Join TSR now to have your say on this topicSign up now

What's better - a 2.1 from Oxbridge or a first from Aston? Watch

    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by caveman123)
    Despite your promoting Oxford for maths, it really isn't level with Cambridge I'm afraid, close but not quite equal.
    Given your next post, what edge do you think Cambridge has?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Well if you have to pass the initial online screening process of graduate schemes, only the classification matters. A 2.1 is often the minimum for grad programmes, yet if you had a 2.2 from Oxbridge you wouldn't pass the screening (unless you lied and later explained why you lied in the interview) but someone with a 2.1 from Aston could pass the initial screening.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    A 2.1 from Oxbridge OBVIOUSLY. Most people have never even heard of Aston before (myself included). What is the point in getting a 1st if it's from a crappy place??
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    2:1 id say, whilst a first is arguably better the fact its coming from oxbridge is always going to count for more. There was a nice thread on here last year i believe where someone posted a link to a job at a hedge fund where it stated the degree grades theyd accept with oxbridge requiring but a 2:1 and the like of LSE, UCL, Imperial etc. etc. a 1st so think where Aston will come on this.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cl_steele)
    2:1 id say, whilst a first is arguably better the fact its coming from oxbridge is always going to count for more. There was a nice thread on here last year i believe where someone posted a link to a job at a hedge fund where it stated the degree grades theyd accept with oxbridge requiring but a 2:1 and the like of LSE, UCL, Imperial etc. etc. a 1st so think where Aston will come on this.
    On that scale, presumably if you flunk Oxford or Cambridge after the first few months for hitting a lecturer or throwing up on the Provost's car, you still come out better than a First from Aston. :rolleyes:

    Seriously, there must be something slightly bonkers going on at that hedge fund for them to push places like LSE, UCL and Imperial down in their esteem to that extent - I find that a bit ridiculous. It sounds like the personal prejudice of some hedge fund owner more than anything based on sound research or knowledge.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    On that scale, presumably if you flunk Oxford or Cambridge after the first few months for hitting a lecturer or throwing up on the Provost's car, you still come out better than a First from Aston. :rolleyes:

    Seriously, there must be something slightly bonkers going on at that hedge fund for them to push places like LSE, UCL and Imperial down in their esteem to that extent - I find that a bit ridiculous. It sounds like the personal prejudice of some hedge fund owner more than anything based on sound research or knowledge.
    Twisting of ones words isnt very nice -_-

    Well the restof their requirements were even more amusing they asked for everything bar a kidney, it was somewhat mind boggling..
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    2:1 from oxbridge .

    Thats like asking whats better , coming 2nd in the Champions Leauge or winning Leauge 2 LOL .
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    A 2:1 from OxBridge will be in most cases accompanied by AAA at A Level and 6A*s+ at GCSE. This demonstrates continued academic excellence and being able to work in a difficult and challenging environment. Whilst I'm not familiar with Aston's entry requirements I'd presume they're much lower and thus do not demonstrate continued excellence. On the other hand, it does likely demonstrate improvement from A Level which could go in a candidates favour, but of course they're more likely to take an OxBridge 2:1.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    On that scale, presumably if you flunk Oxford or Cambridge after the first few months for hitting a lecturer or throwing up on the Provost's car, you still come out better than a First from Aston. :rolleyes:

    Seriously, there must be something slightly bonkers going on at that hedge fund for them to push places like LSE, UCL and Imperial down in their esteem to that extent - I find that a bit ridiculous. It sounds like the personal prejudice of some hedge fund owner more than anything based on sound research or knowledge.
    There are lots of Oxbridge die-hards littered around the workplace.

    There used to be a nutter on TSR called Bubblyjubbly who insisted someone who made it into Oxbridge, ie got the offer and got in (regardless whether they met the offer) but subsequently failed to get a degree, is still better than graduates from other universities.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ajh1990)
    A 2:1 from OxBridge will be in most cases accompanied by AAA at A Level and 6A*s+ at GCSE. This demonstrates continued academic excellence and being able to work in a difficult and challenging environment. Whilst I'm not familiar with Aston's entry requirements I'd presume they're much lower and thus do not demonstrate continued excellence. On the other hand, it does likely demonstrate improvement from A Level which could go in a candidates favour, but of course they're more likely to take an OxBridge 2:1.
    Most of the politicians are public school educated, supplemented by Oxbridge degrees but how many of them can you say are actually doing a good job running the country?

