Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

How do Oxbridge develop you intellectually once onto the degree? watch

    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    You get some intelligent people at Oxford and Cambridge, but you also get very average students. You can't generalise and assume that being at Cambridge or Oxford = intelligence :nn:
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by harr)
    I don't think anybody's tried to claim that they have all the best students. That would clearly be ridiculous.:facepalm:If you're good enough you're generally able to jump through the hoops. If you're not good enough it will probably be difficult to do so.
    To be fair, I'm pretty sure people on this forum think they are intellectually superior if you go to Cambridge or Oxford, hence all the stupid I got a B in GCSEs thread. Which, is funny as I only got 1 A at GCSEs.

    Generally yes. However, there has been many cases that this isn't the rule. Certainly, Hawkings didn't get the best during results during uni. Hmm, Einstein got pretty poor scores at uni too, he was actually a bad student. I can think of a lot of different cases.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by harr)
    But it probably shows a difference in average intelligence (or average work ethic, or average number of A levels taken).
    I wasn't talking about exams. You said "course".

    I don't know what you count as a top university, but you seem to count Manchester as one. I've looked at some of their first year papers and they were a joke. It's entirely possible that I just happened to look at easy papers, but still... (Please note that I'm not saying that the papers for other unis will be similar.)
    There wouldn't be much point in trying to judge potential after it has been acheived.
    Because they're not good enough or live on the international space station.
    No I'm not. I'm assuming that it'll give some indication. (Which it will.)
    Not really. Certainly, I spent that hour I could be rote learning on learning how to prove stuff. This payed off more than any rote learning I could have done.

    Hmm, well depends on what table. Hmm, I doubt you can judge a uni on its first year papers, anyway look at the fourth year papers. Hmmm, to be fair I doubt any first year maths past paper is particularly difficult. Well, I doubt genius is really clear cut to see.

    But, it would be largely not a good indication.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Craghyrax)
    You get some intelligent people at Oxford and Cambridge, but you also get very average students. You can't generalise and assume that being at Cambridge or Oxford = intelligence :nn:
    I don't think anyone is saying that. They are just saying that the students at oxbridge are on average better, which seems pretty reasonable given the selection procedure.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TableChair)
    I don't think anyone is saying that. They are just saying that the students at oxbridge are on average better, which seems pretty reasonable given the selection procedure.
    I was judging by the OP which seemed to say it. But if its not being understood that way by everybody then so much the better!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cruciform)
    Basically there is still a gap in intelligence between people from Oxbridge and universities lower down; even as good as UCL, Warwick, Bristol, etc. My question is how do they develop you intellectually once you get onto the degree, what sets it apart from the other top institutions i.e. it could be better teaching quality, harder course material, atmoshere, etc. I mean the top institutions require very similar A-level grades, so why is there still a fairly large intellectual gap between them?
    Also an oxbridge degree seem much more rigorous than A-levels, how do you progress from there, it's like people on the degree haven't even reached their intellectual peak. Or is everyone actually just naturally very intelligent?
    It beats me.
    What are you basing this on sorry?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Simplicity)
    To be fair, I'm pretty sure people on this forum think they are intellectually superior if you go to Cambridge or Oxford, hence all the stupid I got a B in GCSEs thread. Which, is funny as I only got 1 A at GCSEs.

