What's better - a 2.1 from Oxbridge or a first from Aston?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by hallamrulez
Meh you're probably all just saying that. I don't agree but hey. I'm going to bed because it's late and I've got an assignment to do tomorrow! Because Hallam students actually work as well you know. I know that you believe that you're better than all of us, and that we don't actually do any work, but I have a piece of coursework to do - a 1500 word essay that I've had to work on over all of Easter that's due in a week on Wednesday. So you can't complain that we don't actually do anything. It's about taxes and the amount each sector of the public contributes in society! 
It's quite interesting really.
It's quite interesting really.I'm sorry to make a final cheap point. But this is exactly why it's so frustrating for the Oxbridge and RG students arguing our point.
You have a 1500 word essay to do over 2/3 weeks?
From the Monday of Freshers week I was doing 2500 word essays every 2/3 days.
It shouldnt be a surprise that the academic standard attained at the end is so much higher.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by hallamrulez
I think the gap is absolutely massive anywhere you go though that's the thing. Oxbridge just have this legendary status that I think people should be more sceptical of instead of just lapping up their supposed superiority over the rest of British universities
You seem to be taking this very badly.
Just because a course at one university is worse than another doesn't mean the students that go there couldn't succeed on a stronger course. But surely it would be better to be more realistic about the differences in standards.
Original post by hallamrulez
Also, don't you think that it's unfair that Oxbridge receives more money just because it's older and more established than other universities? Age seems to imply prestige, not just here in the UK but elsewhere. That's not right is it! I guess that there are exceptions but it's a general rule of thumb. It's hardly right that just because a university is older it gets more money to do these kind of things
Also, don't you think that it's unfair that Oxbridge receives more money just because it's older and more established than other universities? Age seems to imply prestige, not just here in the UK but elsewhere. That's not right is it! I guess that there are exceptions but it's a general rule of thumb. It's hardly right that just because a university is older it gets more money to do these kind of things
Perhaps, but with government funding, they just want to pick universities that have more of a track record in producing research likely to increase the UK's GDP.
My old flatmate went to Lancaster University for Maths. I think he did OK in his A Levels but decided to stay near home because he was in a relationship with a child involved.
Anyway, he ended up getting a first and starting a PhD in Engineering at Bristol at the same time that I started a PhD there (having done a maths degree at Cambridge). He was very intrigued to see my old Cambridge problem sheets and was quite happy to acknowledge that they were much harder than the level of the courses he had done.
Now, I have no doubt that he would have coped with Cambridge in a similar way to how I did. He was proud of his first, but wasn't too proud to admit that it wasn't the same achievement as having completed the equivalent degree at Cambridge.
It would be nice to see someone with a similar experience (undergrad at a 'worse' uni than postgrad) comment here.
Anyway, he ended up getting a first and starting a PhD in Engineering at Bristol at the same time that I started a PhD there (having done a maths degree at Cambridge). He was very intrigued to see my old Cambridge problem sheets and was quite happy to acknowledge that they were much harder than the level of the courses he had done.
Now, I have no doubt that he would have coped with Cambridge in a similar way to how I did. He was proud of his first, but wasn't too proud to admit that it wasn't the same achievement as having completed the equivalent degree at Cambridge.
It would be nice to see someone with a similar experience (undergrad at a 'worse' uni than postgrad) comment here.
Original post by hallamrulez
I have a piece of coursework to do - a 1500 word essay that I've had to work on over all of Easter that's due in a week on Wednesday.
I really have tried to ignore your posts but seriously. Try doing the reading/research and writing for an essay that length/slightly longer in literally 36 hours and then tell me that you work at the same level as I did when I was at Oxford
Original post by Zenomorph
What? There are a lot of duffers in the RG you know, maybe you attend one of them ?
a 1st from Bham, Manchester, Leeds, Sheffield, Newcastle, Queen Mary, QUB, Cardiff, Glasgow, Nottingham, Southampton, York = a 2.1 from Oxbridge ?
LOL I don't think so.
a 1st from Bham, Manchester, Leeds, Sheffield, Newcastle, Queen Mary, QUB, Cardiff, Glasgow, Nottingham, Southampton, York = a 2.1 from Oxbridge ?
LOL I don't think so.
I think that they serve reasonably similar purposes in terms of getting you through the door.
Once you're in there it's all you.
If you read my initial post I didn't cast a solid opinion as to which is 'better'. Generally I don't think you can draw a real distinction.
