact, greater access to knowledge makes for a more intelligent and tolerant society, something that is generally desirable. Moreover, it isn't like you can get a degree from listening to Oxbridge podcasts, so people will still attend those universities regardless.
Original post by Joinedup
Oh anyway the defining feature of oxbridge at undergrad is supposed to be the tutorials isn't it? The lecturers are probably very similar to the equivalents elsewhere... Quite possibly WORSE in places since they hire academics to do research rather than be good communicators.
Might put off lucrative american students if they saw how un-slick british academics are.
Might put off lucrative american students if they saw how un-slick british academics are.
this is the case for any research based university (i.e. the majority in the UK and US)
Original post by umop apisdn
Hardly selfish. Oxbridge are 2 of the oldest and most respected universities in the world. The lecture courses are exclusively for Oxbridge students who have earned the right to see them, in addition to paying for the privilege.
Most unis in Britain don't publish lectures online.
Most unis in Britain don't publish lectures online.
I just hate this answer
Original post by John Locke
this is the case for any research based university (i.e. the majority in the UK and US)
imo the yanks are generally just better public speakers and look more comfortable in front of a camera... Maybe it's a cultural thing.
But yeah similar constraints for lecturers at all rg unis... Which means that barring a freakish statistical fluke there will frequently be a better non oxbridge lecturer.
Original post by Genocidal
Then nobody in the third world should be educated because they haven't really done anything to earn that right.
No they wouldn't because you still need the degree from there. Buying their books and watching their lectures doesn't give you a degree. And, of course, you would still have the elitists who go there just for the status.
I believe it's just plain elitism no matter which way you spin it. As I've already mentioned, only the people who are physically there will still get the degree so why should knowledge be withheld? The people who are still there will get their degree, and that's what counts for employers, family members, etc after university.
No they wouldn't because you still need the degree from there. Buying their books and watching their lectures doesn't give you a degree. And, of course, you would still have the elitists who go there just for the status.
I believe it's just plain elitism no matter which way you spin it. As I've already mentioned, only the people who are physically there will still get the degree so why should knowledge be withheld? The people who are still there will get their degree, and that's what counts for employers, family members, etc after university.
I didn't say that at all. Stop misreading my posts.
And yes, I do agree that education is an elitist thing, but it's not to do with money for God's sake. The difference is, we get free education here, unfortunately they don't in 'the third world' (it's not called that any more, by the way.). Yet, there, they are no doubt taught a labyrinth of things which we aren't here. It may not be an eduction with books, instead it may be tales, life skills, etc. Those who know the most there will likely be seen as a higher, just how here, you get given special titles such as doctor and professor.
Everyone has an education, it's just different. Anyone can work hard and be the best and educate their self further.
Original post by andyyy
For the same reason that most writers don't post their books online so that students from all over the world can benefit from them.
HORRIBLE EXAMPLE.It's not the same for the simple fact of . . . .
It's not like Harvard et co post all their lectures online, they only post a very small number to give people a taste of how their lectures are and want to apply/study there more.
Which I'd already stated in #6 and I didn't say that any school needed to post everything in post #1 (that would be ridiculous). Do yourself a favor and stop jumping to conclusions
It's a marketing strategy, really, they don't do it just because they think education should be available to all etc etc.
Yep, already said that too. Post #11.
HORRIBLE EXAMPLE.It's not the same for the simple fact of . . . .
It's not like Harvard et co post all their lectures online, they only post a very small number to give people a taste of how their lectures are and want to apply/study there more.
Which I'd already stated in #6 and I didn't say that any school needed to post everything in post #1 (that would be ridiculous). Do yourself a favor and stop jumping to conclusions
It's a marketing strategy, really, they don't do it just because they think education should be available to all etc etc.
Yep, already said that too. Post #11.
This post would have been more helpful if you'd bothered to read the thread first. You said nothing original. Just thought I'd let you know.
So in summary, your analogy was an EPIC FAIL
Original post by umop apisdn
I didn't say that at all. Stop misreading my posts.