    So are they naturally bright or have they been spoon fed?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dbkey)
    There used to be a nutter on TSR called Bubblyjubbly who insisted someone who made it into Oxbridge, ie got the offer and got in (regardless whether they met the offer) but subsequently failed to get a degree, is still better than graduates from other universities.
    :eek:


    Only on TSR :facepalm:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RichE)
    Given your next post, what edge do you think Cambridge has?
    The quality of the students is, in my view the most mathematically able in the UK. Certainly they have the highest grades, though I'm not sure how it compares to the best in other countries.

    Funding plays a large part too, in that Cambridge has a large if not the largest chunk of funding from the government which puts them at an (unfair) advantage.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by speakerfone)
    Most of the politicians are public school educated, supplemented by Oxbridge degrees but how many of them can you say are actually doing a good job running the country?

    So are they naturally bright or have they been spoon fed?
    I see some cowards on TSR who are happy to neg but too afraid to challenge my view.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by caveman123)
    The quality of the students is, in my view the most mathematically able in the UK. Certainly they have the highest grades, though I'm not sure how it compares to the best in other countries.

    Funding plays a large part too, in that Cambridge has a large if not the largest chunk of funding from the government which puts them at an (unfair) advantage.
    When have you had the chance to compare the mathematics students of Oxford and Cambridge?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Noble.)
    When have you had the chance to compare the mathematics students of Oxford and Cambridge?
    As a student and work colleague over the years.

    The Cambridge lot had that little bit extra, possibly they seemed more keen.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by speakerfone)
    I see some cowards on TSR who are happy to neg but too afraid to challenge my view.
    Well what is your view? Shall we break it down:
    a) Politicians are educated at Oxbridge.
    b) Politicians are running the country badly.
    c) Therefore people educated at Oxford are spoonfed / aren’t bright?
    There are so many problems with that a+b=c logic that I barely know where to begin.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by speakerfone)
    I see some cowards on TSR who are happy to neg but too afraid to challenge my view.
    probably because they have better things to do than challenge your ludicrous points... like counting sheep, picking their noses etc. etc. you get the picture right?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Academically, the answer is Oxbridge, by a mile. I found that my first year papers for Cambridge maths were more difficult than masters level papers at KCL, for example.

    Unfortunately, though, many employers use automated application systems and processes that don't distinguish between universities. The problem comes when they ask for a 2:1 and above in a subject, and you have a 2:2 from Oxbridge. You're immediately excluded, when people with less ability are immediately included.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drederick Tatum)
    Academically, the answer is Oxbridge, by a mile. I found that my first year papers for Cambridge maths were more difficult than masters level papers at KCL, for example.

    Unfortunately, though, many employers use automated application systems and processes that don't distinguish between universities. The problem comes when they ask for a 2:1 and above in a subject, and you have a 2:2 from Oxbridge. You're immediately excluded, when people with less ability are immediately included.
    The latter is an important point, many of the big consultancies, banks, organisations, etc, seem to use these automated HR point scoring systems. Presumably they have algorithmically codified the relative weightings they give to different degree types and scores from the different educational institutions. One wonders if a 2:2 from anywhere is really worth squat though in the current jobs market.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    The latter is an important point, many of the big consultancies, banks, organisations, etc, seem to use these automated HR point scoring systems. Presumably they have algorithmically codified the relative weightings they give to different degree types and scores from the different educational institutions. One wonders if a 2:2 from anywhere is really worth squat though in the current jobs market.
    Which is a major downside of going to Oxbridge, the possibility of ending up with a 2:2 and not finding a job, when you could've got a 2:1 from somewhere else and been automatically much more employable - it's a very scary thought!
 
 
 
Poll
If you won £30,000, which of these would you spend it on?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

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.