What I will say is that I graduated with a 1st from one of the unis you mentioned. I interviewed for a career along with people with Oxbridge 1sts and 2:1s.
... It didn't make a difference where any of us were from IMO.
Posted from TSR Mobile
(edited 11 years ago)
1st from aston, employers care more about experience now than university, and actually don't always want really clever graduates who actually don't really know what they're doing in industry.
Original post by The_Lonely_Goatherd
I really have tried to ignore your posts but seriously. Try doing the reading/research and writing for an essay that length/slightly longer in literally 36 hours and then tell me that you work at the same level as I did when I was at Oxford
Exactly! These students at sub-par universities have no clue what the workload is like! Edit: Fine, neg me if you want. It only indicates your pathetic denial of the truth.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by Drederick Tatum
My old flatmate went to Lancaster University for Maths. I think he did OK in his A Levels but decided to stay near home because he was in a relationship with a child involved.
Anyway, he ended up getting a first and starting a PhD in Engineering at Bristol at the same time that I started a PhD there (having done a maths degree at Cambridge). He was very intrigued to see my old Cambridge problem sheets and was quite happy to acknowledge that they were much harder than the level of the courses he had done.
Now, I have no doubt that he would have coped with Cambridge in a similar way to how I did. He was proud of his first, but wasn't too proud to admit that it wasn't the same achievement as having completed the equivalent degree at Cambridge.
It would be nice to see someone with a similar experience (undergrad at a 'worse' uni than postgrad) comment here.
Anyway, he ended up getting a first and starting a PhD in Engineering at Bristol at the same time that I started a PhD there (having done a maths degree at Cambridge). He was very intrigued to see my old Cambridge problem sheets and was quite happy to acknowledge that they were much harder than the level of the courses he had done.
Now, I have no doubt that he would have coped with Cambridge in a similar way to how I did. He was proud of his first, but wasn't too proud to admit that it wasn't the same achievement as having completed the equivalent degree at Cambridge.
It would be nice to see someone with a similar experience (undergrad at a 'worse' uni than postgrad) comment here.
Is this the case mainly for those doing science/maths courses? I have friends studying Mathematics and Materials Science at Oxford who seem to be inundated with work of a very, very high standard, and they've both mentioned that compared to their friends doing similar degree programmes at universities such as Bristol, Bath and UCL, they were doing considerably more work.
But I've spoken to a few Law students at Oxford as well, and although per term they have more essays in than Law students at UCL, LSE, Durham etc., the amount of time they spend doing independent study is roughly the same. The courses are all slightly different, but all have to teach the mandatory modules to achieve professional accreditation, so course content is roughly the same-ish for the first couple of years. Does anyone know how difference in workload between Oxbridge Law students and other RG Law students?
Original post by Drederick Tatum
Yeah but the same research by Sheffield Hallam suggests there is no correlation...
You trust the research from Sheffield Hallam more than Cambridge's research?
Original post by member591354
You trust the research from Sheffield Hallum more than Cambridge's research?
yes, institute actually doesn't matter, it's the person doing it who has the credit. There are actually a lot of universities better in specific areas than Oxbridge.
Original post by Drederick Tatum
Definitely not.
I refer to my experience as an undergraduate maths student at Cambridge, and later as a class tutor at KCL, Bristol and Bath in the following (note that these are all considered strong universities and they are - but just not near the standard of the Cambridge undergraduate course).
Firstly, Cambridge is much more prestigious than all other British universities apart from Oxford. This is evidenced by the public perception of these universities. In some cases, the reputation of the university combined with a particular subject (Cambridge Maths, Oxford PPE) skews this in Oxbridge's favour even more.
Secondly, the standard of teaching is higher, much higher. This is for many reasons:
It's not snobbery when someone asserts this, and I'm sure that many Oxbridge graduates are as aware of the difficulties of getting a job as anyone else is.
A first from most top universities is not better than a 2:1 from Oxbridge, under most reasonable interpretations of the word 'better'. In particular, it is definitely not 'a tad harder'. I'm not just saying this: compare 3rd year exam maths exam papers at Cambridge to 3rd year maths exam papers at Bristol, Bath and KCL, for example.
I refer to my experience as an undergraduate maths student at Cambridge, and later as a class tutor at KCL, Bristol and Bath in the following (note that these are all considered strong universities and they are - but just not near the standard of the Cambridge undergraduate course).
Firstly, Cambridge is much more prestigious than all other British universities apart from Oxford. This is evidenced by the public perception of these universities. In some cases, the reputation of the university combined with a particular subject (Cambridge Maths, Oxford PPE) skews this in Oxbridge's favour even more.
