This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Oxbridge 'hype'

Scroll to see replies

donteatthepie

I'm not sure if I'd believe someone who told me that to be honest (not saying I don't believe you, I don't know you, but if someone in my school said that no way would I believe them). While there are plenty of things about the two universities that are completely undesirable, people I've spoke to (and I guess I'm the same) wouldn't apply not because they don't think they could get in, but because they think they might be a bit over their heads once they're in, just the environment would be quite pressurised.

Trust me, one of my good friends who is arguably going to get a higher score than a typical Oxbridge offer (he does IB) wasn't going to apply to Oxbridge purely because a) they're overhyped and b) it was too much of a hassle.

Reply 21

faber niger

artorscience?

One could make Oxford and Cambridge just Oxford and Cambridge and just like any other university - except that if you did that you'd have to standardise all universities and make everything the same everywhere. One could ensure that everyone is treated equally at all establishments, that applications, teachings and courses followed a fair and equal system. But that would destroy Higher Education, there's no point to it and frankly it would be destructive to society in general.

Whilst it still exists, leave Oxbridge to its tradition.

Oh, it's the old socialism argument, isn't it?!

Could not Oxbridge retain their academic excellence whilst being more egalitarian in their admission processes, especially if the education system at large was similarly improved? Moreover, ostentation and tradition has little to do with academic excellence.

Reply 22

River85

Maiden

So University's with better reputations/teaching/research get more applicants 'that were almost guaranteed to pass'

Are you sure you're going to Cambridge? :confused:

No, I'm sorry, that was unfair of me.

Also, to add to what eulerwaswrong said about Imperial not being far behind Oxbridge in many sciences the same can be said of UCL and Durham (mainly in the arts, but also in some sciences).

Not that I'm saying Durham, UCL and Imperial are quite in the same league as Oxbridge, just that the difference often isn't much.

Reply 23

Damn, I was going for thoughtful.

kingofgods

But surely it could be argued that if other universitys that allow normal students is and they get 2:1's that there teaching standards are just as good if not better....its easy teaching someone who is already clever as ****..but requires much higher standards to teach someone who may have come into the university with not that much knowledge...i think the whole thing about going to oxbridge has gone out of the academic side and more onto oh i got into oxbridge...

A 2.1 from Oxbridge is much more difficult to get than a 2.1 from (for example) Thames Valley. As an Oxford finalist, I can tell you that getting in was the easy part.

Oxbridge is consistently ranked highly for teaching. I think Oxbridge students are very lucky - they're taught in smaller groups and have far more contact with tutors. This makes it easier to get feedback, ask questions etc.

Universities that have lower entry requirements do so because they need to fill a certain number of places to keep running. Oxbridge (and many other top unis) can afford to be "picky" because they attract the top students.

Reply 24

faber niger

funkypish

You'd still be better off highering somebody from Oxford over Swansea anyway, as the institutions have proven time and again it's more about the friends you meet there than the degree classification you get. Just look at the front bench of the conservatives, mainly from the Bullingdon club, no real talent.

Yes, but that's the Conservative Party, who'd want to work for them?!

What you say isn't so much true in this modern era of ours. Of course you may mix with ambitious people; but what really matters is your degree. Only people who have little experience of Oxbridge (and, at the other extreme, public school boys) tend to stick to the stereotypes.

Reply 25

kingofgods

Maiden

Any university can accept whoever they want surely? They just have to be able/want to fill their places.

So University's with better reputations/teaching/research get more applicants 'that were almost guaranteed to pass'

By this logic Oxbridge are doing what they have to to fill their places with the people they want.

Yes universitys can accept who they want but obviously other universitys seem to like a challenge...to put it straight i find oxford and cambridge way over rated especially on these forums..they are just universitys who are stuck up :rolleyes:

I'd like to see them take on a normal student and see if they can prove their teaching standards...like i said its not hard to teach a student who is already highly educated... :rolleyes:

i could teach someone from a book a subject that iv never done it they were very bright :rolleyes:

Reply 26

Damn, I was going for thoughtful.

jismith1989

Could not Oxbridge retain their academic excellence whilst being more egalitarian in their admission processes, especially if the education system at large was similarly improved? Moreover, ostentation and tradition has little to do with academic excellence.

My impression is that they are trying. I know that Oxford spends a great deal on access and each college has mentoring schemes and open days for students from badly performing schools. They also host the Sutton Trust summer school.

I think the real problem lies with the our education system, which doesn't allow people to achieve as much as they could.

Reply 27

L i b

KAM123

Oxford and Cambridge have always been 'big' they had their own parliamentary representatives in the 1800's LOL!

