Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    foolfarian--"by a cambridge tutor" a cambridge tutor honestly said 'you don't want to come here'. K...Almost verbatim, although he was half-kidding. Tut0ors aren't neccessarily mindless glorifiers of their alma maters, you know.

    I only compare MIT to correct you mistaken impression that it pales in comparison to Harvard, Yale, Princeton etc.

    "I'd just like to point out to that moron, that even in the most DUBIOUS world league tables of universities i have ever seen drawn up, cambridge comes above MIT. "-earlier remark of yours

    "hahaha how can you tell which table is skewed and false. Surely you've heard the quote 'lies, damned lies and statistics' I've only ever seen one 'league table' and i think the whole concept of it is stupid. besides, they put such a high rating on finance that the american unis are catapulted beyond the reach of most other unis in the world."--later remark of yours.

    (undiscoveredself--Aparrently you brits can be quite inconsistent as well.) I only mentioned the tables because YOU brought it up. And i meant to imply that your statistics were skewed, not the tables.

    In fact MIT's reputation for medicine isn't great--but easily exceeds cambridge in the bioengineering fields. It is mainly famous for its engineering, science, economics, political science and related fields. So yes, in terms of medical school, Johns Hopkins and Harvard are better. If i were at Cambridge I wouldn't spend a year at MIT, and if I were at MIt I wouldn't spend a year at Cambridge--only because they are both high-calibre institutions.

    Actually, in the US there are MANY undergraduate research opportunities available, especialy at MIT, something missing at Oxbridge.

    Clearly, your friends were the social misfits if they couldn't get a simple drink.

    As for "what has been going on with MIT": The amount of groundbreaking research there is quite astounding. Its attracting more and more top researchers in various fields. Its professors are winning awards. It's attracting the top students from around the world, and is more selective than Cambridge or Oxford (Seriously, ask anyone on this board from outside of the UK and US about their opinion of MIT). What more could go on?

    This is RIDICULOUS, if you actually believe that Cambridge has a better name than MIT. You obviously have not set a single foot outside of your own backward environment to get a better sense of the world. "Imperial vs. Luton"?--shut up. a moronic comparison.

    I've had to give this speech to close-minded Americans over here as well, in defense of cambridge. I'm glad to see that there are nationalistic, ignorant, idiots on both sides of the pond.

    As for the obnoxious old-world/cultural elitism coming from Joey Johns and undiscoveredself: Are you aware that you guys seem to be the "uncultured", simple-minded, elitist idiots here? I've found that the culture (or supposed absence of it) here is a lot more dyniamic than your quaint, dull, outdated, backward tradition. There is no "culture vacuum" (this coming, no doubt, from someone who has never been here). I've found American culture much more livable, enjoyable and interesting than in england. You seem to be caught in abstract and obnoxious generalizations about "culture" out of desperation. Really, stop making fools out of yoursleves. YOU seem to live in a culture vacuum.

    As for Americans--I rather like them. Brits as well. To each his own, i suppose.

    Joey Johns--American universities offer reputation as well as substance. They are far more intnellectually vibrant and active than Oxbridge--and have far exceeded them in selectivity, research and teaching (on the graduate level). I think Oxbridge has the edge in undergraduate education--although it isn't as dynamic.

    Clearly, America has become the global center of influence in education, research, politics, immigration, economics--for better or worse. The best American universities have and are gaining more prominence internationally than oxbridge. They are funded better, are more selective, have better professors, own better facilities, fund more research, and attract more top students. 15 years down the road, the answer to this meaningless prestige issue, and to the substance issue as well, will become clear.

    Ultimately, all the universities in this discussion are great. They all offer fantastic experiences and educations, and I wish you luck at your respective institutions. (hopefullly, it may help broaden the mind of some).
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by foolfarian)
    A life lesson chuck, always do a bit of research before lifting names straight off of a university website.
    The site actually says 'MIT related academics'. You have to remember people win nobel prizes some years after the actual work.
    Hence of those names a few are old MIT grads who have gone on to do great work (at other universities). Some are people who did great work elsewhere, and have won a prize since coming to MIT (their work was done somewhere else though). And some have won nobel prizes for work done before going to MIT, and won the prize after leaving MIT!!!

    I only recognise Hartwell off that list, and he certainly isnt at MIT, last i heard he was in seattle. And he has 1/3 of the prize with 2 british academics at imperial cancer research getting the other 2/3.
    J
    another lesson for you chuck, I doubt you know everything about medicine, so not knowing most of those names probably doesn't mean anything apart from the fact that you don't know everything about your field. I doubt they are gonna be winning nobel prizes for doing nothing.

