[sj27]

(Original post by Libshan)
I know that for undergrad you can only apply for *either* Oxford or Cambridge and never both, but I'm finding mixed information as to whether or not you can apply to both at the same time as a graduate. Does anyone here know for certain? Are there different rules just at the graduate level or are there different rules for international applicants?

Any definitive help would be much appreciated!

There are different "rules" at postgraduate level - you don't apply through UCAS, you apply directly to the universities. I'm not sure why you are finding "mixed information", if you browse the postgrad threads here you'll see a number of people applying to both (and indeed getting offers from both!)

[Libshan]

(Original post by sj27)
I'm not sure why you are finding "mixed information", if you browse the postgrad threads here you'll see a number of people applying to both (and indeed getting offers from both!)

Oh, thanks! I suppose I made a fatal error in reading forums outside of TSR to get my "mixed information". Appreciate the reply anyhow.

[super-emily]

(Original post by Libshan)
Oh, thanks! I suppose I made a fatal error in reading forums outside of TSR to get my "mixed information". Appreciate the reply anyhow.

Although I only applied to Oxford, I know a couple of people who applied to both. Neither will know who else you have applied for (unless you tell them), and it won't bother them either way. Good luck!

[janjanmmm]

(Original post by Libshan)
Oh, thanks! I suppose I made a fatal error in reading forums outside of TSR to get my "mixed information". Appreciate the reply anyhow.

I applied and got offers from both.

[nulli tertius]

(Original post by Libshan)
I know that for undergrad you can only apply for *either* Oxford or Cambridge and never both, but I'm finding mixed information as to whether or not you can apply to both at the same time as a graduate. Does anyone here know for certain? Are there different rules just at the graduate level or are there different rules for international applicants?

Any definitive help would be much appreciated!

Organ scholars are the only true undergraduates who can apply to both.

Senior status applicants (ie 2nd first degree applicants can apply to both).

All postgrads can apply to be both and frequently do.

[Libshan]

(Original post by super-emily)
Although I only applied to Oxford, I know a couple of people who applied to both. Neither will know who else you have applied for (unless you tell them), and it won't bother them either way. Good luck!

Thank you! I'm an international student (from Canada) and have been out of my last uni programme since 2000 and was the first from either side of the family to go beyond high school so sometimes all the "rules" of how it all goes can be a bit overwhelming!

[Libshan]

(Original post by janjanmmm)
I applied and got offers from both.

Wow! congratulations!

[Libshan]

(Original post by nulli tertius)
Organ scholars are the only true undergraduates who can apply to both.

Senior status applicants (ie 2nd first degree applicants can apply to both).

All postgrads can apply to be both and frequently do.

Thank you! I had to look up what an organ scholar was - my mind had first gone in quite a different direction at first glance!

[janjanmmm]

(Original post by Carrotcake18)
Yes exactly I don't get why people just give in and say "oh well ill do my postgrad there". At undergrad there's the tutorial system which graduates simply dont get, and as for PhD students, well.... its their own research! What difference does it make if its Oxbridge or Warwick or LSE?

Supervisors. And you will still need to put together a resume and search for position after you are done. Having Oxbridge on your resume will help a lot.

At postgrad is all about who exactly teaches you, what your department specializes in. I know someone who just rejected a Cambridge masters offer for Cconomics to go to UCL (Economics), apparently because they have a better Economics department. Would someone at undergrad admissions do that?

Well, they are wrong. Cambridge has a much better Economics department.

[janjanmmm]

(Original post by Carrotcake18)
Unlike the undergraduates who get tutorials/supervisions with better quality of teaching, studying a masters at Oxbridge is not really any better than another top universities. Its just ink on paper.

And we are back to supervisors.
Oxbridge is top of the field in pretty much any discipline. You will have world class academics as your supervisors. This is priceless.

Just to give you an example - one of the professors on my programme (MPhil Russian and East European Studies at Oxford) is Robert Service.
If you do not know who it is - just google him, he is on Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_...28historian%29
This is as top of the line as you can possibly get, there are two or three experts in the field of that level in the entire world. The research they are doing is cutting edge, and being supervised by academics of that level is a dream come true.

[Little Jules]

The situation is more complex at post-graduate level. If you are doing a masters before entering the job market, then Oxbridge will obviously look good on your cv, and may help to boost your employment chances. However, although Oxbridge is obviously well respected in the academic field as well, there are cases where there are other universities with departments that are as good or better than Oxbridge, or who specialise in a particular field that Oxford and Cambridge do not. If you are applying for a PhD, you may find that there are supervisors who better suit your interest elsewhere. Yes Ox and Cam have big names, but they are not the only places with the only names.

