BEST uk universities for mathematics?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by Tsunami2011
Wouldn't agree with this. Cambridge is arguably the best at Maths in the entire world. Warwick is very good, but not as good as Cambridge.
The best at teaching it or the best at research?
Original post by Ryan-Hetherington
You're forgetting Cambridge? Anyone who knows anything about Undergrad Maths knows Cambridge is by far better than Oxford for Maths. As you cannot apply to both, I'd highly suspect that the people who apply to Warwick and Oxford are, by far, in the minority.
Original post by Tsunami2011
Ryan has a point. Warwick ask for STEP, Oxford don't. If an applicant is applying to Oxford presumably with it as their first choice, the odds on them, being bothered enough to take STEP is up for debate. I think its more likely that they would have UCL or Bristol as a second choice. The difficulty of STEP means that an Oxford applicant, isn't really going to want bother with it, if Warwick is only an insurance.
Whilst this is partially true, you are forgetting two things. Firstly, Warwick only needs a 2 in any STEP (1 being significantly easier than 2 and 3, which Cambridge base their offers on) and if you are good enough to get into Oxford that probably won't be a huge deal to you. Secondly you apply before you know whether or not Oxford will give you an offer. I imagine many people apply to Oxford+Warwick+others with the intention of firming Oxford (based on general prestige- both are excellent for maths) but they realise there is a good chance they won't get the Oxford offer. However, that still leaves them with a very good Warwick offer that they can firm (which will admittedly be hard to meet) and then they can pick an insurance out of whatever other offers they have (likely Bath/Durham/Bristol/Imperial/UCL etc.).
(edited 12 years ago)
Original post by Tsunami2011
Ryan has a point. Warwick ask for STEP, Oxford don't. If an applicant is applying to Oxford presumably with it as their first choice, the odds on them, being bothered enough to take STEP is up for debate. I think its more likely that they would have UCL or Bristol as a second choice. The difficulty of STEP means that an Oxford applicant, isn't really going to want bother with it, if Warwick is only an insurance.
You're right in that it is unlikely people will pick Oxford as a firm and then Warwick as an insurance. However, I'm afraid I don't actually see how relevant this is. You surely agree that, out of the people that apply to Oxford, most will also apply to Warwick and quite a few will get offers from both. Then, people have a choice about whether to firm Oxford or another university such as Warwick. As I said, the vast majority firm Oxford, as only 12 people that Oxford gave offers to didn't take the offer up (and this 12 includes people that firmed Oxford and missed the offer). This clearly shows that the majority of people with offers from both pick Oxford. That is all I was saying.
Original post by Ryan-Hetherington
You're forgetting Cambridge? Anyone who knows anything about Undergrad Maths knows Cambridge is by far better than Oxford for Maths. As you cannot apply to both, I'd highly suspect that the people who apply to Warwick and Oxford are, by far, in the minority.
I'm not forgetting Cambridge at all and I'm aware that Cambridge has a better reputation for maths. But consider this: 1321 people applied for 261 offers at Oxford last year and roughly 1190 people applied for 238 offers at Cambridge. Now, I'm sure you will agree that almost everyone with offers from Cambridge an Oxford will also have an offer from Warwick, so I don't know where you are getting the fact that people with Warwick and Oxford offers are in the minority. There are likely to be just as many people with Oxford and Warwick offers as there are with Cambridge and Warwick offers...
Original post by Ryan-Hetherington
You're forgetting Cambridge? Anyone who knows anything about Undergrad Maths knows Cambridge is by far better than Oxford for Maths. As you cannot apply to both, I'd highly suspect that the people who apply to Warwick and Oxford are, by far, in the minority.
Based on what exactly?
Bath and Bristol are great too.
Can we stop all these silly arguments and pick up on the fact that the OP seems to actually be asking about actuarial science.
If so, OP, are you interested in getting exemptions? If so then LSE Actuarial, Warwick MORSE or maybe CASS.
If so, OP, are you interested in getting exemptions? If so then LSE Actuarial, Warwick MORSE or maybe CASS.
From what I've gathered from the past few years is that (for straight maths):
Cambridge and Oxford have very similar exams for the 1st year (this includes some questions being identical), and then in the 2nd/3rd years it's harder to compare. Most say (including tutors) that Cam is better for a masters because of the amount of options to choose from, not the quality (ie the course content/exam difficulty ect).
