How do Oxbridge develop you intellectually once onto the degree?

I disagree.
The workload certainly plays a part.

You're focusing on the effect, not the cause. The typical 'correlation does not imply causation' applies.

Given you've said that in the previous post, what makes you think I'm now going to accept this as truth?
I'll say again, I disagree.

It's fine to disagree.

I'd like to hear your reasoning.

The quantity of work simply forces you to develop. Maybe in different ways, but the efficiency people have after a couple of terms here is incredible compared to what they had when they arrived, mostly because it's forced to be by the workload.

Would you mind expanding upon the first two bits I've bolded?

To be fair, the discussion is 'how do Oxbridge develop you intellectually once onto the degree?' - would you think an answer: "The quantity of work simply forces you to develop", is an adequate explanation?

You also refer to efficiency, how does that relate to the way Oxbridge develop you intellectually?

If we consider the 'how' as asking 'what drives the development', then I feel this is a perfectly valid answer. If you're considering it as 'in what ways do you develop', well, clearly this is not an answer(although, the efficiency bit mentioned is a bit of an answer).
I would say being able to hand in a well done piece of work in a day compared to in a week would certainly count as intellectual development. This is what I mean.

Also, your point before may be semi-vaild for some subjects, but for instance, in maths, the biggest driving factor is largely you'e forced to do the work, because if you haven't, it becomes clear very quickly.

You highlight the results of intellectual growth, not the cause.

Lets take your example.

Two students are given an essay due a week from now. Student A completes the essay in a day. Student B completes it in a week. Both achieve a grade A.

According to you, Student A has greater intellectual capacity than Student B.

Would it be correct to assume that for Student A, it was the essay itself which gave rise to a greater intellectual capacity, causing Student A to complete it in a day?

Further, to you it, "would certainly count as intellectual development". It seems you are again confusing a result of intellectual development (i.e. completing an essay quickly) and the cause of intellectual development.

What caused the student to complete it in one day was their ability to rapidly consider multiple sides of an argument and come to a conclusion via sound points. This process is fostered via 1on1 Socratic style learning at Oxbridge. If you cannot do this fundamental process, how would doing more essays (referring to more 'work') aid you? Yes, you practise this process by doing essays, but you're not seeing the process and reasoning behind it. Thus, it's easy to say, more essays = greater intellectual growth.

In Math the concept is the same. You learn a set of rules from a given axiom, you then form an understanding of the rules by following their natural consequences. This process is fostered via 1on1 Socratic style learning at Oxbridge. You then solidify this understanding by exploring specific instances of the rules (practise sheets/problems). Understandably, someone unaware of the process behind the learning will see: more practise sheets/problems = greater intellectual growth.

So, what gives Oxbidge the main factor in developing their students intellectually, than at any other university, is that they put a greater emphasis on 1on1 Socratic style teaching. As a result, students grasp concepts quicker, allowing them to cover more in the same 3-year span than students at other universities. Put simply, when compared to other universities: It's the way you're educated that develops you intellectually; It's the way you're educated that allows you to process a higher workload.

From my perspective, you're not seeing the greater process. I would google 'learning theory', 'socratic learning' and general psychology to fully understand what learning is and what it means to develop intellectually. It would be clearer then to see how Oxbridge fosters this.

Sorry, went to the gym.

The sheer act of doing something inevitably makes you better at it, that's why we practice. I'm not saying it is purely the workload, but it plays a significant part.

I guess I should ask here if you're actually at Oxbridge, and if so, for what subject?
Because, in my experience, most people mainly develop from the work, and interaction with their peers, rather than with supervisors. I'd guess at an average of 2 hours a week supervisions, compared to 20+ working alone/with others, then lectures. Whilst the supervisions might be more valuable per unit time, they are not the be-all and end-all that you seem to be claiming.

I'd disagree on your view of how the learning occurs in maths, imo it's something very difficult to 'teach', and it mainly is just time spent on it that gives main breakthroughs, with a little help from supervisors.

Yes, but as stated, you don't seem to be seeing the greater picture. There are also types of practise and general rules for practising regardless of subject (see the theories of learning).



You've included a highly unpredictable variable: the student. This discussion is about "how do Oxbridge develop you intellectually once onto the degree?". Some students get nothing from peer discussion, but more from supervision. Some students like learning via textbooks, some via lectures.

The system in place at Oxbridge (which is described in my posts) refers to the 'how' part which accounts for any type of student. Your focus in this post is in describing a specific type of student, which doesn't describe the 'how do Oxbridge' part.

Your above answer, and generally all your answers in this thread, answer this question: "how do students develop intellectually at university". What you've said can be said of any student at any other university.

You also seem to be missing the point I'm trying to make.

I'm well aware of the system in place at Oxbridge, and in no way is your description any less focussed than mine. In fact, I would go so far as to say mine applies to almost everybody(I know people who do little work, they don't get much out of supervisions, those who do lots of work get more). In the end, it is about the work you put in.

And yes, I've answered the question 'how do students develop intellectually at university', because that's what Oxbridge is. The contact time, as I've said, is not very much, and far more of your time is spent working on your own. It might be better work due to supervisions, or due to the sheer amount of it, but all in all, the majority of your learning will take place outside of supervisions.

To make sure I grasp the point you're trying to make, I'll try and sum up my understanding of your point as follows:

In reality, the way Oxbridge develop you intellectually is by increasing the amount of work you have to do. Also, there is little contact time with supervisors and most learning occurs outside of supervisions.

Would that be correct?