The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

Reply 20
catinmoonlight
Does it actually matter which university beats the other?Both are great in my opinion


Of course it matters. How are we going to sleep at night until it's resolved??
notyourpunk
See http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/t139335.html

To be honest looking at the criteria that the Times use I can't see how its an effective measure for Oxbridge when so much of the spending is done on a collegiate basis. The student/staff ratio is also a bit irrelevant when you get supervisions/tutorials on pretty much an individual basis. Iff you therefore take out the three irrelevant categories (library&facilities spending and staff ratio) Cambridge comes out on top!


Lol, so pick and choose which bits make Cambridge look better and - :eek: - they win! Thats such a scientific way of doing things. For my next essay I'll chop up Dickens and stick him back together so that at the end of Oliver, for example, Oliver dies, in order to back up a point I've made. Glad to see Tabland continues churning out such objective and rational minds (another such admirable example being Nick Griffin :wink: )
ProzacNation
Lol, so pick and choose which bits make Cambridge look better and - :eek: - they win! Thats such a scientific way of doing things. For my next essay I'll chop up Dickens and stick him back together so that at the end of Oliver, for example, Oliver dies, in order to back up a point I've made. Glad to see Tabland continues churning out such objective and rational minds (another such admirable example being Nick Griffin :wink: )


Oxford win on funding and are behind Cambridge on all else - to me that says that Cambridge produces better results at lower costs - I think that is better personally.
Reply 23
ProzacNation
Lol, so pick and choose which bits make Cambridge look better and - :eek: - they win! Thats such a scientific way of doing things. For my next essay I'll chop up Dickens and stick him back together so that at the end of Oliver, for example, Oliver dies, in order to back up a point I've made. Glad to see Tabland continues churning out such objective and rational minds (another such admirable example being Nick Griffin :wink: )


Have you even looked at the table?
sbailey
Of course it matters. How are we going to sleep at night until it's resolved??

:rolleyes:
Reply 25
ProzacNation
Nick Griffin :wink:



You know what they say... keep your friends close and enemies closer! I'm sure if we took time out we could gather together a list of ****** oxonians, but life is too short.

On a more serious note, i was always under the impression that Oxford was best for arts and Cambridge for sciences. Don't ask me why.

I picked Cambridge because the prospectus was pretty, accomodation seemed to be better, and my family had always cheered them in the boat race... that and I always thought of it as having a more liberal attitude to state school pupils.
Reply 26
ProzacNation
Nick Griffin :wink:

JHutcher
You know what they say... keep your friends close and enemies closer! I'm sure if we took time out we could gather together a list of ****** oxonians, but life is too short.


Nick Griffin only got a 3rd class degree anyway. Hardly an average student.
Reply 27
sbailey
Nick Griffin only got a 3rd class degree anyway. Hardly an average student.


I'd be happy with a third... it'd mean i made it to graduation lol
Reply 28
ProzacNation
Lol, so pick and choose which bits make Cambridge look better and - :eek: - they win! Thats such a scientific way of doing things. For my next essay I'll chop up Dickens and stick him back together so that at the end of Oliver, for example, Oliver dies, in order to back up a point I've made. Glad to see Tabland continues churning out such objective and rational minds (another such admirable example being Nick Griffin :wink: )


Perhaps I should explain: actually I was stating that some of the criteria were irrelevant and that if you look at relevant criteria. At the end of the day what really matters is
a) getting a good degree (which Cambridge 'win' on)
b) getting a good job (which Cambridge 'win' on)
c) having a great time (which the tables don't measure)

If Bolton, with entry standards of 147.8 started packing House of Commons, major corporations, NGOs etc etc with their graduates with firsts who had a fantastic time and Oxford or Cambridge graduates ended up stacking shelves for a living then it doesn't matter if Bolton spends 50p on the library each year and lets students in if they can recite the alphabet

Also library and facilities spending can vary hugely between colleges (far more than entry standards or prospects) I was saying that the generalisations in the table were meaningless