Warwick covers very similar stuff in the 1st year, but I think their exams are slightly easier. Warwick is more flexible than Oxford, (not sure how flexible cam is) so it's very hard to compare which is 'best'.
Now it's true that the very best students will apply to either one of Oxford or Cambridge, probably based on preference. So there will be lots of 'good' students at either Oxford or Cam. There will be lots of good students at warwick too, but it's probably true that most of the very best students will be at ox/cam
The uneducated individual will usually say cam>ox>war or cam=war>ox. This student is probably applying to university, and wants the university they are applying to (cam/war) to be better than oxford, or if they are applying to oxford, they will be hoping that it's an easier degree than cam. That's the general pattern anyway.
tl'dr , Cambridge=Oxford=Warwick for all practical purposes.
Now regarding actuarial science...I'm not sure.
Cambridge and Oxford have very similar exams for the 1st year (this includes some questions being identical), and then in the 2nd/3rd years it's harder to compare. Most say (including tutors) that Cam is better for a masters because of the amount of options to choose from, not the quality (ie the course content/exam difficulty ect).
Warwick covers very similar stuff in the 1st year, but I think their exams are slightly easier. Warwick is more flexible than Oxford, (not sure how flexible cam is) so it's very hard to compare which is 'best'.
Now it's true that the very best students will apply to either one of Oxford or Cambridge, probably based on preference. So there will be lots of 'good' students at either Oxford or Cam. There will be lots of good students at warwick too, but it's probably true that most of the very best students will be at ox/cam
The uneducated individual will usually say cam>ox>war or cam=war>ox. This student is probably applying to university, and wants the university they are applying to (cam/war) to be better than oxford, or if they are applying to oxford, they will be hoping that it's an easier degree than cam. That's the general pattern anyway.
tl'dr , Cambridge=Oxford=Warwick for all practical purposes.
Now regarding actuarial science...I'm not sure.
Original post by Tsunami2011
Wouldn't agree with this. Cambridge is arguably the best at Maths in the entire world. Warwick is very good, but not as good as Cambridge.
Cambridge is probably the most famous uni for maths owing to the excess publicity they receive.
This is a list of the winners of the winners of the International Maths Olympiad:
http://www.imo-official.org/results.aspx
China (CHN) are miles apart, having won it more times than any other country.
Owing to costs, it's unlikely many of their students would study abroad, hence choosing to attend unis locally.
However, these Chinese unis are not ranked high in "world" league tables. Instead, the top tend to be English speaking unis from the US because they have more publicity.
Take this article from a London paper:
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...uition-fees.do
It's about uni fees in London yet a picture of Oxford is posted!
(edited 12 years ago)
Original post by dugdugdug
Cambridge is probably the most famous uni for maths owing to the excess publicity they receive.
This is a list of the winners of the winners of the International Maths Olympiad:
http://www.imo-official.org/results.aspx
China (CHN) are miles apart, having won it more times than any other country.
Owing to costs, it's unlikely many of their students would study abroad, hence choosing to attend unis locally.
However, these Chinese unis are not ranked high in "world" league tables. Instead, the top tend to be English speaking unis from the US because they have more publicity.
Take this article from a London paper:
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...uition-fees.do
It's about uni fees in London yet a picture of Oxford is posted!
This is a list of the winners of the winners of the International Maths Olympiad:
http://www.imo-official.org/results.aspx
China (CHN) are miles apart, having won it more times than any other country.
Owing to costs, it's unlikely many of their students would study abroad, hence choosing to attend unis locally.
However, these Chinese unis are not ranked high in "world" league tables. Instead, the top tend to be English speaking unis from the US because they have more publicity.
Take this article from a London paper:
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...uition-fees.do
It's about uni fees in London yet a picture of Oxford is posted!
The IMO thing is not too indicative... it suffices to think about how the chinese team train compared to how the english or italian does.
Original post by dugdugdug
Cambridge is probably the most famous uni for maths owing to the excess publicity they receive.
This is a list of the winners of the winners of the International Maths Olympiad:
http://www.imo-official.org/results.aspx
China (CHN) are miles apart, having won it more times than any other country.
