Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chief Wiggum)
    Cambridge has done research which shows that A Level performance correlates with degree performance.
    Yeah but the same research by Sheffield Hallam suggests there is no correlation...
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hallamrulez)
    But you were just arguing that maths courses at Hallam are crap and that you cover way more than maths students here do? How can that be true when you have less lectures than them?
    Since when does volume of content covered depend only on the number of lectures?

    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
    Since when does the amount of funding a university gets depend only on it's age? (in fact, I'd be interested to hear about the figures; if you have any to back up your point)
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zenomorph)
    Gosh you must have difficulty in basic comprehension - I suspect you attend an RG2 uni. LOL

    You name a non OXbridge RG uni and I'll tell you if it is RG1 or 2
    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.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I thought i would chip in with my two cents. I personally would prefer to have a 2:1 form oxbridge because i feel in the world of academia it will looked up as "better" generally due to the fact that those in academia should be aware of the rigrous nature of an oxbridge course compared to the course at Aston.However in the general world of employment both degrees would get you passed the screening phase for any graduate scheme so in that respect i would not have any preference because both would offer me the opportunity to get pass the first phases of graduate recruitment.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    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.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (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
    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.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    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.
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (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
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    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
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    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.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    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?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (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? :teehee:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by member591354)
    You trust the research from Sheffield Hallum more than Cambridge's research? :teehee:
    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.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (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:

    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
    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 ****ging 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.
    One case, so many other factors to consider. We can all cite cases to prove our points.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    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
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    "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.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    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...
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.