Secondly, the standard of teaching is higher, much higher. This is for many reasons:
1.
Lecturers aren't as contrained to syllabuses as in other universities
2.
The best scholars in their subjects tend to teach at Oxbridge
3.
The exam system rewards depth of knowledge in a subject much more than breadth - for example, a lot of other universities have a core set of courses you need to pass in order to pass the whole year / course. Cambridge allows for the students to be very good at one area and very bad at another.
4.
Students at other universities (KCL particularly, in my experience) appear to complain about the difficulty of courses if it isn't uniform year to year. This forces the difficulty of the exams down.
It's not snobbery when someone asserts this, and I'm sure that many Oxbridge graduates are as aware of the difficulties of getting a job as anyone else is.
A first from most top universities is not better than a 2:1 from Oxbridge, under most reasonable interpretations of the word 'better'. In particular, it is definitely not 'a tad harder'. I'm not just saying this: compare 3rd year exam maths exam papers at Cambridge to 3rd year maths exam papers at Bristol, Bath and KCL, for example.
More snobbery I'm afraid Derrick. I'm at an RG, and most of the lectures I've been taught by in First Year are Oxbridge/LSE educated. One lady has a very highly rated PHD from LSE. There not mugs and have been taught by the best.
Case of terminology. I would agree a Cambridge degree is more prestigious but I would disagree it is much more prestigious. Particularly when comparing a 2:1 from Cam against a First from a Top 10 Russell.
I'd also disagree on the hardness. There is this snobbery from Oxbridge students (a very minor few - most are lovely) that people at all other unis are idiots and that they'd be guaranteed a First at say, a top 20 Russell. Not the case. To get a First at any Russell is really difficult. Many people at these Russell's have the same A Level grades as Oxbridgers and are just as smart. Acceptance to Oxbridge doesn't define ones existence and condemn those not chosen to a lifetime of being below.
I think sole accounts in these debates aren't usually that helpful. Anyone can dig up a case of somebodies uncle, someone's friend, this person, or that person. I've known Firsts from Oxford unemployed since last Summer and various other cases.
Lot of snobbery in your post. A shame as you seem to really know your stuff.
Original post by Zenomorph
Nonsense and that's a very very big claim to make for 'those' universities, which I presume is the RG2, the onus is on you to prove that is the case. Otherwise it is very a given that Oxbridge is a league above the Bhams and the Sheffields of the world
Why would I be jealous of some lousy RG2 uni when I graduated from one of the London 3 ?
More nonsense a 1st from Bham is many times easier than a 2.1 from Oxbridge
Why would I be jealous of some lousy RG2 uni when I graduated from one of the London 3 ?
More nonsense a 1st from Bham is many times easier than a 2.1 from Oxbridge
Oxford/Cambridge are better universities than those you've mentioned. But I'm arguing a First from one of them is just as good if not better than a 2:1 from Oxbridge. As they are still very good universities, they are not 'lousy' in any way.
There is simply no such thing as 'RG2'. It is heightened snobbery.
There are at very least, 35 excellent universities in this country (24 Russell and 11 1994 Group). You will get a good education at any of them.
The reality is - 1) you haven't graduated from a London top 3 university. I am sure the London 3 do not teach their graduates to come on student forums slagging off other universities. 2) You are a member of the Oxford 2012 applicants page.
I'd get yourself into a Russell, work really hard, and re-evaluate if I was you. Anyone can come on here and say anything. I could say I have a First from Harvard and I was taught by Niall Ferguson and have a PHD from Yale. But what would be the point? You are only lying to yourself you know?
Original post by Zenomorph
You are a self professed intellectual - use your imagination or you name a non OXbridge RG uni and I'll tell you if it is RG1 or 2
Who are you, the oracle?
Original post by Chief Wiggum
I remember someone posting on the Oxford forum here that their friend had failed the year at Oxford (got below a third), transferred to Nottingham and got a First.
So, I would find the notion that a First at Nottingham is harder to achieve than a 2.1 at Oxford to be highly highly questionable.
So, I would find the notion that a First at Nottingham is harder to achieve than a 2.1 at Oxford to be highly highly questionable.
One case, so many other factors to consider. We can all cite cases to prove our points.
Original post by Noble.
I agree with this, even other top Universities for mathematics give their students a much easier ride, Oxford/Cambridge pack in a lot more content into the years (with mathematics) and the exams are noticeably harder than even other top Universities for the same subject. I have sometimes wondered myself why on earth I decided to go to Oxford when I could've had an easier ride elsewhere.
