Competition - post a photo you've taken of nature >>

I envy Oxford students so much!

Scroll to see replies

Reply 140

*pitseleh*

Original post by Miss_Scarlett

Out of interest, are you even at uni at the moment?

As far as I know, she's actually pre-GCSE... so no.

Reply 141

Miss_Scarlett

Original post by *pitseleh*

As far as I know, she's actually pre-GCSE... so no.

lol are you joking? :p:

Thanks for the info :smile:

Reply 142

*pitseleh*

Original post by Miss_Scarlett

lol are you joking? :p:

Thanks for the info :smile:

Alas, no, I'm deadly serious. I remember reading a while back that she was 14/15.

Scary, eh? :p:

Reply 143

mf2004

Original post by stayd001

I'm so academic might as well be an admission officer, he/she/it seems to know more than any Oxbridge student.

she's probably one of the most misinformed people on this forum, even is she's slightly less bad than she used to be.

Reply 144

anonperson

Original post by im so academic

Evidently, one goes to university to study, not to party.

(Of course the social life is important, but what ****er applies only so he or she can just party all through 3 years without doing any work?)

Postgraduate I guess, OP?

Change that to 'You go to university to study, not to party' and you sound a little bit less of a tosser.

Reply 145

anonperson

Original post by - Major -

Imsoacademic is on the way to this thread right now....

EDIT : How correct i was, just posted before me :smile:

It doesn't say you edited it... fail.

Reply 146

Mellete

Original post by Organ

People doing some random course at Oxbridge aren't the only students who work super-duper hard you know. I'm sure us minion medical, vet, dental, engineering, chemistry etc students at numerous other universities are working pretty, if not more, damn hard.

Why have chemists been grouped into this? Surely it's a standard science course no more competitive than physics, maths et c. (and indeed chemistry has the highest applicant success ratio for Oxford undergraduate admissions)

ok?

Original post by anonperson

It doesn't say you edited it... fail.

Not that it really matters, but if you edit a post very quickly, it doesn't say you edited it.

Reply 149

Picnic1

Is anyone watching Masterchef right now? They made a meal for the staff and students of New College, Oxford. They took care to say what the specialism of all the staff are - I was just thinking 'well I know the ins and outs of every Beatles album but I don't make a big song and dance about it'. Is there something intrinsically better about 19th century Russian literature than the works of John Lennon? No! And if Oxford chose to create a course about The Beatles would it be any more insightful than the very best observations made by biographers and amateur observers over the years? No! Most of the people there kind of have a mousy, sheepish look to them as if they don't deserve to be at Oxford- they probably don't. Only the very best geniuses ever known to man really deserve to be at Oxford but as they are in such short supply or seek a lonelier path or an environment of more variety (like the aforementioned Mr Gilliam) then Oxford have to accept merely AAA or AAAA as if that should really be sufficient in the grand scheme of things to warrant a lifetime of some fair amount of security.

You should probably have to write a few books, write a few songs and run a few marathons to be allowed in. Not pass a few mere A-Levels well.

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 150

The_Lonely_Goatherd

Original post by Picnic1

And if Oxford chose to create a course about The Beatles would it be any more insightful than the very best observations made by biographers and amateur observers over the years?

You seem to get wound up/take offence rather easily :yes:

Oxford does have a Beatles course option and no one there has ever claimed that it would be more insightful than biographers and fans, just because it's Oxford :nah:

Reply 151

Picnic1

Original post by The_Lonely_Goatherd

You seem to get wound up/take offence rather easily :yes:

Oxford does have a Beatles course option and no one there has ever claimed that it would be more insightful than biographers and fans, just because it's Oxford :nah:

I do indeed. I was the shyest , nicest person that anyone could hope to meet (if they had chosen to speak to me) for years who only poured out their ideas in writing. I was full of ambition - I wanted to be a true renaissance man- a top journalist, film critic, author, philosopher, actor. Then I had a godforsaken year at a cold and lonely university being ignored by badly dressed miserable students when I might as well have been at home with my loving parents and done all my studying directly from the source, from the books of the great writers themselves, rather than from the lips of some comfortably numb middle class, dry and bored academic. And for the agony of becoming severely depressed (and the stiff upper lippedness of not burdening my problems on other people - a problem that could not be remedied by continuing to study at that particular university at that particular time in any case) I ended up getting sent down despite that university admitting that they should have proactively checked if I needed help in some way- you know, when I wasn't attending lectures (attendance and punctuality always previously a strong point at school) and when I was failing exams for the first time in my life. I bet there aren't many people sent down in this day and age. So I kind of despise a certain kind of nicety that academia uses where you are supposed to express gratefulness for even being there (rather than them trying to work out what individual contribution you can bring). Every time I do something out of the ordinary like writing an essyay on philosophy or architecture or popular music, a comedy sketch , a sequence of poems or getting a letter published in a magazine or newspaper I wonder why my ex-university regarded me as less than ordinary. I can only imagine that they had less imagination than I had hoped for.

Now that's off my chest...

Regarding Oxford , if there is a Beatles option then shouldn't a university that prides itself on being one of the world's best take every measure to try to gain the people who have the best perception on that? They will only get that from hunting from them, not from relying on them being contacted by them (when they might be rejected anyway because they don't have what is deemed as sufficient academic credentials).

