[dave730]

It is generally recognised that both Cambridge and Oxford have good supervision/tutorial systems, that Cambridge has the superior undergraduate maths course, and that at both universities some colleges are superior to others academically. For the quality of undergraduate maths teaching, which do you think is better - a 'top' Oxford college (e.g. Merton) or a 'bottom' Cambridge college (e.g. Fitzwilliam or Homerton)?

[RichE]

As you've got the ball rolling, how about a fourth sweeping generalization? "TSR members doing maths at either Oxford or Cambridge don't agree with your second or third statement."

[dave730]

All I said was that those three things were generally recognised, which they are, if not by everyone. Very few would say that Oxford's undergraduate maths course is as good as (or superior to) the maths Tripos at Cambridge, or that Homerton College in Cambridge performs as well academically as Trinity College Cambridge. No disrespect to any course or college is intended.

[dougiemacs]

Originally Posted by dave730

All I said was that those three things were generally recognised, which they are, if not by everyone. Very few would say that Oxford's undergraduate maths course is as good as (or superior to) the maths Tripos at Cambridge, or that Homerton College in Cambridge performs as well academically as Trinity College Cambridge. No disrespect to any course or college is intended.

this is due for the most part to the fact that homerton cannot attract the best students like trinity, and so recieves a lot throught the pool, so the standard of students may be lower as opposed to the teaching

[DFranklin]

Originally Posted by dave730

All I said was that those three things were generally recognised, which they are, if not by everyone.

Generally recognized by people who don't know what they're talking about, yes. Are those the people you want responding to your poll?

(I'll grant you Homerton College, but that's somewhat 'cheating' - it's clearly in a different category from every other college at Cambridge. It would almost be like citing Oxford Brookes as an example of an Oxford College).

[RichE]

Originally Posted by dave730

Very few would say that Oxford's undergraduate maths course is as good as the maths Tripos at Cambridge...

There have been tons of threads about this on TSR, and you will find the actual maths undergrads at the two universities are typically unwilling to say one undergrad course is better than the other or that the teaching arrangements are better at one than the other (and not just out of politeness or some ancient secret pact).

What you do get is a lot of people who aren't doing maths at either coming out with "oxford for arts, cambridge for sciences" or something equally facile and uninformed.

[Blackjamin]

Boring thread or what.

[Anon the 7th]

[dave730]

Originally Posted by DFranklin

Generally recognized by people who don't know what they're talking about, yes. Are those the people you want responding to your poll?

(I'll grant you Homerton College, but that's somewhat 'cheating' - it's clearly in a different category from every other college at Cambridge. It would almost be like citing Oxford Brookes as an example of an Oxford College).

Homerton is at least a college of the university, unlike Oxford Brookes, which is Oxford Polytechnic under a new name. Go to Homerton and you get the same lectures as if you went to Trinity. (But I did notice you said 'almost'). I take your point, though. Homerton is a special college given its exclusive (?) concentration, until very recently, on 'education studies'. (In your day, they didn't even take anyone doing maths. They do now, though).

But anyway I did mention Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge too! I deliberately didn't pick ones even nearer the bottom of the Tompkins Table. Please take Fitzwilliam as the example if you like. How would you compare, say, being at Merton doing maths at Oxford with being at Fitz doing maths at Cambridge??

I think it's beyond reasonable discussion that the Cambridge maths Tripos covers more maths and deeper, than the Oxford maths course.

[dave730]

Originally Posted by Blackjamin

Boring thread or what.

Why did you click on it, then, out of the hundreds or thousands of threads here?

[BJack]

Originally Posted by dave730

How would you compare, say, being at Merton doing maths at Oxford with being at Fitz doing maths at Cambridge??

I would say they're probably fairly similar because there's not a lot of difference between colleges and there's not a lot of difference between the universities in terms of quality of education.

I think it's beyond reasonable discussion that the Cambridge maths Tripos covers more maths and deeper, than the Oxford maths course.

It's "beyond reasonable discussion" only insofar as many people here seem incapable of discussing this topic sensibly. Why are you so certain that Cambridge's course covers so much more than Oxford's? Have you studied at both?

[Good bloke]

Originally Posted by dave730

Why did you click on it, then, out of the hundreds or thousands of threads here?

It seems to be natural for humans to have a fascination with watching car crashes or other disasters. The Tompkins table cannot be sensibly used to provide an indication of the quality of a college - it has too mahy flaws.

[DFranklin]

Originally Posted by dave730

But anyway I did mention Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge too! I deliberately didn't pick ones even nearer the bottom of the Tompkins Table. Please take Fitzwilliam as the example if you like. How would you compare, say, being at Merton doing maths at Oxford with being at Fitz doing maths at Cambridge??

I haven't a clue. I haven't been to both institutions. Nor has anyone else on here, I'm sure. And I can tell you that you really need to have inside knowledge on both places to make sensible comments.

I think it's beyond reasonable discussion that the Cambridge maths Tripos covers more maths and deeper, than the Oxford maths course.

What is covered is only half the story. Most Cambridge undergrads only understand a small percentage of what is potentially examinable (a really depressingly small percentage).