Er... all universities at the time had that up until the 1950s, although as time wore on they became combined (first, joint constituencies like "Glasgow and Aberdeen", then "Combined Scottish Universities" and "Combined English Universities" - which elected members by PR).

Reply 28

Ashes_to_Ashes

jismith1989

Indeed.

However, the teaching is also of a very high standard; and it's hard to separate the two variables. It's like the old private school debate: do they get high results because they cherry-pick the best students or because they have good teaching strategies? It's hard to make a definitive conclusion.

I think the best way to measure any educational institution for its quality is the 'value added' to the performance of students. However, if students are already very able and good students then it may only be viable to check how it maintains their performance, so really... that system just falls apart. :p:

Reply 29

faber niger

Damn, I was going for thoughtful.

Indeed; I completely agree.

It's just that the person I was responding had the opinion that it was contradictory to both make Oxbridge more equitable and retain its high standards. Which is obviously not the case. :rolleyes:

Reply 30

L i b

kingofgods

to put it straight i find oxford and cambridge way over rated especially on these forums..they are just universitys who are stuck up :rolleyes:

They are ancient seats of learning and probably the finest academic communities on earth.

Reply 31

Damn, I was going for thoughtful.

kingofgods

I'd like to see them take on a normal student and see if they can prove their teaching standards...like i said its not hard to teach a student who is already highly educated... :rolleyes:

i could teach someone from a book a subject that iv never done it they were very bright :rolleyes:

I don't think you understand what a degree involves.

We are not spoon fed by the tutors. Instead, students (at least in arts subjects) are expected to come to tutorials with an essay and a considered opinion on a topic. They can then discuss this with their tutor which helps to iron out problems and allows them to develop their views further or to consider things in a different way.

There is a heavy workload and quite a lot of pressure. Someone who wasn't academically able would not be able to cope with this.

Reply 32

Maiden

River85

Are you sure you're going to Cambridge? :confused:

No, I'm sorry, that was unfair of me.

No indeed I am not sure :tongue:

Anyway, ugh I'm the first to hold my hands up and say English is my downfall in life lol. Was trying not to just put 'get better grades' so chose to use kingofgods phrasing

kingofgods

...I'd like to see them take on a normal student and see if they can prove their teaching standards...like i said its not hard to teach a student who is already highly educated... :rolleyes:

i could teach someone from a book a subject that iv never done it they were very bright :rolleyes:

I'd like to think I'm a normal student from a normal state school..... and hell I hope they'll be able to prove their teaching standards with me.
It's about personal motivation too, people who bothered to do that tiny bit extra to apply may be more likely to put in that tiny bit of extra work to get an oxbridge 2:1 than a 2:1 from somewhere else.

Reply 33

Damn, I was going for thoughtful.

jismith1989

Oh sorry - I didn't put it in context!

Reply 34

faber niger

Keep_it_Unreal

That's true. Although you always have to make assumptions for that to work; because who is to say that Oxbridge students could not have performed equally or even better at another university, thus gaining a similar or higher value added score? But you can never prove it because people can't be at two universities at once!

Reply 35

donteatthepie

trm90

Fair enough :smile:

I agree about the hassle, as if normal A2s aren't enough you have extra exams and interviews just to stand a chance of getting an offer! I'd rather go LSE :p:

Reply 36

kingofgods

Damn, I was going for thoughtful.

That says nothing about teaching standards then :s-smilie:

ANY university can start putting heavier work loads on students? The question is what makes oxford and cambridge so speacial that they think they should kick up such a fuss...personally i know alot of people that wouldnt go for the simple reason that its such a "oh look im going to do a degree at oxford" really says alot about you as a person if thats the reason you go..

Reply 37

Maiden

Cambridge isn't that much extra hassle. Than other Uni's (can't speak for Oxford of course) It was only 1 extra form, and the early submission date, which was hard for school to get teacher references done by. Going up for interview wasn't any more stressful than going to Bristol for their UCAS day.

Reply 38

beccarr

donteatthepie

Fair enough :smile:

I agree about the hassle, as if normal A2s aren't enough you have extra exams and interviews just to stand a chance of getting an offer! I'd rather go LSE :p:

good idea

Oxford and Cambridge are seen as 'ooh amazing' because they are in the top range with Harvard, Yale etc around the world. This doesn't mean they are the BEST universities, they are just the most talked about and revered. I know a guy who got a first in Law from Cambridge and couldn't get a job. he now works in a call centre. They are two of the best universities, but not THE best.

Reply 39

Maiden

kingofgods

That says nothing about teaching standards then :s-smilie:

They can but how many of their students would just fall to pieces under the heavier workloads, without the extra support of tutorials or whatever that oxbridge has?