Reply 152

Copacetic

This my fair and unbiased opinion:

Oxbridge takes in students who have achieved good A level scores. They generally take in a large number of students who would be classed as intelligent. There are also a lot of people who get similar grades and are similarly intelligent who go to other institutions and get rejected from Oxbridge even though they may well have performed admirably under the Oxbridge system and may even have gone on to do better than some of those who were accepted. Oxbridge students are clever, as a whole, and yet there are plenty of other top universities who also have many clever people and provide courses rivalling those of Oxbridge. The Oxbridge universities, taken holistically, looking at graduate prospects, teaching standards, learning facilities etc. are right up towards the top of the table of English universities. The students there are also a fairly normal lot.

And also, Picnic1 you are making a fool out of yourself.

Reply 153

Warrior King

Original post by Mick Travis

I'm not thinking about career opportunities, it's the fact they're the best and I didn't go there!

So by saying that you're putting down everyone else out there and saying all other univerisites and courses are completely worthless? Medicine is pretty darn tough wherever you study and I found that out today more so than any other day during the 4 years I've been at med school so far.

Oxbridge aren't the only academically demanding universities with tough courses out there.

Reply 154

Iqbal007

Original post by Mick Travis

Sorry, but I do. Maybe I wasn't clever enough to get in. Or maybe I just didn't work hard enough. However I would love to have gone to Oxford rather than to some mediocre institution. Yes, I know by mediocre I'm referring to a university that 80-90% of people aren't able to go to, but so what? It isn't the best. Oxford is for the elite and I wasn't there.

It's hard-wired into British culture - particularly amongst the middle classes - that only Oxbridge matters - other Universities are nothing special. That's not really an intellectual point (the British aren't that keen on brains) it's more about the beauty, history and cultivation that Oxford is supposed to possess. It's also about our perfectionism, we are quite hard on ourselves. Anything less than the best(?) is a bit pointless.

I reckon I would have been happy at Oxford, although the workload and some intimidatingly bright peers might have tested me to the limit. I'm easily infuriated by the very cerebral. Still at the time I wanted to go to some big city and have a crazy party for three years. A bit embarrassing now I think about it and a waste of three years. But you live and learn I guess.

Dont envy, because if you cant get in, compete with people when you have your degree and get a job, then compare yourself as many people work in large banks, etc with degrees from many different places.

Reply 155

Picnic1

Original post by Copacetic

And also, Picnic1 you are making a fool out of yourself.

How's that exactly?

You'll get over it.

Original post by Picnic1

How's that exactly?

Let me comment on a few of your posts.

Original post by Picnic1

And you see mostly nondescript students - they don't try hard to look nice during the day. They probably feel that they don't need to - their potential partners are Oxford students. They think that they have it made. They mostly lack even that loosely entertaining sense of 'rahness' that might make going to those universities like Durham a little bit interesting.

"They think they have it made". It's a generalisation that I would say doesn't apply to the majority of Oxford students. They will probably be aware that an Oxford degree stands them in good stead for the future but few people from my experience believe that everything in life will simply sort itself out because they go to Oxford.

Original post by Picnic1

Basically the students at Oxford seem are probably just slightly more of a workshorse than other people, potentially (but not always) at the expense of a personality.

Another generalisation. How many students at Oxford do you know in order to make this claim?

Original post by Picnic1

I'm someone who'd want to strike up a conversation about the merits of The Doors over The Beatles and I think that it could be like looking for a needle in a haystack

No, it's like many other universities. There is no reason why it would be hard to find someone who knows about the Beatles. What is the basis for this assertion?

Original post by Picnic1

and I would unfairly be looked upon as a working class person with ideas above their station unless I fit in to the cliques and academic cliches that being an 'Oxbridge mind' requires.

Another generalisation based on common myths. It might depend on college choice to some degree but again, from my experience, there are surprisingly few cliques. The idea that working class people are looked down on is utter nonsense.

Original post by Picnic1

They took care to say what the specialism of all the staff are - I was just thinking 'well I know the ins and outs of every Beatles album but I don't make a big song and dance about it'. Is there something intrinsically better about 19th century Russian literature than the works of John Lennon? No!

Now you come across as very bitter indeed. It was a programme in which the contestants cooked for Oxford tutors. Of course they are going to mention the research interests of those tutors. Did you want the programme to credit every single art form and artist that has ever contributed to society just so people like you didn't feel left out?

Original post by Picnic1

Only the very best geniuses ever known to man really deserve to be at Oxford but as they are in such short supply or seek a lonelier path or an environment of more variety (like the aforementioned Mr Gilliam) then Oxford have to accept merely AAA or AAAA as if that should really be sufficient in the grand scheme of things to warrant a lifetime of some fair amount of security.

Presumably this is a joke? Oxford University is precisely that, a university. It's a teaching and learning institution. If only the best geniuses ever known to man went to Oxford then there wouldn't be many people there and the place would probably have to be shut down for hemorrhaging money and resources. Their aim should be, and is, to take students who have proven excellent academic credentials and who have the potential to succeed in their chosen field.

Reply 158

Mick Travis

Original post by Iqbal007

I've been trying to think where it comes from. Truth is I was quite a miserable child prone to grandiose ideas. I liked to think I was smart - although intellectually speaking a big fish in a rather small pond - it's been hard for me to take on board that others are more able than me and you have to accept being good enough in life rather than the best all the time. A bitter pill to swallow.

There is also the romantic way Oxbridge is portrayed in our media. Perhaps it's not entirely realistic but if you believe like me that Britain is on the whole a rather grubby, rundown country then it's very appealing.

Reply 159

nulli tertius

Original post by Mick Travis

This is one of the bleakest threads I have seen on TSR.

Have you considered doing a course at Rewley House/Kellogg?

http://www.conted.ox.ac.uk/courses/oxfordqualifications/index.php