Owing to costs, it's unlikely many of their students would study abroad, hence choosing to attend unis locally.
However, these Chinese unis are not ranked high in "world" league tables. Instead, the top tend to be English speaking unis from the US because they have more publicity.
Take this article from a London paper:
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...uition-fees.do
It's about uni fees in London yet a picture of Oxford is posted!
This is a list of the winners of the winners of the International Maths Olympiad:
http://www.imo-official.org/results.aspx
China (CHN) are miles apart, having won it more times than any other country.
Owing to costs, it's unlikely many of their students would study abroad, hence choosing to attend unis locally.
However, these Chinese unis are not ranked high in "world" league tables. Instead, the top tend to be English speaking unis from the US because they have more publicity.
Take this article from a London paper:
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...uition-fees.do
It's about uni fees in London yet a picture of Oxford is posted!
imo =/= university maths
Original post by Ryan-Hetherington
Yes but, out of those 185 with Oxford offers, how many applied to Warwick? The odds are if they're wanting to do Maths, they applied to Cambridge as it is generally considered better than Oxford for Maths.
With regards to my opinion, I'm applying for Maths next year so I have visited the departments, talked to friends who go to Oxbridge and Warwick, and also done research online.
With regards to my opinion, I'm applying for Maths next year so I have visited the departments, talked to friends who go to Oxbridge and Warwick, and also done research online.
Quite easy to see from this that you are not at university, haven't applied through ucas and don't know what the fudge you are talking about. You can't apply to both Oxford and Cambridge.
Edit: Just to remind those negging, this was the guy who said Warwick was as good as Cambrige and better than Oxford for Maths. Warwick is good, but there is quite a gulf between cambridge and warwick undergrads, exemplified in the difference in offers 1,1 in STEP 2, 3 vs a 2 in STEP 1. Cam has too many alumni too eminent to count. Oxford has the MAT, taken a year before STEP and also has Andrew Wiles and fields medalists amongst its alumni. I know quite a few at Oxford who have got 1,1 in STEP 2,3. Warwick is ofc very good, but not quite as stellar as the others imho. Cam> (by a bit) Oxford>(by a bit more)Warwick.
The poster hasn't even been through the application process let alone been taught at the above universities. How would he know what maths at Cambridge or Warwick is like? Now, i'm not saying he shouldn't comment because he hasn't been to COWI but the fact he doesn't know what he is talking about is evident from his posts.
That was quite a lot of rant for a couple of negs. Oh well, I suppose that's what life on tsr comes down to in the end
.(edited 12 years ago)
Original post by SHELDON123
Sorry to be rude but I'm afraid you're just wrong there. All the people I know that are very very good at maths go to Oxbridge and all the people I know that don't get into Oxbridge for maths go to Warwick, enough said. If you want some statistics, the average UCAS entry tariff for maths at Oxford is 580 and at Cambridge is 600. Conversely, it is 540 at Warwick. Now, I know UCAS entry tariff doesn't actually tell you how good people are at maths, but I think the massive difference gives a pretty good indication.
As far as people picking Warwick ahead of Oxford, out of the 185 offers Oxford gave out for maths last year, they had 173 people join in the summer. This includes people that miss their offers and people that go to america etc. It is likely that the vast majority of Oxford applicants also apply to Warwick and so pretty much all of them pick Oxford ahead of Warwick. This also seems pretty consistent with the people I know, as I've never heard of anyone reject an Oxford offer for Warwick.
I'd just be interested to know, but what do you base these opinions on? Have you been through the application process for Oxbridge and Warwick or are you at Warwick at the moment?
As far as people picking Warwick ahead of Oxford, out of the 185 offers Oxford gave out for maths last year, they had 173 people join in the summer. This includes people that miss their offers and people that go to america etc. It is likely that the vast majority of Oxford applicants also apply to Warwick and so pretty much all of them pick Oxford ahead of Warwick. This also seems pretty consistent with the people I know, as I've never heard of anyone reject an Oxford offer for Warwick.
I'd just be interested to know, but what do you base these opinions on? Have you been through the application process for Oxbridge and Warwick or are you at Warwick at the moment?
I take it you mean all the people in the UK good at maths go to Oxbridge.
Please read my comment re the best mathematicians in the world as indicated by the Chinese who win the IMO year after year. They attend local Chinese unis. Because they win the IMO, surely their teaching methods can't be bad?