One of the reasons Imperial over Cambridge was one of the best decisions of my life! I'd disagree that a 2:1 from Oxbridge trumps a 1st from say Imperial, but I'd have to admit that even between these world class institutions, is not always obvious. In Imperial maths for example, there are plenty of stats courses that people take because they're easier than other courses. It's like that in Oxbridge maths too - some courses are harder than others and you can be strategic about what you pick.
But really, there is no way anyone can convince me that an Aston degree compares with an Oxbridge degree. Easiest way to prove that for maths say, is to give someone a STEP paper, which is only based on the A-Level syllabus, and see how someone from Aston does. I'd be surprised if many (any?) do well enough to get the grades required to enter Cambridge.
There's lots of good things more vocational degrees such as those at Aston bring to the table. But if we're comparing like for like subjects, I know what I'd rather have.
Original post by Chief Wiggum
I remember someone posting on the Oxford forum here that their friend had failed the year at Oxford (got below a third), transferred to Nottingham and got a First.
So, I would find the notion that a First at Nottingham is harder to achieve than a 2.1 at Oxford to be highly highly questionable.
So, I would find the notion that a First at Nottingham is harder to achieve than a 2.1 at Oxford to be highly highly questionable.
You can't seriously try and pin this on the difficulty.
A great deal is likely to have been down to the student being happier at Nottingham and possibly better mentally prepared.
I don't buy that subjects like Geography and History are all that much harder then the degree at other top universities. So many subjects at Oxbridge have 90% 2:1 figures and the same can be said for other Russell group universities. By large, it doesn't seem particularly hard to get a 2:1 in Art/Humanities subjects whether it's at Oxford or York
Original post by joe_bromfield
It depends on the individual.
When I graduated from Aston in 2010 I was the top student in the entire university. Not just in my subject, but across ALL subjects. I averaged well over 80%. I then went on to blitz MSc Economics at the University of Bristol and now I'm doing a PhD.
Reasons I went to Aston: I had a rough time at college and didn't work very hard in my A levels at all (only got ABBB), and I also needed to stay in Birmingham for family reasons.
Is someone who got a 2:1 from Oxford or Cambridge better than me?! Definitely not. But it completely depends on the individual, which is why employers conduct interviews instead of just hiring on the basis of the CV alone.
When I graduated from Aston in 2010 I was the top student in the entire university. Not just in my subject, but across ALL subjects. I averaged well over 80%. I then went on to blitz MSc Economics at the University of Bristol and now I'm doing a PhD.
Reasons I went to Aston: I had a rough time at college and didn't work very hard in my A levels at all (only got ABBB), and I also needed to stay in Birmingham for family reasons.
Is someone who got a 2:1 from Oxford or Cambridge better than me?! Definitely not. But it completely depends on the individual, which is why employers conduct interviews instead of just hiring on the basis of the CV alone.
"I was the top student in the entire university"
What you meant to say was: 'I achieved the highest degree classification of anyone graduating in my year, though we should - perhaps - temper this claim by acknowledging both (i) that some degrees grant marks more or less generously than others; (ii) that the quality of a student is not defined by their degree mark'.
"Is someone who got a 2:1 from Oxford or Cambridge better than me?! Definitely not."
So modest.
This kind of egotistical drivel was always going to have to eminate from the distorted spout of an economics (sub)student.
hey noble, we just agree to disagree man... of course this conversation is pointless u said it urself cause everyone thinks he's uni is the best. U haven't told me though, on what ground and what parameters is the rating done and make oxbridge the best. U re skipping my questions and take it where u want... anyway... Also how can 2 graduates in maths for example, 1 of them knows more maths than the other one... thats insane... maths is maths... u cannot prove that at any point its just ur word!! Also u haven't done u re studying on the credits system... google that for a start...
i don't wanna take it any further cause there's no point...
i don't wanna take it any further cause there's no point...
Original post by hallamrulez
I think the gap is absolutely massive anywhere you go though that's the thing. Oxbridge just have this legendary status that I think people should be more sceptical of instead of just lapping up their supposed superiority over the rest of British universities
Sorry Beg to differ.
You can say that if you've actually sampled 4 different unis - RGs and what not and also been for interviews at Oxford and in active communication with them, yes I'VE done that.
