Oxford vs. Durham

University of Oxford

Oxford

Scroll to see replies

Fluffy

It's not too bad doing UG and maters at the same place, but to go on and do PhD is not looked on too favourably - it looks like you've either been handed a PhD on a plate or looks like you were too scared to make the transition. It's about experiencing different things etc.

All I know is that I've seen post-doc applications binned because of it...

If I had stayed on at Cambridge it wouldn't have been because I was being handed a place or too scared *offended* :mad:

University of Oxford

Oxford

Reply 21

Fluffy

jonnyofthedead

I have to say, that bears no resemblance to my experience - off the top of my head, I can name three people whose CVs read 'BA MSci Ph.D. (Cantab.)'; they're currently en route to postdocs at, respectively, MIT, UPenn, and (I think) Trinity College, Dublin. For that matter, I know someone who did both his undergrad and Ph.D. at Oxford, and is now a lecturer at Cambridge: clearly, having stayed in one place for seven years isn't necessarily going to destroy one's chances in academia. Hell, take a look at these guys: http://www.its.caltech.edu/~dmacgrp/people.htm
Of ten postdocs, four did all their training in one place. Since Caltech has a superb reputation and MacMillan is pretty much the reigning New Hotness in his discipline, it's not likely that he's taking bottom-of-the-barrel applicants.

That said, I can imagine that supervisors would be wary of potential one-trick ponies, and it certainly might be detrimental if an applicant had worked on only one project during the entirety of their training. If, however, someone had worked in one lab for their master's and another for their Ph.D., and perhaps had one or two different summer studentships as an undergrad, I don't see that it would make any particular difference where those labs happened to be.

Oxford and Cambridge are probably the only places where you could get away with it, without being known personally to the person reviewing your application. Nowhere else in the UK can really compete with their reputations...

Reply 22

musicbloke

jonnyofthedead

I can name three people whose CVs read 'BA MSci Ph.D. (Cantab.)';

Shouldn't that be 'MA MSci Ph.D. (Cantab.)'?

Reply 23

Fluffy

musicbloke

Shouldn't that be 'MA MSci Ph.D. (Cantab.)'?

Only if they cough up the admin fee :wink:

Reply 24

Fluffy

Personally I would look else where - the whole one trick pony issue. Post doctoral funding in the UK is ****ed at the moment, and you do not want anything on your CV that might paint a negative.

However, if your being offered a generously funded PhD in an area you really are genuinely passionate about (and not just because the offer is there), you need to balance this against all the variables.

Reply 25

etherised

tommyboy

While I certainly wouldn't chose Oxford just for the name, it will probably give you new perspectives on your work just due to the number of people there. I personally feel that changing university (between BA and MPhil admittedly) has benefited me greatly and made me encounter many new approaches to my field which I wouldn't necessarily have considered before.

Yes, I absolutely agree. I cannot fault Cambridge, where I did my undergrad, for the standard of teaching, the resources, the academic community, the college system - everything is wonderful. On the other hand, I find some aspects of being at King's frustrating (seminars of 12 when I'm used to supervisions of two, a general feeling of disparateness about the graduate community). But, for all that, I would make the same choice again (to move from Cam to KCL), because I've found it hugely beneficial to be in a place which has a different attitude to the subject, a different angle on theory. Moving has made me reconsider how I approach the subject.