Original post by dugdugdug
I take it you mean all the people in the UK good at maths go to Oxbridge.
Please read my comment re the best mathematicians in the world as indicated by the Chinese who win the IMO year after year. They attend local Chinese unis. Because they win the IMO, surely their teaching methods can't be bad?
Please read my comment re the best mathematicians in the world as indicated by the Chinese who win the IMO year after year. They attend local Chinese unis. Because they win the IMO, surely their teaching methods can't be bad?
God you know nothing. It is a well known fact that the Chinese drill their students. They lack creativity and independent thinking.
Now I appreciate that at the highest level IMO some creativity in solving the problems will be required but I'm sure the Chinese will have seen almost all types of problems before. Plus, you name me one famous chinese mathematician.
You want something that tells you who has the best mathematicians?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fields_Medal
Russia and France have the best since the 90s before that the US. No Chinese ever won the Fields Medal.
Just because the Chinese train harder than the rest and with it come the results, do not mean they're not good.
Oxbridge have a great tutorial system so would you say their students' success is only down to that and nothing else?
As with league tables, it's dominated by English speaking institutions.
L'ecole Polytechnique churn out the majority of quants in investment banks. The French and German degrees are 5-6 years long. Are they slow at learning and take longer? No, they cover a lot more material than unis in the UK and US. However, their unis don't rank high in tables.
Look at the Guardian's table for maths:
It has St. Andrews at 3rd above Warwick at 4th and Central Lancashire, Lancaster and Northumbria at 5th to 7th with Imperial at 8th and UCL at 21st!
You honestly believe in those figures?
Fields Medal / Nobel Prizes are subjective, a bit like the Oscars.
The films that win the best picture aren't necessarily blockbusters.
James Bond films are popular but they've never won best picture.
Oxbridge have a great tutorial system so would you say their students' success is only down to that and nothing else?
As with league tables, it's dominated by English speaking institutions.
L'ecole Polytechnique churn out the majority of quants in investment banks. The French and German degrees are 5-6 years long. Are they slow at learning and take longer? No, they cover a lot more material than unis in the UK and US. However, their unis don't rank high in tables.
Look at the Guardian's table for maths:
It has St. Andrews at 3rd above Warwick at 4th and Central Lancashire, Lancaster and Northumbria at 5th to 7th with Imperial at 8th and UCL at 21st!
You honestly believe in those figures?
Fields Medal / Nobel Prizes are subjective, a bit like the Oscars.
The films that win the best picture aren't necessarily blockbusters.
James Bond films are popular but they've never won best picture.
(edited 12 years ago)
Original post by dugdugdug
Just because the Chinese train harder than the rest and with it come the results, do not mean they're not good.
Oxbridge have a great tutorial system so would you say their students' success is only down to that and nothing else?
As with league tables, it's dominated by English speaking institutions.
L'ecole Polytechnique churn out the majority of quants in investment banks. The French and German degrees are 5-6 years long. Are they slow at learning and take longer? No, they cover a lot more material than unis in the UK and US. However, their unis don't rank high in tables.
Look at the Guardian's table for maths:
It has St. Andrews at 3rd above Warwick at 4th and Central Lancashire, Lancaster and Northumbria at 5th to 7th with Imperial at 8th and UCL at 21st!
You honestly believe in those figures?
Fields Medal / Nobel Prizes are subjective, a bit like the Oscars.
The films that win the best picture aren't necessarily blockbusters.
James Bond films are popular but they've never won best picture.
Oxbridge have a great tutorial system so would you say their students' success is only down to that and nothing else?
As with league tables, it's dominated by English speaking institutions.
L'ecole Polytechnique churn out the majority of quants in investment banks. The French and German degrees are 5-6 years long. Are they slow at learning and take longer? No, they cover a lot more material than unis in the UK and US. However, their unis don't rank high in tables.
Look at the Guardian's table for maths:
It has St. Andrews at 3rd above Warwick at 4th and Central Lancashire, Lancaster and Northumbria at 5th to 7th with Imperial at 8th and UCL at 21st!
You honestly believe in those figures?
Fields Medal / Nobel Prizes are subjective, a bit like the Oscars.
The films that win the best picture aren't necessarily blockbusters.