    Also, it's the same with all accumulation of nobel prizes by institutions (ie the work may have been done someplace else etc)and if we did only count how many nobel prizes were attained by places for work done at the specific institutions I suspect the proportions would still be similar. I'm sure there are other univs who name nobel prize winning alumni or current professors (who they did their 'nobel' work at other univs) in their 'nobel prize' list, in fact i suspect pretty much all do.
    Therefore how ever you decide to look at it, MIT still have many nobel prizes and I imagine other awards for various things.

    Your "MIT is nothing" statement has been slaughtered lol, deal with it
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    A bit of topic and geeky but I was watching Startrek the next generation and out of all the universities in the world, they chose Cambridge as the place where Data is a world leading professor. So people in America must consider Oxbridge a very prestigious name.
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by BossLady)
    another lesson for you chuck, I doubt you know everything about medicine, so not knowing most of those names probably doesn't mean anything apart from the fact that you don't know everything about your field. I doubt they are gonna be winning nobel prizes for doing nothing.

    Also, it's the same with all accumulation of nobel prizes by institutions (ie the work may have been done someplace else etc)and if we did only count how many nobel prizes were attained by places for work done at the specific institutions I suspect the proportions would still be similar. I'm sure there are other univs who name nobel prize winning alumni or current professors (who they did their 'nobel' work at other univs) in their 'nobel prize' list, in fact i suspect pretty much all do.
    Therefore how ever you decide to look at it, MIT still have many nobel prizes and I imagine other awards for various things.

    Your "MIT is nothing" statement has been slaughtered lol, deal with it
    1) i didn't say they won nobel prizes for doing nothing and can't see where that was inferred.

    2) (more to do with post by adxj220) MIT. It's 3 letters!! that's a rubbish name. Its like UEA (university of East Anglia). how cack a name is that (not saying uni is, but name is).
    And my main point was that in the exchane stakes, it will bump up a MIT students CV more by adding a 'year in cambridge' than it would a cambridge student by adding 'a year at MIT'.


    fact is we could all argue away for weeks to come. These are our opinions, and opinions only. We do seem to disagree on the whole 'standing abroad' of each uni, I'll start a poll to see other peeps opinions
    J
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by foolfarian)
    1) i didn't say they won nobel prizes for doing nothing and can't see where that was inferred.

    2) (more to do with post by adxj220) MIT. It's 3 letters!! that's a rubbish name. Its like UEA (university of East Anglia). how cack a name is that (not saying uni is, but name is).
    And my main point was that in the exchane stakes, it will bump up a MIT students CV more by adding a 'year in cambridge' than it would a cambridge student by adding 'a year at MIT'.


    fact is we could all argue away for weeks to come. These are our opinions, and opinions only. We do seem to disagree on the whole 'standing abroad' of each uni, I'll start a poll to see other peeps opinions
    J
    well thus far in the poll i started on the main page we've had 6 votes for cambridge, 11 for oxford (total 17) 9 for harvard (i put that in to exclude patriotism) and 0 for MIT.
    J
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by foolfarian)
    well thus far in the poll i started on the main page we've had 6 votes for cambridge, 11 for oxford (total 17) 9 for harvard (i put that in to exclude patriotism) and 0 for MIT.
    J
    Hmmm. On east coast america we definately say that cambridge and oxford are way up there ona mystical pedestal. i visited them both last year and they are awesome - especially cambridge (oxford seemed livelier, but cambridge ws nicer).
    I didn't realise MIT was that good. i mean it's good an all, but it's just another mid level university. I wanna go to caltech. (much better place in all respects than mit)
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I agree, Oxford and Cambridge just have this mystical quality about them to us Americans (I'm also on the east coast) - that puts them just one notch above Harvard, Yale, Princeton, etc.

    MIT is absolutely a great school for what it is, but I don't see it surpassing Oxbridge or the Ivy League-ers anytime soon.

    Just my perception anyhow.

    Although I really want to go undergrad to Oxbridge, I would probably go back to the states for a graduate degree, because its there that the difference in funds between the colleges seems to really show. This is a shame and I truly hope that Oxbridge finds a way to get a lot of $ w/o hurting its students - even as an American I truly wish to see Oxbridge keep its prestige above us.