It is not at all clear to me that the Cambridge course is superior to the Oxford one. That's partly because I don't know enough about the courses. But since I got a first, did Part III and supervised at Cambridge, and have helped many Oxford students with their courses on F38, I suspect I know far more about this than most of the people on here.

[dave730]

Contemptuous attitudes at Cambridge at e.g. Trinity towards colleges such as Churchill are not unknown.

Last year a Trinity fellow who shall remain nameless told me that even when Churchill produced high Firsts at maths, the people who got them still couldn't think, because of how they were hampered during low-quality supervisions. He said if they went on to do research they tended to remain stuck in undergraduate level approaches and mentality for the rest of their careers, for that reason. Quite nasty, I thought! Especially since he kept using "brick" metaphors when talking about Churchill. Let's just say he didn't convince me. But there were 3 other people from Trinity around the table who nodded approvingly at what he was saying.

About this poll, I can understand that some people don't agree with the preamble, but on the actual question of the poll this doesn't matter, because it doesn't affect how they would answer the question. Or if they think it's impossible to have a valid opinion on unless you happen to have had lengthy experience at both a 'bottom' Cambridge college and a 'top' Oxford college (i.e. I've asked a question that is almost impossibly difficult for almost anyone to have a sensible opinion about, and one that most people shouldn't even bother trying to form an opinion about), they don't have to answer it at all.

[dave730]

Originally Posted by Good bloke

It seems to be natural for humans to have a fascination with watching car crashes or other disasters. The Tompkins table cannot be sensibly used to provide an indication of the quality of a college - it has too mahy flaws.

I quite agree. Trinity's better at maths than Homerton and Fitzwilliam, though, and Merton than most colleges at Oxford.

[kat2pult]

Does it really make THAT much difference in the grand scheme of things? At both you'll receive a top notch education and great graduate prospectives. Why not choose which university you prefer more?

[wrockite]

Originally Posted by DFranklin

(I'll grant you Homerton College, but that's somewhat 'cheating' - it's clearly in a different category from every other college at Cambridge. It would almost be like citing Oxford Brookes as an example of an Oxford College).

Its absolutely nothing like citing Oxford Brookes as a college of Oxford University. How long ago did you graduate from Cambridge? I would be inclined to agree with that statement 8/9 years ago, but nowadays that is absolute rubbish.

Oxford Brookes is an entirely separate institution. As of this year, Homerton is fully recognised as a member college of the university. The only reasons it can be considered in a different category is the high proportion of education students - which makes up for about 30% of Homerton's intake - and the fact that Homerton does not admit Vets oe Medics. The other 70% receive exactly the same education (excluding different supervisors) to the rest of the university, take exactly the same exams and are able to get exactly the same grades.

[tomthecool]

I think the problem with this thread is that the question is too vague.
Are you asking whether the Oxford/Cambridge students at these colleges are more intelligent?
Or whether the quality of teaching (but not necessarily the results) is better?
Or whether people are more able to reach their full potential at each college?
Or whether learning maths is more enjoyable at each college? (Because of better teaching, better students, a better course, ...?)
??

[dave730]

Originally Posted by tomthecool

I think the problem with this thread is that the question is too vague.
Are you asking whether the Oxford/Cambridge students at these colleges are more intelligent?
Or whether the quality of teaching (but not necessarily the results) is better?
Or whether people are more able to reach their full potential at each college?
Or whether learning maths is more enjoyable at each college? (Because of better teaching, better students, a better course, ...?)
??

Numbering your questions 1-4, I wasn't thinking of 1, except as related to 2 and 3.
2 is much more like it, and I think isn't far away from 3 (although I'd talk about being intellectually stretched, moving forward, getting a profound understanding of how to do maths, and doing great path-breaking research if that's what they want to do - rather than 'reaching' 'full' potential which is somewhat of a cliché). So yes, 2, but in terms of profound mathematical understanding and ability to do brilliant research rather than 'value added'; and not getting 'stunted' at any stage, even end-of-fourth-year stage.
4 no; or yes, insofar as it comes from 2 or 3. Nothing to do with good food or whatever

Your thoughts, on any of this??

[DFranklin]

Originally Posted by wrockite

Its absolutely nothing like citing Oxford Brookes as a college of Oxford University. How long ago did you graduate from Cambridge? I would be inclined to agree with that statement 8/9 years ago, but nowadays that is absolute rubbish.

20 years ago. I'm probably being overly kind to Oxford Brookes (which I understand to share some courses/facilities with Oxford) and overly harsh to Homerton. My apologies.

I think you'd still have to say that Homerton is clearly different in reputation and history than any other Cambridge college. But:

As of this year, Homerton is fully recognised as a member college of the university. The only reasons it can be considered in a different category is the high proportion of education students - which makes up for about 30% of Homerton's intake - and the fact that Homerton does not admit Vets oe Medics. The other 70% receive exactly the same education (excluding different supervisors) to the rest of the university, take exactly the same exams and are able to get exactly the same grades.

Or in other words, even given it's an "outlier", there's not going to be a huge difference between the actual education recieved at Homerton compared with, say, Trinity. (Which was my main point, unfortunately subsumed by making a flip comment about Oxford Brookes).