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

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LexiswasmyNexis)
    Sheffield. Your turn.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    You know where I graduated from ! Troller.

    Commiserations on Sheffield by the way
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zenomorph)
    You know where I graduated from ! Troller.

    Commiserations on Sheffield by the way
    Learn to read please. I asked you what you have been doing since your graduation. You can continue to evade straightforward queries, but I will assume you are either a complete loser at 30 something or a silly kid playing the big man...

    I welcome your commiserations. I have a good degree and it netted me a good career. I'm not arsed what you think.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Eboracum)
    But the individual candidate may be just as competitive.
    This is factually incorrect. I know people who work for those organisations or in those professions who are none of the above.
    NO not if he wants to get into IB he isn't.
    (Original post by Eboracum)

    Here is a link to The University of Sussex's North American Study Abroad partners. In which you will find Penn (and other really good universities). So that's one 'fact' you failed to mention.

    http://www.sussex.ac.uk/study/sabroa...s/northamerica


    We've got Penn, Columbia, and Berkeley. And Sydney, Singapore and others. Oh, and SciencesPo. World class universities sending their students to our uni, because, we're world class as well. Not so lousy now punk?
    So what they can link all they want won't make them world class that's for sure.

    (Original post by Eboracum)
    If you've got a 2:1 from LSE I'd expect you to be pretty smart. Yet your comments could be attributed to a trained monkey. I would suggest that you haven't studied at LSE, or that you have and you have below 2:1 honours, or more likely you applied to Oxford in 2012, didn't get in and are now at Sussex (no shame in that son).
    Well that doesn't say much for an RG2 graduate since a trained monkey is better them !

    You can suggest and believe what you want I couldn't care less but I sense more than a tinge of jealousy that I went to LSE and you didn't but that's tough I guess.

    You made the wrong choice and now you feel bitter about it evidenced by the weak and rather pathetic tirade you launched since you discovered you were in the RG2.

    You shouldn't have felt such a big chip on the shoulder just because you are from the North - you should have just gone for it and put LSE as your 1st choice but you didn't have the guts. No one can change that now

    Applied to Oxford in 2012 ? No I did not, you'll have to offer some proof if you keep insisting that I did when I didn't.


    (Original post by Eboracum)
    Seeing as you love league tables, Manchester is 49th in the World. So no one is ashamed to go there by any means.
    But outside the top 30 in all UK tables - pretty bad considering how it views itself.

    (Original post by Eboracum)
    Again what does and doesn't make a league table perfect? I've argued previously against them. But who decides, you? Sat in your uni room at Sussex? What gives you the legitimacy to decide and to rank these universities? But seeing as we are picking arbitrary rankings out of the sky I'd argue Leeds is just as good as St Andrews and Exeter. I'd argue Manchester is better than them both, although in reality they are all roughly the same.
    It's not me ranking them you fantasist. Newspaper rankings have been with us for 20 years so they are not picks ' out of the sky '. Only a fool would not know that.

    So no, Manc and Leeds are behind St Andies and Exeter and way behind LSE of course.

    You talk big but where do you go ? ashamed of it ?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LexiswasmyNexis)
    Learn to read please. I asked you what you have been doing since your graduation. You can continue to evade straightforward queries, but I will assume you are either a complete loser at 30 something or a silly kid playing the big man...

    I welcome your commiserations. I have a good degree and it netted me a good career. I'm not arsed what you think.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Good career ? Are you with the Sheffield train museum doing night shifts ?? LOL
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zenomorph)
    Good career ? Are you with the Sheffield train museum doing night shifts ?? LOL
    For Goodness sake. We discussed what I am doing now EARLIER IN THIS THREAD.

    You claim to have graduated from LSE in 2000 where you got a 2:1, yes? And now you are at Sussex.

    What about the years in between? Were you employed?

    To be honest, based on your behaviour on this thread, I doubt the story you have put across here. Surely no LSE grad could be so narrow minded and obtuse.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LexiswasmyNexis)
    For Goodness sake. We discussed what I am doing now EARLIER IN THIS THREAD.

    You claim to have graduated from LSE in 2000 where you got a 2:1, yes? And now you are at Sussex.

    What about the years in between? Were you employed?

    To be honest, based on your behaviour on this thread, I doubt the story you have put across here. Surely no LSE grad could be so narrow minded and obtuse.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I don't recall any such discussion and why should anyone reply when all you will do is make a complaint because the answer may not be to your liking.

    If you want a discussion then you have to think about the consequences of your actions, otherwise you're going to have a very hard time engaging in robust adult debates as you might end with no one to talk to.