    Brittany
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I think everyone has overlooked an important part of this discussion. You all seem happy to compare whole institutions on whatever criteria you seem to choose, whether it's prestige, academic reputation, league table ranking, sound of the name but this is a really bad way to compare universities. People go to Universities to get degrees and its these you should be comparing. As I'm a lawyer I'll talk about law, Oxford's BCL is looked upon more favourably by the bar, employers etc.. than the Cambridge LLM or the equivalents from Harvard, Yale, Stanford etc. This is reflected by the number of students from American universities/Cambridge moving to Oxford. Law bachelors degrees have a similar but less noticeable pattern. Equally, different degrees for example sciences are better respected at other Univesities and in particular at Caltech/MIT style Unis. This is how you should make comparisions not on a whole Uni level. Universities vary greatly from subject to subject (Brookes history is better ranked than Oxford) and it is near impossible to assess the quality of a "university" without making distinctions.

    btw: Previously mentioned stat about Cambridge's nobel prizewinners, fair point but Christ Church Oxford has more Prime Ministers than the whole of Cambridge. It doesn't help prove anything other than an arts/science bias.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tarrygon83)
    A trend is emerging, whereby scholars flock to American Unis instead of Oxbridge because they feel that American Unis are better now than UK ones.

    Better only because they are better paid.
    I know of a few researchers who worked for a few years in America then came back to Britain because they thought it was a nicer environment.
    Others disagree of course.
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by hitchhiker_13)
    Better only because they are better paid.
    I know of a few researchers who worked for a few years in America then came back to Britain because they thought it was a nicer environment.
    Others disagree of course.
    for some reason that reminds me of one of the funniest thing's i heard in ages.
    Basically in america one of the most popular bottled water is made by coca cola, and is 'purified by reverse osmosis of tap water' ie it is tap water put through a filter.
    The british water companies took exception to this - after all it's saying our water isn't pure (our mains water is the best in the world.)
    So the regulator jumped with joy to find that the amount of a carcinogenic chemical in the coca cola water was above our regulations (but within european regulations) so coke had to recall nearly half a million bottles.
    love it
    J
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by foolfarian)
    for some reason that reminds me of one of the funniest thing's i heard in ages.
    Basically in america one of the most popular bottled water is made by coca cola, and is 'purified by reverse osmosis of tap water' ie it is tap water put through a filter.
    The british water companies took exception to this - after all it's saying our water isn't pure (our mains water is the best in the world.)
    So the regulator jumped with joy to find that the amount of a carcinogenic chemical in the coca cola water was above our regulations (but within european regulations) so coke had to recall nearly half a million bottles.
    love it
    J

    Nice story, but what's it got to do with my post?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by foolfarian)
    well thus far in the poll i started on the main page we've had 6 votes for cambridge, 11 for oxford (total 17) 9 for harvard (i put that in to exclude patriotism) and 0 for MIT.
    J
    I don't see the poll...clearly, in a UK biased forum, oxbridge will get more total votes. It ends up being a fighting match between harvard and MIT with regards to posters' perception of US unis. I would give the vote to harvard as well (except, obviously, for engineering and the sciences). But I'd give it to MIT over Oxbridge.

    And I'm having a hard time believing that these posters who actually live in America don't hold MIT in very high regard. It easily supasses or equals most "ivy-leaguers". It is absolutely not a "mid-level university" (and I live on the east coast too--your generalization is quite incorrect). Must be anglophiles (among whom Oxbridge is quite literally a cult)...but I suppose that's why they're here in the first place.

    Nice little story about the bottle water. Is that meant to imply our cultural inferiority, in some deranged way?

    Hey, Amartya Sen headed back to Harvard because he preferred the environment there: just to show it goes both ways. Generally, top researchers and academics tend towards the US--not always, of course.

    MIT...it's not a great name, but can't do much about that.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by adxj220)
    ?

    Hey, Amartya Sen headed back to Harvard because he preferred the environment there: just to show it goes both ways. Generally, top researchers and academics tend towards the US--not always, of course.
    Yes I did acknowledge this.

    I would say if academics do head to the US, in the brain drain, the problem is a financial one and not because of any inherant superiority.

    I have read a number of accounts from researchers who think there is quite a competitive, self-interested attitude in Americea, compared to a more amiable atmosphere in Britain, and the rest of Europe, where it is all about the greater good of the advancement of knowledge (well not all, but more).
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by adxj220)
    I don't see the poll...clearly, in a UK biased forum, oxbridge will get more total votes. It ends up being a fighting match between harvard and MIT with regards to posters' perception of US unis. I would give the vote to harvard as well (except, obviously, for engineering and the sciences). But I'd give it to MIT over Oxbridge.

    And I'm having a hard time believing that these posters who actually live in America don't hold MIT in very high regard. It easily supasses or equals most "ivy-leaguers". It is absolutely not a "mid-level university" (and I live on the east coast too--your generalization is quite incorrect). Must be anglophiles (among whom Oxbridge is quite literally a cult)...but I suppose that's why they're here in the first place.

