Oxbridge or Ivy League

Original post by RedCasino

People talk as if they have had the privilege to experience both sides, or have read into the subject more clearly.

Regarding admissions, the reason why Oxbridge is higher at 20% rate is because you know if you stand a good chance when applying since there's a limit on the UCAS form as well as CHOOSING between the two otherwise double the applicants and therefore closer to the 10% success rate of Ivy Leagues, so candidates are conditioned into the role early on depending on their calibre. Those that apply to Ivy League can have a shot, because there is no successful formula, your extra-curricular speak a lot, and it's more uncertain than applying to Oxbridge since they look to your academics purely.

Regarding prestige, they're probably the same, though Harvard tends to rule... however this does not in ANY way reflect the quality of the course, I mean Harvard at undergraduate level is not very reputable but employers will still hire you due to brand name. The actual quality very much differs, and Oxbridge tend to rule at undergraduate level with supervisions/tutorials which rarely happens in Ivy League. However due to funding, postgraduate is much better off being done at some reputable Ivy Leagues.

And please don't generalise, Ivy League is a sports union, not one that's academically similar in calibre like Oxbridge is. Plus, employers know the top institutions and it's always tough to apply to either place and receive an offer, very few people get the option to choose and even then it's based on other factors rather than just BRAND name vs BRAND name since they're similar.

We've had this conversation before I think but I do think that Oxbridge and the top Ivies well to be fair just Harvard and Yale are pretty much on par with each other and very difficult to differentiate in terms of academics etc. What it boils down to from there is the quality of the candidate's non-academic credentials.

There seems to be this notion that form some reason Oxbridge is seen as less prestigious than Harvard or Yale in Asia or even on Wall Street which I think is a bit stupid. As you stated, academics worth their salt know of the prestige of Oxbridge and Harvard and Yale vice versa.

Also I wouldn't say the American system is very much open to international students in terms of available places and fees etc meaning it is extremely difficult in terms of logistics to get into the American system if you're based in the UK. And given the option of spending 5 years or 6 years at medical school rather than doing 3 or 4 years undergrad then at least 4 years graduate study to become a doctor in the states, I wonder what option most would take? Although saying that graduate entry route in the UK is becoming increasingly popular but mainly to do with the fact undergraduate medicine is extremely competetive to get into.

I think if you attended Oxbridge or a top US college and hoping you're not some complete moron on the side, you're career prospects look good wherever you decide to go in the world maybe except for North Korea.......no actually maybe you could go there.

Reply 43

There are a number - i referenced the THS one above.

The Economist did a big, very exhaustive survey last year with lots of data and rated Cambridge fifth in the world and Oxford eighth.

Original post by Bobo1234

I've never seen a league table with an Ivy League university higher than Cambridge. Just saying.

Reply 44

Original post by gozatron

I'll make an allowance for that act, i know you city fans aren't right in the head.

Though i would argue for natural sciences, engineering and mathematics, MIT must outrank pretty much all Ivy league schools.

Well it doesn't have a medical school (last time I checked) so it never was on the radar for me in terms of US study but I kind of abandoned the idea of going to the States when I was 16 when I realised it was too long winded a route in terms of medical training.

For me Oxbridge is the pinnacle and I hope to go there to do postgrad study (hopefully MBA or MPhil) once I'm done with medical school. Some would say go Harvard or Wharton and if they weren't 2 year courses I'd perhaps consider them. But as I said I feel Oxbridge evokes more history and prestige and left a greater mark on history and popular culture than say the American universities.

Reply 45

Oh by the way they sell Dartmouth College t-shirts at Primark. Well it's a light green/blue t-shirt with a red football helmet saying Dartmouth College Football Est 1957. I got as part of my "study clothes" i.e. clothes I can lounge around in when doing long hours. I certainly wouldn't mind doing my elective in the States or at one of the Ivies but my first choice is certainly Japan.