    And yes, perhaps you will say " that wasn't me ". But if it isn't you then it can only be 1 other person and since you both take the same attitude I hold you jointly responsible.

    So I am not willing to partake in such conversations anymore.

    Bye.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zenomorph)
    I don't recall any such discussion and why should anyone reply when all you will do is make a complaint because the answer may not be to your liking.

    If you want a discussion then you have to think about the consequences of your actions, otherwise you're going to have a very hard time engaging in robust adult debates as you might end with no one to talk to.

    And yes, perhaps you will say " that wasn't me ". But if it isn't you then it can only be 1 other person and since you both take the same attitude I hold you jointly responsible.

    So I am not willing to partake in such conversations anymore.

    Bye.
    What a joker. Go back and read it if you don't recall. I'm happy to accept points of view; sadly you only offer trash talk. It's hilarious that you refuse to engage with me because of the actions of another. Is that not terribly childish?

    The fact is I have asked you about three direct questions over the past few days and you have evaded them all. I have answered you when you have done the same to me.

    I put it to you that you cannot answer the questions or present a response to specific criticisms because you are incapable. Throughout this thread you have shown an inability to understand posts or an unwillingness to read them properly. All you have managed is pathetic trash talk about various unis and the belligerent labelling of others as 'trolls'.

    I hope you are trolling and that you don't really see the world as it seems you do based on your posts. If you really do look down on people like it appears then I suggest the world will come to seriously bite you in the ass.

    If you were so cocky about the merits of your education over others', you would give an indication as to what you have been up to in the years since your graduation. I will not provide any further guesses as to which parts of your claimed history are lies.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zenomorph)
    NO not if he wants to get into IB he isn't.

    So what they can link all they want won't make them world class that's for sure.

    Well that doesn't say much for an RG2 graduate since a trained monkey is better them !

    You can suggest and believe what you want I couldn't care less but I sense more than a tinge of jealousy that I went to LSE and you didn't but that's tough I guess.

    You made the wrong choice and now you feel bitter about it evidenced by the weak and rather pathetic tirade you launched since you discovered you were in the RG2.

    You shouldn't have felt such a big chip on the shoulder just because you are from the North - you should have just gone for it and put LSE as your 1st choice but you didn't have the guts. No one can change that now

    Applied to Oxford in 2012 ? No I did not, you'll have to offer some proof if you keep insisting that I did when I didn't.

    But outside the top 30 in all UK tables - pretty bad considering how it views itself.

    It's not me ranking them you fantasist. Newspaper rankings have been with us for 20 years so they are not picks ' out of the sky '. Only a fool would not know that.

    So no, Manc and Leeds are behind St Andies and Exeter and way behind LSE of course.

    You talk big but where do you go ? ashamed of it ?
    I went to a finance conference at University last term with people in Investment Banking from Barclays, RBS and Merrill Lynch. And boutiques. And a guy who used to work on Wall Street. All went to my university. 'IB' is open to the best candidates.

    I proved your moronic arbitrary statement about Sussex's links wrong. And now you try to come back with a silly statement.

    The reality is. The numbers don't add up. No one who makes moronic statements like some of the things you've been writing has a degree from LSE. You've failed to tell us what you have been doing since 2000, you've not given us details about your short course, and you are a member of the Oxford applicants 2012 page. Anyone can come on here and lie. I could say I've got a PHD from Harvard and LewisismyNexis could say he has a First from Yale. But then you are only lying to yourself.

    Your rankings talk is Nonsense. In the 2013 Times World Rankings, Manchester is 49th, St Andrews is 108th and Exeter is 153rd. As I've said, I don't believe league tables are a sound exact judgement but you seem to rate their usefulness so highly, so with these rankings, how is it possible that Exeter and St Andrews are better than Manchester?

    Source: http://www.timeshighereducation.co.u...der/rank%7Casc

    I've won the argument 10 times over. I'd suggest you take your insults and re-evaluate your opinions. Work really really hard, get a First at Sussex and then you'll have a decent chance getting into your beloved LSE. But I won't respond, I've destroyed you analytically already. I wish you best of luck with your future endeavours.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Eboracum)
    But the debate should be about individuals shouldn't it Drederick?. Otherwise why have interviews? Just employ the people from Oxford and give no one else a shot?
    I was trying to answer the question in the thread title, which clearly has nothing to do with individuals.

    In fact, what you've said here is exactly the opposite of what I'm talking about. If you can do well at a hard paper, than you can do well at an easier paper so that gives employers more information than if you've (only done well at the easier paper).