    Nice little story about the bottle water. Is that meant to imply our cultural inferiority, in some deranged way?

    Hey, Amartya Sen headed back to Harvard because he preferred the environment there: just to show it goes both ways. Generally, top researchers and academics tend towards the US--not always, of course.

    MIT...it's not a great name, but can't do much about that.
    Nah, i just thought it was a funny comparison which struck me. In America all coke have to do is say 'we use a super duper purifying process called reverse osmosis - just like Nasa!!!' and sales go through the roof. (literally best selling)
    Here it takes 1 journalist to visit the plant to tell the country 'um guys, it's tap water' to **** off the water boards so much (after all coke take tap water, take minerals out. put them back in plus some carcingens and sell it at 90x the price) that they **** all over them.
    Didn't really have a point...
    J
    im so bored
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by hitchhiker_13)
    Yes I did acknowledge this.

    I would say if academics do head to the US, in the brain drain, the problem is a financial one and not because of any inherant superiority.

    I have read a number of accounts from researchers who think there is quite a competitive, self-interested attitude in Americea, compared to a more amiable atmosphere in Britain, and the rest of Europe, where it is all about the greater good of the advancement of knowledge (well not all, but more).
    Mmm. one scientist who i hate (even above fricking James Watson) is Craig Venter. The american (or maybe canadian) boss of Celera. Who else would be audacious enough to
    a) try to patent the entire human genome so as to prevent it becoming public access
    b) then claim that the human genome draft is his DNA
    J
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by foolfarian)
    Mmm. one scientist who i hate (even above fricking James Watson) is Craig Venter. The american (or maybe canadian) boss of Celera. Who else would be audacious enough to
    a) try to patent the entire human genome so as to prevent it becoming public access
    b) then claim that the human genome draft is his DNA
    J

    Oh my God, I completely share your hate for James Watson!
    He talks away about "bad genes" and how we should get rid of them, and was completely horrible to Rosalind Franklin and ruthlessly manipulated Maurice Wilkins.
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by hitchhiker_13)
    Oh my God, I completely share your hate for James Watson!
    He talks away about "bad genes" and how we should get rid of them, and was completely horrible to Rosalind Franklin and ruthlessly manipulated Maurice Wilkins.
    If you click my name and see recent posts you'll no doubt find the rant i had about him earlier on today.
    J
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    wow, we seem to have diverged into the health benefits of drinking Dasani water and a character assasination of James Watson.

    interesting nonetheless.

    i think MIT is a pretty cool acronym. how come there's not much mention of Stanford in here?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by adxj220)
    I don't see the poll...clearly, in a UK biased forum, oxbridge will get more total votes. It ends up being a fighting match between harvard and MIT with regards to posters' perception of US unis. I would give the vote to harvard as well (except, obviously, for engineering and the sciences). But I'd give it to MIT over Oxbridge.

    And I'm having a hard time believing that these posters who actually live in America don't hold MIT in very high regard. It easily supasses or equals most "ivy-leaguers". It is absolutely not a "mid-level university" (and I live on the east coast too--your generalization is quite incorrect). Must be anglophiles (among whom Oxbridge is quite literally a cult)...but I suppose that's why they're here in the first place.

    Nice little story about the bottle water. Is that meant to imply our cultural inferiority, in some deranged way?

    Hey, Amartya Sen headed back to Harvard because he preferred the environment there: just to show it goes both ways. Generally, top researchers and academics tend towards the US--not always, of course.

    MIT...it's not a great name, but can't do much about that.
    *sigh*, do some research before you type up this bullsh*t. Amartya Sen headed back to Harvard because at Trinity college, the mandatory retiring age was 70 years old. He left because of his age. In other words, he had to leave, not because he preferred the environment at Harvard. Jeez...
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by EuroAmeriAzn)
    *sigh*, do some research before you type up this bullsh*t. Amartya Sen headed back to Harvard because at Trinity college, the mandatory retiring age was 70 years old. He left because of his age. In other words, he had to leave, not because he preferred the environment at Harvard. Jeez...
    Exactly. There was an irony aspect - amartya sen is a big advocate of lifting the retirement age so as to alleviate some of the pension issues we have today
    J
 
 
 
Poll
“Yanny” or “Laurel”
Useful resources
Uni match

Applying to uni?

Our tool will help you find the perfect course

Articles:

Debate and current affairs guidelinesDebate and current affairs wiki

Quick link:

Educational debate unanswered threads

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

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.