    Generally yes. However, there has been many cases that this isn't the rule. Certainly, Hawkings didn't get the best during results during uni. Hmm, Einstein got pretty poor scores at uni too, he was actually a bad student. I can think of a lot of different cases.
    Einstein being a bad student is just a myth. And Hawking was boarder line 2:1 to 1st and then was interviewed to see what to give him, they then gave him a first.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Because at Oxbridge interviews aren't sales pitches, they're assessing your ability to think as A Levels only test your ability to regurgitate a textbook.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    In my (admittedly limited) experience the work is no 'harder' than anything I've had, there just tends to be more of it. That's not necessarily a good thing, being able to pump out essays doesn't make you any better at your subject. I think the thing that stimulates more than any other is the tutorial system, students can't get away with not doing any work unlike in the bigger classes of other universities.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Hate to disappoint all the"bright young things" who feel so privileged to be at Oxford, but having graduated a few years ago from there (PPE) I can look back dispassionately and compare myself to people from other good universities. Now we are all mixed up in the big wide world, there is little difference between us. Lots from other universities have the same A level grades and do as well or better than the Oxonians. Someone from University of Hertfordshire got a promotion way ahead of the Oxbridge lot! I have no links with Warwick, but my perception is that their graduates are a very bright bunch and skilled in applying what they know. Some of my Oxford friends have had real success (and I'm fortunate to count myself in that group), others have floundered. Some are incredibly bright-others I wonder how they got in.

    As regards intellectual challenge, I think the tutorial system is great for developing the ability to collate information rapidly, present an argument effectively and debate. On the other hand, it means that I have amazing knowledge of the limited areas I did essays on, but my wider understanding of my subjects leaves something to be desired. I wasn't a library-based intellectual though.

    I'm glad I went to Oxford but think I would have made a similar success of my life had I gone to the universities which have been mentioned in such disparaging terms.

    And a message to the OP - this is the sort of exchange which gets Oxford people a bad name and can make post-Oxford life very difficult (and post Oxford life is hopefully a lot longer than those nine 8 week terms!).
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cruciform)
    Basically there is still a gap in intelligence between people from Oxbridge and universities lower down; even as good as UCL, Warwick, Bristol, etc. My question is how do they develop you intellectually once you get onto the degree, what sets it apart from the other top institutions i.e. it could be better teaching quality, harder course material, atmoshere, etc. I mean the top institutions require very similar A-level grades, so why is there still a fairly large intellectual gap between them?
    Also an oxbridge degree seem much more rigorous than A-levels, how do you progress from there, it's like people on the degree haven't even reached their intellectual peak. Or is everyone actually just naturally very intelligent?
    It beats me.
    this is BS, sorry bt it really is.. there is no such intelligence gap at all..
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    I'm answering this as a somewhat clever but not hardworking sixth former with offers (after interviews) from Cambridge and Imperial:

    the interview at Cambridge pushed me about 1000x further than the Imperial one. At Imperial I was set two logic problems, I solved one with ease but with the other one I got extensive hints. With Cambridge it was TWO half-hour intellectually rigorous interviews which made me really think hard.

    So on that basis I can make 2 assumptions - I) they do pick la creme de la creme of students, rather than just the best because so many brilliant people got rejected from Oxbridge but not from other top 10 unis cos Oxbridge NEED to see you're amazingly clever not just an A student; and II) if their course is anything like their interview then it is more demanding and thus makes students reach their potential.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by i.am.lost)
    I'm answering this as a somewhat clever but not hardworking sixth former with offers (after interviews) from Cambridge and Imperial:

    the interview at Cambridge pushed me about 1000x further than the Imperial one. At Imperial I was set two logic problems, I solved one with ease but with the other one I got extensive hints. With Cambridge it was TWO half-hour intellectually rigorous interviews which made me really think hard.

    So on that basis I can make 2 assumptions - I) they do pick la creme de la creme of students , rather than just the best because so many brilliant people got rejected from Oxbridge but not from other top 10 unis cos Oxbridge NEED to see you're amazingly clever not just an A student; and II) if their course is anything like their interview then it is more demanding and thus makes students reach their potential.
    such a typical load of oxbridge student ****... you are no cleverer than anyone who goes to Warwick, UCL, St Andrews just because you (let's face it, fairly arbitrarily) get a place at oxford. Certainly from my school one of the guys who got in to do law at magdalane was not at all the brightest in our year whereas a guy who we all consider to be something of a genius is now at st andrews. They don't pick 'the creme de la creme..' don't kid yourself, they pick those who are most suited to the oxford system at best... indeed the gap between oxford an the top unis these days is very small
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sambo2)
    such a typical load of oxbridge student ****... you are no cleverer than anyone who goes to Warwick, UCL, St Andrews just because you (let's face it, fairly arbitrarily) get a place at oxford. Certainly from my school one of the guys who got in to do law at magdalane was not at all the brightest in our year whereas a guy who we all consider to be something of a genius is now at st andrews. They don't pick 'the creme de la creme..' don't kid yourself, they pick those who are most suited to the oxford system at best... indeed the gap between oxford an the top unis these days is very small
    Maybe they should get your sixth form to choose the offers?