    So the only advantage of an Oxbridge graduate when getting a job is that employers know that they can attain a high standard. This doesn't preclude non Oxbridge graduates from being able to demonstrate as high, or higher a standard, however.

    (Original post by Eboracum)
    You're living in cuckoo land if you believe your Oxford degree will get you a job alone.
    I don't believe this, and when I applied for my job as a pensions actuary, and later a Probability PhD, I did not believe my Cambridge degree would be sufficient to get me by. Thanks for your advice though.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Eboracum)
    I went to a finance conference at University last term with people in Investment Banking from Barclays, RBS and Merrill Lynch. And boutiques. And a guy who used to work on Wall Street. All went to my university. 'IB' is open to the best candidates.

    I proved your moronic arbitrary statement about Sussex's links wrong. And now you try to come back with a silly statement.

    The reality is. The numbers don't add up. No one who makes moronic statements like some of the things you've been writing has a degree from LSE. You've failed to tell us what you have been doing since 2000, you've not given us details about your short course, and you are a member of the Oxford applicants 2012 page. Anyone can come on here and lie. I could say I've got a PHD from Harvard and LewisismyNexis could say he has a First from Yale. But then you are only lying to yourself.

    Your rankings talk is Nonsense. In the 2013 Times World Rankings, Manchester is 49th, St Andrews is 108th and Exeter is 153rd. As I've said, I don't believe league tables are a sound exact judgement but you seem to rate their usefulness so highly, so with these rankings, how is it possible that Exeter and St Andrews are better than Manchester?

    Source: http://www.timeshighereducation.co.u...der/rank%7Casc

    I've won the argument 10 times over. I'd suggest you take your insults and re-evaluate your opinions. Work really really hard, get a First at Sussex and then you'll have a decent chance getting into your beloved LSE. But I won't respond, I've destroyed you analytically already. I wish you best of luck with your future endeavours.
    What's the point of this? You're not the only one guilty of this, but I thought the thread was supposed to be about whether an Oxbridge 2:1 was better than a first from other universities.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Eboracum)
    But the individual candidate may be just as competitive.
    Well yes. However, the words 'University of Leeds' may result in his CV not even getting put in front of the hiring squad.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    It's amazing the Oxbridge snobbery we hear on these forums.

    Yes maybe Oxbridge is amazing compared to other universities, maybe getting 1% in an Oxbridge exam is better than 100% in all others but there's been no mention of the standards of non-Oxbridge universities.

    It has somewhat automatically assumed that Oxbridge are the only ones offering "hard" exams and the other unis have identical crappy standards.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Eboracum)
    I went to a finance conference at University last term with people in Investment Banking from Barclays, RBS and Merrill Lynch. And boutiques. And a guy who used to work on Wall Street. All went to my university. 'IB' is open to the best candidates.

    I proved your moronic arbitrary statement about Sussex's links wrong. And now you try to come back with a silly statement.

    The reality is. The numbers don't add up. No one who makes moronic statements like some of the things you've been writing has a degree from LSE. You've failed to tell us what you have been doing since 2000, you've not given us details about your short course, and you are a member of the Oxford applicants 2012 page. Anyone can come on here and lie. I could say I've got a PHD from Harvard and LewisismyNexis could say he has a First from Yale. But then you are only lying to yourself.

    Your rankings talk is Nonsense. In the 2013 Times World Rankings, Manchester is 49th, St Andrews is 108th and Exeter is 153rd. As I've said, I don't believe league tables are a sound exact judgement but you seem to rate their usefulness so highly, so with these rankings, how is it possible that Exeter and St Andrews are better than Manchester?

    Source: http://www.timeshighereducation.co.u...der/rank%7Casc

    I've won the argument 10 times over. I'd suggest you take your insults and re-evaluate your opinions. Work really really hard, get a First at Sussex and then you'll have a decent chance getting into your beloved LSE. But I won't respond, I've destroyed you analytically already. I wish you best of luck with your future endeavours.
    Why should anyone reply when all you will do is make a complaint because the answer is not to your liking.

    So if you desperately want to believe that I didn't go to LSE and that I applied to Oxford in 2012 despite no record of this on TSR whatsoever and that somehow you know better than I what kind of course I take at Sussex - so be it but not 1 jot of it is true I can assure you.

    In the same way I can ' insist ' that you are not at an RG2 but at the university of Huddersfield. Fantasy can only go so far before it becomes ludicrous.

    In the end , If you want a discussion then you have to think about the consequences of your actions, otherwise you're going to have a very hard time engaging in robust adult debates as you might end up with no one to talk to.

