Surely Oxbridge degrees should be LESS valued than others... ?

So only the top 10% get a 1:1 then next 20% get a 2:1 and so forth.

Perhaps a better question would be:


If Oxbridge, with the cream of the crop as its students and with such high teaching standards and facilities, awards a lower proportion of firsts and upper seconds than a 'lesser' university, how can anyone believe that the lesser univeriity's standards are comparable - or even acceptable?

Perhaps you can clear something up for me (which has puzzled me for some time).

Why do so many people think there is a degree class known as 1:1?

If Oxbridge has such brilliant teaching standards and facilities, why is a good degree from there (i.e a first or a 2:1) considered better than an equivalent 'grade' from a 'lesser' uni?

I don't know.

You used the term. Surely you must know why?

THere is a very good paper on this from HEPI


http://www.hepi.ac.uk/files/47%20Comparability%20of%20degree%20standards.pdf

though what you describe as a better question, the author considers to be "misguided"

I see a lot of people quote it as a 1:1 online. So maybe it's just me being naive and trsuting their judgement? :/

I know this isn't the 'normal' view, and it's probably quite a controversial thing to say, but don't immediately jump on for saying it...

If Oxbridge has such brilliant teaching standards and facilities, why is a good degree from there (i.e a first or a 2:1) considered better than an equivalent 'grade' from a 'lesser' uni?

Surely, if a student has been to a uni with worse teaching standards and still managed to equal the success of an Oxbridge graduate, that shows they are able to perform well regardless of their 'support' and therefore be either harder-working or just generally more academic.

I know getting into Oxbridge in the first place shows a student is very high academically, but isn't a first from Oxbridge just as 'easy' as a first from anywhere else?

Any views very much welcome, and please don't neg me for this, i'm just wondering. I'm not trying to p**s off any Oxbridgers!

Thanks!

I can clear this up pretty easily since my best freinds brother has just completed Cambridge this year.

Oxbridge works differently. Eevery other uni ranks their degrees the same. I.e if you get 80%+ you have a 1:1 class. 70%-80% 2:1 etc.

Oxbridge rank their degrees internally. So only the top 10% get a 1:1 then next 20% get a 2:1 and so forth.

This is why Oxbridge degrees are ranked even higher than other unis, even ones such as LSE and Imperial.

Hope this helped

There is a lot of ignorance about, certainly.

I'm rather enjoying this question.

One I've always wondered is this:

Why is someone getting grades good enough to get to Oxbridge and then doing very little for three years so that they barely scrape a 3rd considered better than someone who maybe wasn't great at A-levels but then went to university and put in the effort to get a 1st?

Perhaps you can clear something up for me (which has puzzled me for some time).

Why do so many people think there is a degree class known as 1:1?

I guess I can't really argue with that statement. I will look into things further in the future. Before posting on TSR anyhow.

Because these people consider themselves qualified sources on the subject by way of having a friend's brother attending the university rather than going themselves.