    But what the guy you quoted said was gay I agree. Especially the typical 'clever but not hardworking' ****.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by _KilgoreTrout_)
    Maybe they should get your sixth form to choose the offers?

    But what the guy you quoted said was gay I agree. Especially the typical 'clever but not hardworking' ****.
    of course what we think is not relevant compared to what an experienced oxbridge proffessor thinks and my anedcdotal example has no weight to it - but I would say in my experience there is no such 'intellectual gap' between oxford and the rest
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by _KilgoreTrout_)
    Maybe they should get your sixth form to choose the offers?

    But what the guy you quoted said was gay I agree. Especially the typical 'clever but not hardworking' ****.
    To be honest, I think sometimes that someone's fellow students who has known them for many years as well as knowing their grades can judge their intelligence better than a tutor who only sees them for around an hour as well as knowing their grades.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DaveJ)
    To be honest, I think sometimes that someone's fellow students who has known them for many years as well as knowing their grades can judge their intelligence better than a tutor who only sees them for around an hour as well as knowing their grades.
    Maybe to some extent, but a large part of the interview is seeing if they would want to teach you. Also friends and people who know you still don't have the experience of picking out people who would do well in degrees etc.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by i.am.lost)
    I'm answering this as a somewhat clever but not hardworking sixth former with offers (after interviews) from Cambridge and Imperial:

    the interview at Cambridge pushed me about 1000x further than the Imperial one. At Imperial I was set two logic problems, I solved one with ease but with the other one I got extensive hints. With Cambridge it was TWO half-hour intellectually rigorous interviews which made me really think hard.

    So on that basis I can make 2 assumptions - I) they do pick la creme de la creme of students, rather than just the best because so many brilliant people got rejected from Oxbridge but not from other top 10 unis cos Oxbridge NEED to see you're amazingly clever not just an A student; and II) if their course is anything like their interview then it is more demanding and thus makes students reach their potential.

    Oh dear oh dear oh dear oh dear. I know a student at cambridge, who had low grades, and a very lucky interview (by his own admission - they asked him things that they thought were not on his syllabus when in fact they were). He is now struggling. Another guy got rejected, who had much better grades, had done much more worthwhile work, and was far cleverer. He's now thriving at a 'lower' uni. If oxbridge was so much cleverer than everyone then they wouldn't need 4 teams on university challenge, to demonstrate their dominance. and teams often defeat these 4 teams of 'superior intelligence'.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by _KilgoreTrout_)
    Maybe to some extent, but a large part of the interview is seeing if they would want to teach you. Also friends and people who know you still don't have the experience of picking out people who would do well in degrees etc.
    qed, it's about wether you who would benefit most from the oxford system, but this deosn't necessarily correlate to who the most intelligent are.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Muddy91)
    Oh dear oh dear oh dear oh dear. I know a student at cambridge, who had low grades, and a very lucky interview (by his own admission - they asked him things that they thought were not on his syllabus when in fact they were). He is now struggling. Another guy got rejected, who had much better grades, had done much more worthwhile work, and was far cleverer. He's now thriving at a 'lower' uni. If oxbridge was so much cleverer than everyone then they wouldn't need 10 teams on university challenge, to demonstrate their dominance. and teams often defeat these ten teams of 'superior intelligence'.
    im not sure university challenge is a measure of intelligence lol... and they only get 4 teams.. but clearly the guy you quoted was a muppet, we all agree on that.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: February 19, 2010
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?
Useful resources

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

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