    So I am not willing to partake in such conversations anymore but since you wished me luck then I wish you you more luck than me and if you work hard at UoH , you might make it to York.

    Good Bye.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    If Oxbridge really are that great, why has nothing been done to copy it?

    Would it not be good to have not just 2 but many more "world class" universities? After all we know the elements that make Oxbridge great.

    Comparisons are often made with the US for most things and re universities, other than Harvard and Yale, there's Princeton, Stanford and MIT to name just a few other "top" ones.

    I've heard arguments such as you can't replicate history but Oxbridge have only been around some 700 years, so are we saying a red brick in 700 years time will have the same aura of invincibility?

    Or is it because it is nice just to keep Oxbridge special rather than widen the field?
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    I'm wearing odd socks
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I know I could just unsubscribe from this thread, but the discussion is getting ridiculous now. There's far more to life than whether you go to Oxford or Cambridge, whether you learn more, have harder exams, whether you attend a Russell Group university and think your degree is just as challenging - seriously, this thread was done to death by page 7, we're now on page 22. The discussion on this thread has gone around so many circles of people arguing the same point over and over I'm starting to lose faith in humanity (and the people who use TSR are supposed to be of the intelligent kind). Intelligent people go to Oxford, intelligent people go elsewhere, there are plenty of people who could survive the intensity of a degree at Oxford/Cambridge, but didn't get the chance for whatever reason. Most of this thread has turned into people defending their own institutions and taking pretty much everything as an insult, when the thread should have been a discussion based on the educational differences. Going to a 'worse' University says nothing about an individual, even if the argument is extended to say someone is receiving a 'worse' education than someone attending Oxford/Cambridge - it STILL says nothing about the individual.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Oh yes this is to put paid to this Oxford BS that some people are fibbing about which should be a banning offense and certainly I am on no other Oxford thread as far as I am aware:

    http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/wiki...age_2012_Entry

    can you find a Zenomorph there ? I don't think so ....
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I think people are missing the point smewhat, in that the advantage of Oxbridge doesn't solely come in the name and people valuing the degree more highly. If presented with two identical people, one with an Aston 1st and the other an Oxford 2:1, then I don't think the difference would be considered massive.

    However, Oxbridge offers a lot of opportunities to get extra things on your CV that are of benefit - when you look at the number of JCRs and societies, and the amount of high level sport going on, then a pretty big proportion of people from Oxbridge leave with something other than their degree result to show for it, which I think is less the case elsewhere. Also, there are a lot of opportunities available in terms of holiday work, and a very competitive culture that means people have something to show for their summers (not to mention programmes run by Oxford, and things like English teaching work that often recruits exclusively from Oxbridge) - probably the majority of people I know at Oxford are doing a useful internship or research project this summer, whereas none of my friends at other places are doing anything other than low-skilled work (obviously I'm not saying nobody other than people at Oxbridge do internships, but it seems less common taking a rough sample of my friends at redbricks).

    Also, I don't think you can underestimate the value of networking. There are a lot of career-focussed events in Oxford where you can get a foot in the door, not to mention telethons, where people ring up alumni from their college for fundraising, but which often leads to internships and job offers (e.g. my friend in second year already has a guaranteed job for when he graduates off the back of a conversation he had doing a telethon). Not all jobs have a clear-cut graduate programme, and for getting into a lot of things who you know still counts, which is where Oxbridge is of benefit.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Eboracum)
    Indeed. This is the crux. You get the job for who you are, not what university you went to.

    I'm at The University of York doing Politics. I know people with A*AA who got 2:2's (end of First Year). So it's far from easy. I accept the teaching standard is different, but it's certainly not much harder and I wouldn't agree it makes you 'so much more employable'
    I would argue it's a combination of both. For example:

    If two candidates had similar experience and personalities, one went to Oxbridge and one to UEA, the Oxbridge would get the job, simply because their degrees are known to be much more rigorous and harder to get onto.

    However if the UEA candidate had far greater employment experience and was better able to work in a team, he might stand a better chance than the Oxbridge candidate.

    Many things need to be assessed in particular situations to determine who is right for a graduate job, but the rigour and reputation of Oxbridge does significantly increase any candidate's chances over candidates from pretty much all other universities, assuming all other factors are equal.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Im Aston on economics most the graduates on my course worked for top 4, Goldman sachs we had 4 people go to.I think i probably had the worst job out of the lot lol. Oh well.
 
 
 
Poll
Which Fantasy Franchise is the best?
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.