[Nattatouille]

^I think with post-grads there are a lot of different factors you have to consider-- not just league tables and career prospects. When I applied to Cambridge for a post-grad I did it because my dissertation supervisor encouraged me to because he had gone there.

So I did, but when I went to the interview, I found a lot of the people there difficult to get along with. And in the interview I felt really uncomfortable and out of my depth. And when they offered me a place-- I turned it down to go to do the same programme in Southampton instead... Just because in Southampton the people and supervisors were far less 'results driven' and it seemed like a nicer environment to work and study in.

[Ombre_Rouge]

I was wondering if I could receive some input regarding applying for one-year Master's programmes in the UK. I am an American international student entering my fourth year as an English undergraduate at the University of St Andrews. I would like to apply to Oxford, Cambridge, St Andrews, and possibly another university for my Master's. Oxford and Cambridge both have American literature programmes (MSt in English and American Studies at Oxford, MPhil in American Literature at Cambridge).

When I told my sister of my intention to apply to study American literature in Britain, she acted as though it was a poor choice, speculating that Oxbridge might not specialise in American literature and that I might be better off applying to American universities. I am not interested in applying to American universities because I would like to stay in Britain another year; do not want to be bothered with two standardised tests (the GRE and a subject test -- why an English applicant's eligibility would be partly determined by a maths score, I have no idea...); and do not like the fact that top American unis seem to encourage getting PhDs instead of Master's (some not having true Master's programmes).

I do not need convincing that Oxbridge have impeccably high standards, so I would imagine that an American literature Master's degree would be just as formidable as another type of English degree from Oxbridge. In your opinion, am I justified in thinking this, or does it seem silly or foolish for an American to study American literature abroad? Does anyone have any thoughts on either of these programmes?

Many thanks for your help!

[thatfineframe]

I think if there's work being done at Oxford and Cambridge that excites you, and people you'd like to work with, it couldn't hurt (especially if you can get funding, though the chances of that are always low simply by virtue of numbers). If you're working in a niche subdiscipline and there are genuinely better people with whom you could work in the States, then I think your sister would be right, but that may not be the case at masters level.

The only real disadvantage that I can think of might be that if you wanted to do a PhD in America and then teach there, it's just possible that a UK masters might not be the best prep for doing that in your field - I don't know about it in detail because I'm an early modernist. Perhaps you could check this out with a couple of American academics you know and trust, if it applies to you - but I'm guessing it probably doesn't since you said that the US emphasis on PhD programmes is offputting. Even if you did want to go and do a PhD, though, I actually don't think - disclaimer for lack of field-specific knowledge - that a well-used masters year at Oxford or Cambridge would hurt you, and it might be just the push you needed to get into top places.

If you want to go into employment, then I think the cachet would outweigh any notion that American literature is best studied in America. Equivalently prestigious programmes in the States, as you say, don't seem to have much of an interest in offering masters degrees, so in terms of a 'high-ranking' masters, Oxbridge is a very good bet. (General note: when I say 'high-ranking', I'm not trying to knock other universities at all, only to acknowledge that Oxbridge is still very much perceived and understood as a top-end, exclsuive brand. But in admitting that, it's not my intent to perpetuate it in a way that's harmful to others.)

Best of luck with your applications, wherever you decide to try for! I did masters applications this past year so it's all very fresh in my mind, and it's weird but heartening to see the next lot of applicants beginning to post.

[Ghost6]

(Original post by Nattatouille)

So I did, but when I went to the interview, I found a lot of the people there difficult to get along with. And in the interview I felt really uncomfortable and out of my depth. And when they offered me a place-- I turned it down to go to do the same programme in Southampton instead... Just because in Southampton the people and supervisors were far less 'results driven' and it seemed like a nicer environment to work and study in.

Of course, the Ivy League / Oxbridge environment with all the pressure to succeed and competition among students is not suited for everybody, but some people thrive in that kind of environment and in the end, there is no doubt they get a better education. This is why top companies recruit people from there: the graduates have demonstrated they can cope with pressure and they are used to being pushed to produce their best work.

[janjanmmm]

(Original post by Carrotcake18)
Unlike the undergraduates who get tutorials/supervisions with better quality of teaching, studying a masters at Oxbridge is not really any better than another top universities. Its just ink on paper.