Also Cambridge hasnt churned me into anything as I'm not there yet :rolleyes:
Reply 29
notyourpunk
Perhaps I should explain: actually I was stating that some of the criteria were irrelevant and that if you look at relevant criteria. At the end of the day what really matters is
a) getting a good degree (which Cambridge 'win' on)
b) getting a good job (which Cambridge 'win' on)
c) having a great time (which the tables don't measure)

If Bolton, with entry standards of 147.8 started packing House of Commons, major corporations, NGOs etc etc and Oxford or Cambridge graduates ended up stacking shelves for a living then it doesn't matter if Bolton spends 50p on the library each year and lets students in if they can recite the alphabet

Also library and facilities spending can vary hugely between colleges (far more than entry standards or prospects) I was saying that the generalisations in the table were meaningless

Also Cambridge hasnt churned me into anything as I'm not there yet :rolleyes:


Bien dicho, well said. Anyway, looking at the breakdowns in terms of teaching quality etc (the things that REALLY matter) in these tables, it would seem that Oxford is heinously overrated. For example, Liverpool (pretty crap overall) is better than it in french, and durham (dare i speak its loathsome name) is better in history, both of which are staples of the 'traditional' arts subjects in which Oxford has been seen as better than Cambridge. In English and history and foreign languages, Cambridge wipes the floor with Oxford, contrary to common belief. Hmm.
Reply 30
neg rep for that post? Why? I'm going to get a red gem sooner rather than later :frown:
Reply 31
notyourpunk
neg rep for that post? Why? I'm going to get a red gem sooner rather than later :frown:


I don't like the rep system. It seems that most positive rep is earned by trading, whilst negative rep is used by immature people who can't handle someone disagreeing with them.
Reply 32
notyourpunk
neg rep for that post? Why? I'm going to get a red gem sooner rather than later :frown:


Well ive given you some rep in order to try and mitigate the damage...thats Jesuan loyalty for you :wink: hehe.
Reply 33
Oh leave ProzacNation alone, her arguments as to why oxford is distinctly better than cambridge (or her rubbishing of cambridge) make amusing reading. I say keep 'em coming, I've yet to see her make an objective argument. All good fun if you ask me!
catinmoonlight
Does it actually matter which university beats the other?Both are great in my opinion

it didn't matter until someone brought it up and everyone else just joined in
Cambridge is ace because I am going there and I cannot be bothered to apply to Oxford. What an intellectual comment!
Phil23
http://education.guardian.co.uk/universityguide2005/table/0,,-5163901,00.html

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/pdfs/finalunitable2.pdf

Now Oxford are top in both, Cambridge can stop bickering that the 'Times' league tables are rubbish, cos their support for the Guardian must be withering after this result! :biggrin: woo hoo! Muhehahaha! :askpig: :rolleyes:

very very close but generally it is the names at the overall No 1 that people look at:smile:

phil


Yes, but Cambridge has a higher point score in the most important categories, such as: Teaching assessment, Research, Entry Standards, Good Honours and most importantly, look at the lead they have in the Graduate prospects score...Oxford has a lower score than Kings College!!!! (Having said this, I am not suggesting that Oxford students are worthless, just that Cambridge students seem to be significantly more employable!!!)

The Guardian league gives no break down thus it is less credible for analytical purposes.
Reply 37
salsa caribe
it didn't matter until someone brought it up and everyone else just joined in


Hell yeah, it still makes for damn good fun though! (whoops like an inbred texan speeding in an overpowered chevvy).
notyourpunk
Perhaps I should explain: actually I was stating that some of the criteria were irrelevant and that if you look at relevant criteria.


Please excuse my (obviously absurd inclination) to take The Guardian's and The Times' decision over what may or may not count as "relevent criteria" over your opinion of what this may in fact entail. Once YOU start writing for The Times or The Guardian then I will be happy to read what you have to say on the matter. Until then, you can decide that the top universities should be judged on female student bra sizes for all I care, Oxford won, and youre all just being sore losers.
Willa
Oh leave ProzacNation alone, her arguments as to why oxford is distinctly better than cambridge (or her rubbishing of cambridge) make amusing reading. I say keep 'em coming, I've yet to see her make an objective argument. All good fun if you ask me!


Thankyou :biggrin:

Latest

Trending

Trending