Reply 46

Jacke02

Who cares about league tables once your in the top 5 of the WORLD?!

Don't oxbridge have a far superior tutorial system, where you get 1/2/3/4 on one teaching with top academics. From what i know, stanford/yale have no such system, and rely more heavily on PhD students to do the seminars and such.

Reply 47

manchild007

Original post by qwertyuiop1993

Yes, Ivy League are more harder to get in (according to statistics).

Thanks for clarifying.

As I have said before, and I think I should clarify this again, I do not think that the Ivy League is better than Oxbridge simply b/c more people apply (and it is harder to get into) than the former. It'd be a pretty stupid reason for anyone to reach the conclusion from the numbers, but my reply was simply aimed at the poster who wanted some figures.

Reply 48

The well-known ARWU data puts Harford, UCB, Stanford and MIT above Cambridge.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_Ranking_of_World_Universities,_2010

I think it's just a comforting myth popular in Britain that Oxbridge still competes at that level - they simply don't have the money to, which is why they have been so anxious to find ways to get their fees up.

International top students from countries like India, China, etc are nearly always trying to get into the top US universities first before other places like the UK.

Reply 49

manchild007

Original post by Warrior King

Also I wouldn't say the American system is very much open to international students in terms of available places and fees etc meaning it is extremely difficult in terms of logistics to get into the American system if you're based in the UK.

Definitely agree with this. If people think the Ivy League application/acceptance numbers are crazy low, international admissions rates are EVEN LOWER (as you're effectively not competing against the people applying from you country but the world as a whole, which is how US universities class international students) :rolleyes:

Reply 50

pieceofheaven

7

Original post by EasyA

I know people who got into Oxbridge but got turned down by Ivy League Universities :smile:

I know people who had the reverse experience
:ahee:

ahhh anecdotes.

Reply 51

RedCasino

10

Original post by Warrior King

Well it doesn't have a medical school (last time I checked) so it never was on the radar for me in terms of US study but I kind of abandoned the idea of going to the States when I was 16 when I realised it was too long winded a route in terms of medical training.

For me Oxbridge is the pinnacle and I hope to go there to do postgrad study (hopefully MBA or MPhil) once I'm done with medical school. Some would say go Harvard or Wharton and if they weren't 2 year courses I'd perhaps consider them. But as I said I feel Oxbridge evokes more history and prestige and left a greater mark on history and popular culture than say the American universities.

Yeah, Princeton gets a lot of inspiration from our spiral towers and old architecture from Oxbridge, just out of interest, why did you consider Medicine school in US? (Are you a British/European citizen, or non-European? I'm just interested since it's more costly and lengthy, and well I don't take much precedence to their quality of healthcare especially if you don't have the money you're screwed).

And I think we did have the conversation before, frankly you do need to be rich, which is why I was put off from US institutions (although I'd like to do a masters/PhD there one day, maybe... unless online degrees become the way to go, heh). Even though we're getting 9k fees, it's not up-front and you only pay for it after you start work, which is great since none of the universities I've had a look around advocate working whilst studying.

Completely opposite to US institutions, where you work your way through, even scholarships are usually in the form of loans with interest or you do work on campus, and even then as you rightly pointed out internationals hardly qualify for the help which is a let down since it means very bright but poor off students might not stand much chance, but that's the world we live in. =/

Reply 52

nulli tertius

21

Original post by jimmyatemyworld

Because I'm pretty sure there are like 3,000 applicants to Oxford just for Law?!

I am afraid you are mistaken. For 2010 admissions 1153 applied to read law at Oxford with an additional 345 for Law with a year abroad.

Reply 53

Original post by emmanottinghil

The well-known ARWU data puts Harford, UCB, Stanford and MIT above Cambridge.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_Ranking_of_World_Universities,_2010

I think it's just a comforting myth popular in Britain that Oxbridge still competes at that level - they simply don't have the money to, which is why they have been so anxious to find ways to get their fees up.