And there are "tutorials/supervisions" for postgraduate study at Oxford, too
Here is a quote from my Guidance notes:

a) The role of supervisors
The tradition of graduate work at Oxford is one of individual supervision of each student, (i.e. tutorials) combined with small seminars, lectures and classes. Each graduate student is assigned by the REES Management Committee to a supervisor, who may be in a different college from that of the student. In addition to the supervisor, each graduate student is assigned to a college adviser, who takes a general interest in the student’s well-being, and from whom the student can seek academic and other advice. The supervisor is responsible for planning with the student his or her course of study and for keeping an eye on overall progress....

A foundation for monitoring of student progress is provided by the Training Needs Analysis (TNA), which is carried out by the student and supervisor in term 1. The TNA reviews past training of the student, identifies generic and subject-specific skills and knowledge that requires development, and formulates a training plan....

The first year of the course gives the students a solid basis in the major facts, methodologies and perspectives in the field of Russian and East European Studies, and develops students’ research skills. This base is then supplemented in the second year by specialised coursework on the optional papers, methodology and the thesis. The approach to teaching involves a carefully planned programme of supervision, tutorials, classes, seminars and lectures.

The truth is - you get exactly what you pay for, the best education in the world.

[Ombre_Rouge]

Thank you very much for your insight! I think I will go ahead and apply to these Oxbridge programmes, as I do not intend to obtain a PhD and agree that a year spent at either university would not be a year wasted.

As a side note, I suppose I could use the argument that British literature is widely studied in the States; most American English students don't flock to America for British lit degrees! The specific institution and, of course, academic staff, are what seem to count most.

You must be so relieved to be finished with the application process! Out of curiosity, were you required to interview for your place? If so, was it mainly about your research proposal? I am a bit nervous about the prospect of having an interview, but according to other students on here, Master's interviews are not very common. I'm hoping that's true...

Anyway, thanks again for your help

[Nattatouille]

(Original post by Ghost6)
Of course, the Ivy League / Oxbridge environment with all the pressure to succeed and competition among students is not suited for everybody, but some people thrive in that kind of environment and in the end, there is no doubt they get a better education. This is why top companies recruit people from there: the graduates have demonstrated they can cope with pressure and they are used to being pushed to produce their best work.

I have to admit that the pressure is my higher in Oxbridge-- there is no denying it. I reckon I could of done it and coped... But then, what was the point if I couldn't make friends or of settled there properly? The only people I got along with on the open day all ended up elsewhere (Bristol, UCL)

I don't know whether they will get a better education in terms of certain post-grads. It is again all about the supervisors, your project and subject. And of course, if you don't like the environment, you're not going to perform at your best.

I reckon if you don't get in to Oxbridge, as long as you go to a Russell Group uni you are showing your ability to cope with pressure and succeed. And a PhD from there is no different from Oxbridge (apart from really the prestige)

(Original post by janjanmmm)
The truth is - you get exactly what you pay for, the best education in the world.

The cost of my course was the same across all the universities I applied to.

The studentship paid £2,000 more than other universities though.

[evantej]

(Original post by Ombre_Rouge)
I was wondering if I could receive some input regarding applying for one-year Master's programmes in the UK. I am an American international student entering my fourth year as an English undergraduate at the University of St Andrews. I would like to apply to Oxford, Cambridge, St Andrews, and possibly another university for my Master's. Oxford and Cambridge both have American literature programmes (MSt in English and American Studies at Oxford, MPhil in American Literature at Cambridge).

When I told my sister of my intention to apply to study American literature in Britain, she acted as though it was a poor choice, speculating that Oxbridge might not specialise in American literature and that I might be better off applying to American universities. I am not interested in applying to American universities because I would like to stay in Britain another year; do not want to be bothered with two standardised tests (the GRE and a subject test -- why an English applicant's eligibility would be partly determined by a maths score, I have no idea...); and do not like the fact that top American unis seem to encourage getting PhDs instead of Master's (some not having true Master's programmes).

I do not need convincing that Oxbridge have impeccably high standards, so I would imagine that an American literature Master's degree would be just as formidable as another type of English degree from Oxbridge. In your opinion, am I justified in thinking this, or does it seem silly or foolish for an American to study American literature abroad? Does anyone have any thoughts on either of these programmes?

Many thanks for your help!

What is the idea behind studying a masters degree if you do not intend to pursue doctoral research? That to me seems the more pressing issue rather than the legitimacy of studying American literature in Britain.

[janjanmmm]

(Original post by Nattatouille)

The cost of my course was the same across all the universities I applied to.

The studentship paid £2,000 more than other universities though.

This is probably because you are considered home/EU student. Not to worry, we (international students) are paying for you - I have to pay £17500

Compare that to £13000 for University of Edinburgh, or free tuition at German schools, and you will understand what I am talking about