Durham is the grave of the Oxbridge rejects

NB No Durhamite is criticising Oxbridge in this thread. There is no need for you to go all superior on us.

Also Durham certainly does select on intelligence.

For 2006 the English, Law and History departments rejected anyone who did not meet the cut off point of 7+ A*s at GCSE and 4+ As at AS Level straight away without any other considerations.

I doubt that's true about but the fact people even believe it is a reflection, for me, of why Oxford's admissions system is infinitely superior to Durham's. If Oxford even suggested the above was true it'd be razed to the ground for being elitist. But it clearly isn't because Oxford has an array of interviews and subject tests which means even if you have poor grades, intelligence can show through. It's just a more powerful system for discovering ability and one of the key reasons why Oxford and Cambridge are able to generate intellectually higher quality student bodies than their competitors.

Christ. The next time I say "I'd rather be a leper than a Tab", I really have to prepare for the inevitable Cambridge student clutching league tables and a WHO report, and claiming most vehemently that leprosy is at least marginally worse than Cambridge University.

. It is the opinion of those less blind individuals that makes Durham the Sunday Times University of the Year 2005(http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8403-1795844,00.html).:

Durham’s students appear to like their university much more than their peers in other high-achieving institutions. It goes without saying that this is a vindication for the teaching quality, academic support, learning resources, and assessment and feedback offered by academic staff.

Ah well, it's still tighter than your mum.

Your logic's about as watertight as the Titanic

Ah well, it's still tighter than your mum.

Please keep it low-brow please, none of this high-brow veiled Oxbridge comeback us punters cannot follow.

Ah well, it's still tighter than your mum.

Please keep it low-brow please, none of this high-brow veiled Oxbridge comeback us punters cannot follow.

Durham and Edinburgh are far more rah than Oxford. All my friend at these universitis, not to mention their facebook photos, confirm this.

Granted, the Times isn't gospel, but it seems a hell of a lot reliable than a few peoples' opinions, and these statistics would indicate that there are [slightly] more rahs at Oxbridge.

Social class A, B or C1 or a non-state school isn't a definitive marker for "Rah".

The Times would need a whole new pashmina/old-school-tie wearing,appropriate-family-background,hacky-attitude-drinking-society-membership,whatever assessment to quantify rah impression you can get.

Well, isn't that an enlightened statement!? Ha!

As opposed to what, i should ask? You mean to tell us that all the other 'plebeian' universities admit on some other factor?!

The reason that Durham might be viewed as a refuge for Oxbridge rejects is that, for those who do not make it into the institution that is Oxbridge, Durham offers an alternative-a place with a remarkable reputation, excellent teaching standards but with less pressure. Indeed, for some subjects and in many people's opinions (and no, not just the aforementioned rejects!), Durham even ranks above Oxbridge. It is the opinion of those less blind individuals that makes Durham the Sunday Times University of the Year 2005(http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8403-1795844,00.html).

.................

Admit it. Durham sucks.