International top students from countries like India, China, etc are nearly always trying to get into the top US universities first before other places like the UK.

It would help to know how to spell Harvard before making a case for it.

Also league tables home and abroad are always taken with a pinch of salt and the opinion that really matters is that of the top academics and employers whom I have no doubt in my mind are fully aware of the prestige and credentials of most of the top universities world-wide.

If it was a case of "brand-name" power etc. then Berkley and Stanford as fantastic institutions that they are, really don't have the clout that Oxbridge have and don't even come anywhere close.

Harvard and Yale are up there due to the number of world leaders they've produced well to be fair only US presidents. I think Stanford only produced one right? Also the British system provided a far more stellar line-up of world leaders and a who's who of world history and popular culture to name but a few: John F Kennedy, Bill Clinton, Nelson Mandela (UoL external), Mahatma Gandhi, X number of British and Indian PMs, Royaltly from all over....I could go one.

I'm not for one moment slagging off the top American universities, not at all. But you can't say Oxbridge are somewhat vastly inferior or lag somewhat behind when you look at the contribution they've made to world history.

Reply 54

RedCasino

10

Original post by emmanottinghil

The well-known ARWU data puts Harford, UCB, Stanford and MIT above Cambridge.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_Ranking_of_World_Universities,_2010

I think it's just a comforting myth popular in Britain that Oxbridge still competes at that level - they simply don't have the money to, which is why they have been so anxious to find ways to get their fees up.

International top students from countries like India, China, etc are nearly always trying to get into the top US universities first before other places like the UK.

Take league tables with a pinch of salt, especially ones done by Shanghai.

The reason those from Asian institutions apply to US, is for the prospect of living there and because they tend to be poorer off nations, they want to succeed in what they consider the biggest economy, and have been conditioned to follow the US system more. Make no mistake, people do apply to Oxbridge but it's more of a cultural decision that the child might work in the US one day rather than China or India which faces problems, even though their economies are on the rise.

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 55

qwertyuiop1993

16

Original post by manchild007

Thanks for clarifying.

As I have said before, and I think I should clarify this again, I do not think that the Ivy League is better than Oxbridge simply b/c more people apply (and it is harder to get into) than the former. It'd be a pretty stupid reason for anyone to reach the conclusion from the numbers, but my reply was simply aimed at the poster who wanted some figures.

Of course (and I find the reason for your neg rep quite humourous)
It's just funny when people put these broad questions up expecting a definitive answer to such a nuanced question.

Reply 56

jimmyatemyworld

Original post by nulli tertius

I am afraid you are mistaken. For 2010 admissions 1153 applied to read law at Oxford with an additional 345 for Law with a year abroad.

I can't actually find any figures online, but someone I know is going to Oxford to study Law and he said he was told there were about 3,000 who applied for 2011. Either he was told wrong or there are simply many more people trying to nip in before the fees go up. Either way, Oxford has way more applicants than 3,000 in total...

Reply 57

Trading on past history sadly doesn't even slightly hack it. In the 19th century they were pretty much the only universities. Things have moved on.

Original post by Warrior King

It would help to know how to spell Harvard before making a case for it.

Harvard and Yale are up there due to the number of world leaders they've produced well to be fair only US presidents. I think Stanford only produced one right? Also the British system provided a far more stellar line-up of world leaders and a who's who of world history and popular culture to name but a few: John F Kennedy, Bill Clinton, Nelson Mandela (UoL external), Mahatma Gandhi, X number of British and Indian PMs, Royaltly from all over....I could go one.

Reply 58

dinat

Original post by ForGreatJustice

Doesn't really mean anything, I know people who got accepted to Oxbridge and got rejected by Bristol and Bath

Spoiler

yeah i got accepted into cambridge ( also peterhouse btw) and got rejected by east anglia , edinburgh, and ucl

Reply 59