And yes, I do agree that education is an elitist thing, but it's not to do with money for God's sake. The difference is, we get free education here, unfortunately they don't in 'the third world' (it's not called that any more, by the way.). Yet, there, they are no doubt taught a labyrinth of things which we aren't here. It may not be an eduction with books, instead it may be tales, life skills, etc. Those who know the most there will likely be seen as a higher, just how here, you get given special titles such as doctor and professor.
Everyone has an education, it's just different. Anyone can work hard and be the best and educate their self further.
And yes, I do agree that education is an elitist thing, but it's not to do with money for God's sake. The difference is, we get free education here, unfortunately they don't in 'the third world' (it's not called that any more, by the way.). Yet, there, they are no doubt taught a labyrinth of things which we aren't here. It may not be an eduction with books, instead it may be tales, life skills, etc. Those who know the most there will likely be seen as a higher, just how here, you get given special titles such as doctor and professor.
Everyone has an education, it's just different. Anyone can work hard and be the best and educate their self further.
What didn't you say?
It shouldn't be an elitist thing, though, that's my point. That's why I'm in favour of making things like lectures available online.
Third world, poor places, undeveloped countries, there's not much of a difference really.
They may well be taught life skills and how to survive in those countries, but we are talking about academic education, which is why we are in a thread which is talking about releasing academic lectures online.
You didn't answer my question about why should knowledge be withheld, though? You just said that anyone can work hard and educate themselves further, and this would be true if these lectures were made available to the general public wouldn't they?
If you withhold education and knowledge and hide it behind closed doors because other people haven't "earned the right" to access it then how can you educate yourself further? Yes, I know you can just say look at Harvard's or Yale's online lectures, but I'm talking about the general principle here.
Original post by Obfuscator
So what the set up is strange to you? It's still there... just because it's not exactly like you wanted it to be.
I've already stated why it was strange to me
Read people.
Also, the second part of your comment is highly ignorant.
Original post by Genocidal
You sound like a pretentious *******.
Education is not something to be locked away because a few bastards want to believe that they are the elite of society. Withholding knowledge and education is why we get idiots who hang around in gangs on street corners.
Education is not something to be locked away because a few bastards want to believe that they are the elite of society. Withholding knowledge and education is why we get idiots who hang around in gangs on street corners.
'Oh no, I can't get lecture notes from Oxford on the internet...I know, I'll join a gang and hang out on a street corner! That will be just as intellectually stimulating!'
This is obviously the reason there are idiots in the world. They cant get hold of lectures on the internet...
Related discussions
- Imperial,UCL vs Cornell, Columbia,UPenn,Brown international prestige/reputation?
- Am I good enough for Harvard?
- Are 7A*s and 3A*s good enough for Ivy League?
- Would you rather attend...?
- What would be your dream university ?
- Has anyone ever rejected Oxbridge?
- Online courses
- supercurricular ideas for mathematics and philosophy?!?!
- Applying to an IVY LEAGUE FROM UK
- Applying to American colleges as a Uk student
- Official US Universities Applicants Thread 2024
- Applying to foreign universities
- Imperial college questions
- US Law School- UK applicant
- Guardian/Daily Mail Uni/Times Rankings 2024
- A-levels for Ivy League Admissions
- University of Pennsylvania Online Msc in Computer Science
- Am I done for? - UNI
- LSE or UCL???
- Imperial Chemistry department 2022 - biggest scam in history of higher education???
Latest
Trending
Last reply 19 hours ago
Weidenfeld Hoffmann Trust (WHT) Scholarship Notification (2024-2025)Last reply 22 hours ago
Oxbridge applicants for modern languages - 2025 entry (applying in 2024)Last reply 1 week ago
Will I get into Oxford with my GCSE results? - EngineeringLast reply 2 weeks ago
will 5 a levels give me a better chance at getting into oxford?Trending
Last reply 19 hours ago
Weidenfeld Hoffmann Trust (WHT) Scholarship Notification (2024-2025)Last reply 22 hours ago
Oxbridge applicants for modern languages - 2025 entry (applying in 2024)Last reply 1 week ago
Will I get into Oxford with my GCSE results? - EngineeringLast reply 2 weeks ago
will 5 a levels give me a better chance at getting into oxford?