And I can confirm that the gap is massive, specifically between Oxbridge and Bham / Sussex / Soton
Original post by Tuerin
I comprehended what you said, but I question the sense of it. It would save a lot of time and space on this thread if, instead of defining the RG1/RG2 status of every RG university in your eyes, you listed the RG universities in these two suspect categories. I'll be going to Bristol soon.
This is just a cursory list and done specially at your request so there maybe some institutions missing. Bristol is in RG1 though I'd say a little overrated.
I remove Oxbridge because they are far superior to all in RG whether 1 or 2.
RG1:
ICL
UCL
LSE
KCL
Edinburgh
Bristol
Durham
Possibly Exeter
RG2:
All the rest
(Zenomorph's note: some of the 94A are better than RG2)
Happy?
Original post by LexiswasmyNexis
I think that they serve reasonably similar purposes in terms of getting you through the door.
Once you're in there it's all you.
If you read my initial post I didn't cast a solid opinion as to which is 'better'. Generally I don't think you can draw a real distinction.
What I will say is that I graduated with a 1st from one of the unis you mentioned. I interviewed for a career along with people with Oxbridge 1sts and 2:1s.
... It didn't make a difference where any of us were from IMO.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Once you're in there it's all you.
If you read my initial post I didn't cast a solid opinion as to which is 'better'. Generally I don't think you can draw a real distinction.
What I will say is that I graduated with a 1st from one of the unis you mentioned. I interviewed for a career along with people with Oxbridge 1sts and 2:1s.
... It didn't make a difference where any of us were from IMO.
Posted from TSR Mobile
That depends which door we are talking about ?
The door to your local Iceland's Management trainee programme then sure but the door to Morgan Stanley's MTP - NO.
So quality of employment does matter
Original post by Zenomorph
That depends which door we are talking about ?
The door to your local Iceland's Management trainee programme then sure but the door to Morgan Stanley's MTP - NO.
So quality of employment does matter
The door to your local Iceland's Management trainee programme then sure but the door to Morgan Stanley's MTP - NO.
So quality of employment does matter
Now you're being silly. I think Lexis is a trainee solicitor, or will be after finishing the LPC, but in any case to claim that you are somehow restricted to working at Iceland after graduating from a perfectly good university is a ridiculous statement. Your claim that Oxbridge is 'better' than other universities is probably correct but you are massively over-egging the pudding and making yourself look foolish in the process. Notice how nobody who has actually attended either Oxford or Cambridge is making such outrageous claims. You are (according to your other posts) at Sussex.
Your list of RG1 / RG2 is a total nonsense, on what basis is Warwick a sub-par university, for example?
(edited 11 years ago)
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Firm Choice
- LLB first year tips
- Second Bachelors Degree at Oxbridge? (2.1 from mid/top RG uni)
- Help me pick: Swansea BEng vs Birmingham Aston MEng or Heriot-Watt BEng?
- Any questions about the Oxford BCL - ask away
- How can someone at Warwick look down on me?
- How necessary is a first in order to become a barrister?
- Law degree from a RG uni
- Honest reviews of Aston University?
- Bishop Vesey vs King edwards aston sixth form
- 1st vs 2:1 from "target uni" for consulting
- Getting into Oxbridge for Postgraduate Study
- Why is student satisfaction so low for some of these top unis?
- Guardian/Daily Mail Uni/Times Rankings 2024
- Graduate LLB or Conversion
- UCAT do i have a chance at medicine
- Which universities are targeted by employers?
- Will it get funded a PhD at Oxbridge
- Is Queen's University Belfast or Trinity College Dublin better?
- how difficult is it to get a job after LPC in London
Latest
Last reply 7 minutes ago
Based on 2023 GCSEs, will grade boundaries be higher or lower in 2024?GCSEs
13
Last reply 7 minutes ago
Apprenticeship needs a 4 in scienceLast reply 9 minutes ago
Should I accept my offer at LCF or wait another year and apply for CSM again?Last reply 11 minutes ago
GCSE geography case studies CIE -urgent help neededLast reply 14 minutes ago
Is it really such a bad thing to have an undefined relationshipLast reply 17 minutes ago
University of Oxford 2025 Undergraduate Applicants Official ThreadLast reply 18 minutes ago
Best SEO Service Company In USALast reply 22 minutes ago
Worried about the acceptance of my A level Qualifications. Need an answerLast reply 23 minutes ago
Name a country or city with the last letter of the previous oneForum games
7298
Last reply 24 minutes ago
Amazon Project management apprenticeship 2024Trending
Last reply 18 hours ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 20 hours ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 23 hours ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 18 hours ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 20 hours ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 23 hours ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