James Bond films are popular but they've never won best picture.
A lot of wish-wash this post it (why are you mentioning rankings all of a sudden). For one you don't even seem to know that IMO is for high school students. So if the Chinese win IMO it reflects high school teaching not uni teaching. I was trying to win this argument with you by logic and facts but since your reply is so poor I will just laugh at you
indicated by the Chinese who win the IMO year after year. They attend local Chinese unis.
attend local unis. ahahahahah. more fail is not possible.Original post by danny111
A lot of wish-wash this post it (why are you mentioning rankings all of a sudden). For one you don't even seem to know that IMO is for high school students. So if the Chinese win IMO it reflects high school teaching not uni teaching. I was trying to win this argument with you by logic and facts but since your reply is so poor I will just laugh at you
attend local unis. ahahahahah. more fail is not possible.
attend local unis. ahahahahah. more fail is not possible.Whether dugdugdug's views are correct or not, there is no need for personal attacks.
Your comment that he / she knows nothing is clearly wrong and you've dug yourself a whole.
If dugdugdug really knows nothing, how did you come about to challenge his views? He has clearly expressed them enough for you to object, so at the very least he can write English.
IMO is for school level and the Chinese have won it multiple times. These very students go on to local unis so with an intake of world class students, that surely raises the bar and hence the overall standard of the uni concerned.
Of the 100 or so unis in the UK, the entry standards for the top uni, whatever it is and the bottom uni are very different. Is it so difficult to appreciate those with higher calibre students will offer a more demanding course than those with lower calibre students?
These columns should be reserved for expressing personal opinions and hopefully help those that need advice. Personal attacks are not needed and waste space.
Original post by reallytired
Whether dugdugdug's views are correct or not, there is no need for personal attacks.
Your comment that he / she knows nothing is clearly wrong and you've dug yourself a whole.
If dugdugdug really knows nothing, how did you come about to challenge his views? He has clearly expressed them enough for you to object, so at the very least he can write English.
IMO is for school level and the Chinese have won it multiple times. These very students go on to local unis so with an intake of world class students, that surely raises the bar and hence the overall standard of the uni concerned.
Of the 100 or so unis in the UK, the entry standards for the top uni, whatever it is and the bottom uni are very different. Is it so difficult to appreciate those with higher calibre students will offer a more demanding course than those with lower calibre students?
These columns should be reserved for expressing personal opinions and hopefully help those that need advice. Personal attacks are not needed and waste space.
Your comment that he / she knows nothing is clearly wrong and you've dug yourself a whole.
If dugdugdug really knows nothing, how did you come about to challenge his views? He has clearly expressed them enough for you to object, so at the very least he can write English.
IMO is for school level and the Chinese have won it multiple times. These very students go on to local unis so with an intake of world class students, that surely raises the bar and hence the overall standard of the uni concerned.
Of the 100 or so unis in the UK, the entry standards for the top uni, whatever it is and the bottom uni are very different. Is it so difficult to appreciate those with higher calibre students will offer a more demanding course than those with lower calibre students?
These columns should be reserved for expressing personal opinions and hopefully help those that need advice. Personal attacks are not needed and waste space.
5 posts?
cambriidge imperial oxford lse ucl
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Studying maths at uni
- University Options for Math/Statistics and Philosophy Joint Degree
- Chemistry required for Mechanical Engg?
- Economics courses in UK without further maths a level
- Selection of five universities for UCAS application
- Undergraduate
- Will my subjects be okay for universities?
- Help with getting into Engineering
- Maths and Economics
- Medicine Entry Requirements
- MSc Statistics at top university in the UK
- Study psychology without maths requirement in highschool
- Warwick University vs Bristol University Scholarships
- Bath vs USYD
- Official Heriot-Watt University 2023 Applicant Thread
- Need help asap pls answer this question?
- What should I study to get a career in EEE(robotics)/quantitive finance
- UEA vs University of York for Actuarial Science
- Ucas applicant 2023
- A-level "weird" combination (3 A-level subject included further math)
Latest
Trending
Last reply 3 weeks ago
71 on the MAT, rejected for interview by both Oxford and Imperial.Trending
Last reply 3 weeks ago
71 on the MAT, rejected for interview by both Oxford and Imperial.
