"A 2:2 in Science is preffered or equal to a 2:1 in Social Sciences or Arts Subjects"

... not really. seeing as i get to party all night and never do anything difficult why would i be complaining?

just so you know science degrees at cambridge result in BAs.

not necessarily... it means you have to sit around in labs ******* around with chemicals all day.

WRONG

gosh yes because that's what undergrad is about isn't it? having a set of "things" to learn and then someone to provide you with that set of "things". it's not about comparison or synthesis or independent thought or anything. how LUDICROUS.

awww, thanks.

just because something takes more time doesn't mean it is more difficult per se.

nice elitist way off putting it, so your turning around a saying that students at other unis are lazy no matter what they get

If people honestly believe a math degree from oxbridge at 2:2 isn't worth more than practically every social science degree else where they are seriously deluded.

I got a 2ii in Biomedical Science. Does that mean I'm dumb?

The standard of work is nowhere near Oxbridge. A 2.1 from a good uni is mediocre; it puts you in the top 60%, in the top whatever %. Nearly all of these students aren't good enough for Oxbridge in the first place.

At most unis, if you're reasonably bright and work fairly hard, you'll get a first. That's just not so at Oxbridge; you can't beat the system by problem sheet and past paper learning, or note regurgitation.

If people flunk at Oxbridge and then cruise to a 1st at another Top 6 uni, that says it plain and simple.

Also, STEP and AEA papers are harder intellectually than the material at these so called good unis; you actually have to think and be creative, not parrot off problem sheets.

Bubblyjubbly is right. Compare the exam papers; gulfs apart.

So, are people just really desperate to find something they can grab onto to prove their supposed worth over other people? It's the only reason I can think these threads keep happening, it's all just a big dick-waving competition.

So, are people just really desperate to find something they can grab onto to prove their supposed worth over other people? It's the only reason I can think these threads keep happening, it's all just a big dick-waving competition.

A 2.1 is preferred by employers over a 2.2 regardless of subject(unless its something ridiculously easy) in just about all cases. Most major firms automatically close doors to people with 2.2s, regardless of whether it was in Maths or History.

Yes, Physics Enemy, that is just one of the problems. I knew of a number of EXTREMELY bright and hard working Natscis of the Physics variety whilct at Cambridge, they got 2.2s and good jobs, but it's a kick in the teeth having to explain that to employers, which they ultimately know, but feel they should, at the first glance, ignore.

Yes, BA's in science subjects are far easier, hence the BA...

Quick Oxford Physics graduates. Throw your BAs into the bin!!!!!!!

And why does Oxford offer BA's rather then BSc's? Now how many uni's do you think also go by this idea.........*clap*

Maybe because they view it as an art form; creative, imaginative, outside the box, etc. Which I believe it should be. The dude on 'A Beautiful Mind' talked about this at the end.

Unfortunately, at other generic unis, they make said subjects as dull, methodical and parrot-like as possible, hence the BSc.

Or it is tradition and Oxford has been doing it for decades.

To view it as an art form is a little stupid as all arts have science behind them, thus science is at the core of everything.

There is also no point in letting people have room for imagination unless they are the very best and have been taught the subject eg. the best post-grad's in the world.