This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Oxford versus Cambridge

Cambridge just wins out of the 2 on the science front in the Times and Guardian rankings as expected (though arguably not by that much) but what about the arts:

Anthropology- TIMES: Cambridge GUARDIAN: Oxford

Archeology- TIMES: Cambridge GUARDIAN: Cambridge

Classics: TIMES: Subject not ranked GUARDIAN: Cambridge

Economics- TIMES: Cambridge (Oxford is in 5th place)
GUARDIAN: Oxford

French- TIMES: Cambridge GUARDIAN: Subject not ranked.

Geography- TIMES: Cambridge (Oxford is in joint 6th)
GUARDIAN: Cambridge

German- TIMES: Cambridge GUARDIAN: Subject not ranked.

History- TIMES: Cambridge (Oxford is in 3rd place behind Durham)
GUARDIAN: Cambridge.

Italian- TIMES: Cambridge GUARDIAN: Subject not ranked.

Law- TIMES: Cambridge GUARDIAN: Oxford

Psychology- TIMES: Cambridge GUARDIAN: Oxford (but Cambridge not included on site at all)

Russian- TIMES: Cambridge and Oxford is in 3rd place behind St Andrews
GUARDIAN: Subject not ranked.

Sociology- TIMES: Subject not ranked. GUARDIAN: Cambridge

Theology- TIMES: Cambridge GUARDIAN: Cambridge

Modern Languages: TIMES: Subject not ranked GUARDIAN: Oxford

Music- TIMES: Cambridge (Oxford is in equal 3rd position with Nottingham, behind Kings College London)
GUARDIAN: Oxford is in 5th place behind dedicated music schools. Cambridge is in 9th place.

English- TIMES: Oxford is in second place behind Durham. Cambridge is in 4th place.
GUARDIAN: Oxford (Durham is in 9th place incidentally)

Philosophy- TIMES: Oxford GUARDIAN: Oxford

Politics- TIMES: Oxford (Cambridge is in 3rd place behind LSE)
GUARDIAN: Oxford

Linguistics- TIMES: both universities are tied for 1st place
GUARDIAN: Subject not ranked.

So in the arts that's 10 - 4 to Cambridge with 5 draws this year.

Oxford was still named university of the year by both sites. The Times says:

'Oxford’s grip on the top spot is helped largely by higher spending on library and computing facilities and a bigger proportion of students awarded at least a 2:1 degree'.

Reply 1

thomasjtl

9

it's been long established that league tables don't mean much, especially at an undergraduate level.

Reply 2

ShadowCatz

To the OP. Do you seriously think that you're actually contributing anything?

Reply 3

Turdburger

16

So your trying to say that the League Table's are rubbish

..... using information from league tables.... that makes no sense!!

Reply 4

Picnico

OP

Oxford wins the battle for university of the year and Cambridge wins the battle in individual subjects (but it should be remembered that Cambridge didn't submit data for several subjects on the Guardian rankings).

The world would be a less rich place without these Oxford/Cambridge battles. We wouldn't have a boat race for one thing.

Reply 5

hobnob

14

Picnico

Oxford wins the battle for university of the year and Cambridge wins the battle in individual subjects (but it should be remembered that Cambridge didn't submit data for several subjects on the Guardian rankings).

There is no 'battle'. Honest. :rolleyes:

Reply 6

parkerpen

Complete waste of time. Even the times admitted their tables were biased towards oxford a few years back due to the different ways central spending was calculated. Oxford came out on top becuase of massively superior library spending when cambridge did better on entrance scores and job prospects and pretty much everything esle. A lot of scores are based on QAA scores (teaching scores) which can be as much as 5 years out of date

Reply 7

hobnob

14

parkerpen

Complete waste of time. Even the times admitted their tables were biased towards oxford a few years back due to the different ways central spending was calculated. Oxford came out on top becuase of massively superior library spending when cambridge did better on entrance scores and job prospects and pretty much everything esle. A lot of scores are based on QAA scores (teaching scores) which can be as much as 5 years out of date

Nevertheless, who cares? It just shows how pointless league tables are. Overall, it's probably fair to say that both universities offer decent courses and, banter aside, are pretty much equals in most things. Does it really matter whether some league table ranks one university one or two places above the other according to some entirely random criteria?

Reply 8

the_alba

12

Aye. Yawn, OP. Just yawn.

Reply 9

FadeToBlackout

15

Picnico

The world would be a less rich place without these Oxford/Cambridge battles. We wouldn't have a boat race for one thing.

We would. Nottingham vs. Solent, Bristol vs. UWE... there are several "boat race"-s around.

Reply 10

ShadowCatz

Don't forget the Edinburgh vs Glasgow and Aberdeen vs Robert Gordon boat races!

Reply 11

FadedJade

15

I like the way that Oxford is apparently top for philosophy, without actually offering a 'philosophy degree'.

Reply 12

Turdburger

16

The solent goes through Southampton, not Nottingham btw. Sorry for being pedantic!

Reply 13

Chruchill

Can you link to your sources too? For all we know you could be pulling these figures out of mid air, or maybe because I'm interested in having a look.

Personally though, I don't think there can be too much between the 2 universities, when I talked to an Oxford Tutor he said you get the same standard of education which ever one you go to, it's just up to you which atmosphere/place you prefer.

Still want to apply for PPE in a few years regardless. :smile:

Reply 14

jbruner17

They have differences, but they're two of the most similar universities on the face of the earth. Most people who didn't attend either of them amalgamate the two as the same kind of place.

Reply 15

FadeToBlackout

15

Heartbreaker

The solent goes through Southampton, not Nottingham btw. Sorry for being pedantic!

That's it- Southampton BC vs. Solent BC.

Plenty of boat races, albeit not with as much coverage or history as The Boat Race.

Reply 16

Alan Smithee

-x-Nina-x-

I like the way that Oxford is apparently top for philosophy, without actually offering a 'philosophy degree'.

Oxford is top for philosophy because a) it has a vastly rich history in the discipline; b) it has a current faculty of philosophers (tenured and visiting) that, for me to enumerate, would be both arduous and awe-inspiring at the same time; c) because the BPhil is the possibly the most famous course at Oxford, and is possibly much more difficult to get onto than any undergraduate degree there.

Reply 17

parkerpen

Pernell Whitaker

Oxford is top for philosophy because a) it has a vastly rich history in the discipline; b) it has a current faculty of philosophers (tenured and visiting) that, for me to enumerate, would be both arduous and awe-inspiring at the same time; c) because the BPhil is the possibly the most famous course at Oxford, and is possibly much more difficult to get onto than any undergraduate degree there.

The BPhil is a graduate degree, these tables are undergraudate based. Comparing the difficulty of getting onto a graduate degree and an undergraduate degree is a pretty useless comparison. I would also argue that PPE or Classics are much more famous oxbridge degrees. Being a difficult course to get onto does not necessarily mean it is the best. Having a rich history in a discipline does not make the university good.