Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by allymcb2)
    No. That is just because LSE has more international students, and therefore have been exposed to different environments and experiences. Thats nice, but it doesn't make them cleverer. I think you would be wrong on both counts.

    How many people have you met at LSE who rejected Oxbridge? Because pretty much everyone going for the relevant subjects here declined imperial or LSE.
    You do realise that these international students you speak of probably did a full IB diploma on top of various super-advanced classes, right? That said, their academic preparation will rival any Oxbridge student's any day of the week.

    Define "clever". Are we going by A-level grades? International exam scores? How many books they've read? How many languages they speak?

    The thing is, many extremely intelligent people never even applied to Oxbridge in the first place - they didn't want to go there anyway (for many reasons), so why waste time applying? Since not everyone who goes to LSE applied to Oxbridge, how many people rejected Oxbridge is entirely irrelevant.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shady lane)
    My flatmate was rejected by LSE, which was her first choice.
    She went to Cambridge.

    My cousin goes to Bristol...she turned down a Cambridge interview in Economics.

    You'll find that many people who prefer LSE or Imperial won't bother applying to Oxbridge if they know they don't want to go there. You have to submit the applications very early, right?
    Shall I take that as 2?

    I declined LSE, my second choice for Law.

    My friend declined Imperial, his second choice, for chemistry, though I imagine a lot of medics would rather go somewhere other than oxbridge, but discounting them.

    Yes, but some people hate London so don't apply to LSE, so I wouldn't expect that to make much difference.

    There were many more but I have forgotten who applied where now.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lexy86)
    If we're bringing figures into this, Cambridge came below Nottingham, Bath, Sheffield, York, Warwick and a handful of others in this year's Times ranking for politics, for instance, and recieved only a 4A for research quality along with a 23/24 for teaching quality. Does that make it a worse university? Of course not. Still, it's something to consider if rankings really do matter that much to you.
    No, but being top in the vast majority of subjects suggests they are better universities. Cambridge isn't good for politics, but it came top of vastly mroe subjects than anyone else. If you want to see how good a university is overall, look at all it's subjects.

    (Original post by shady lane)
    Although I have told you that at least in one industry, which pays the highest graduate salaries, several firms DO NOT prefer Oxbridge graduates. You just don't like that industry so you choose to disregard it.
    Overall, banking is like 1 or 2% of all graduate jobs. Yes it matters, but let's look at the overall picture.

    (Original post by shady lane)
    Ally...it's not true. Seriously. Trust me when I tell you this from personal experience. The undergraduates at LSE, particularly in the Government and IR departments, are some of the brightest people I have come across--and they are from countries around the world. I met very few people at Oxford who could engage in conversation in such a diversity of topics, but I meet them at LSE every single day.
    I have these at Oxford? :confused: They're there for anyone who wants to have them.

    (Original post by shady lane)
    I would imagine at Imperial, most students can outperform or equal Oxbridge scientists, even on a bad day.
    Not really, Cambridge still outranks Imperial at sciences. Well, most sciences, I think Imperial's engineering is very different than Cambridges to make them almost incomparible, but possibly with an Imperial edge.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lexy86)
    You do realise that these international students you speak of probably did a full IB diploma on top of various super-advanced classes, right? That said, their academic preparation will rival any Oxbridge student's any day of the week.

    Define "clever". Are we going by A-level grades? International exam scores? How many books they've read? How many languages they speak?

    The thing is, many extremely intelligent people never even applied to Oxbridge in the first place - they didn't want to go there anyway (for many reasons), so why waste time applying? Since not everyone who goes to LSE applied to Oxbridge, how many people rejected Oxbridge is entirely irrelevant.
    If they didn't go to Oxbridge, they won't have an oxbridge standard degree no matter how clever they are. That is the point.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Drogue, the % of further study says nothing about the number who apply and don't get in--it's the desire to study. All you need to get onto a decent master's is a 2:1--are you suggesting LSE graduates don't get 2:1s? Most LSE graduates go on to work, and it's not because they didn't get into graduate school. It is the most career-oriented university I have ever come across, probably ties with Wharton in that respect.

    Also LSE has 4000 undergrads, 50% or so of which are foreign. So obviously Oxbridge dominates in British politics.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by allymcb2)
    Shall I take that as 2?

    I declined LSE, my second choice for Law.

    My friend declined Imperial, his second choice, for chemistry, though I imagine a lot of medics would rather go somewhere other than oxbridge, but discounting them.

    Yes, but some people hate London so don't apply to LSE, so I wouldn't expect that to make much difference.

    There were many more but I have forgotten who applied where now.
    Yes Ally guess what?
    1. I'm not British so obviously I don't know that many people who went through the application process here.
    2. I don't have statistics so I can only use anecdotes. Would you like me to ask the NUS to do a survey on university choice?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drogue)
    No, but being top in the vast majority of subjects suggests they are better universities. Cambridge isn't good for politics, but it came top of vastly mroe subjects than anyone else. If you want to see how good a university is overall, look at all it's subjects.
    Of course! I entirely agree, but what I'm saying is it's all very individual. A degree is what you make of it. I'm not saying Oxbridge grads won't have an advantage in certain situations, however, graduates from other universities can, too, be extremely intelligent and just as (if not more) employable.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shady lane)
    Drogue, the % of further study says nothing about the number who apply and don't get in--it's the desire to study. All you need to get onto a decent master's is a 2:1--are you suggesting LSE graduates don't get 2:1s? Most LSE graduates go on to work, and it's not because they didn't get into graduate school. It is the most career-oriented university I have ever come across, probably ties with Wharton in that respect.
    On an irrelevant side note, that is something else I don't like about LSE. Your social life in a place like that would be boring as hell. People I socialise with include historians, politicians, physicists, chemists, geologists, psychologists, mathematicians and philosophers and the lawyers aren't exactly of the money-grabbing variety, they don't all even want to be lawyers. I have my whole life to socialise with money grabbing lawyers, why start early?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Socrates)
    There are plenty of people who reject Oxbridge for other universities. SB (who got an offer from both Oxford and LSE) rejected the former for the latter.
    True, but far, far more do it the other way around. I know probably around 40 LSE students, well over half of whom got turned down by Oxbridge. At Oxford, I know probably a couple of hundred people, and I know about 4 or 5 who were turned down by LSE. Anecdotal, but large enough numbers to suggest a trend.

    (Original post by Socrates)
    Who'd want to live in the village when you get much better social life (as well as an excellent degree) in the capital?
    I'd dispute this. They're very different, but many people don't see superclubs as the height of a brilliant social life. And Oxford certainly isn't a villiage, unless your villiages have 18,000 students, well over 100 bars, 5 cinemas, etc. It's not London, but there's no lack of amenities or nightlife. Add to that events you don't get anywhere else - from balls to the highest profile debates and speakers. I think the social life here is *far* better than London, although i was pleasantly surprised how much I enjoyed my summer there. It's also a lot cheaper here.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shady lane)
    Yes Ally guess what?
    1. I'm not British so obviously I don't know that many people who went through the application process here.
    2. I don't have statistics so I can only use anecdotes. Would you like me to ask the NUS to do a survey on university choice?
    2, I accept

    On 1 didn't you argue earlier in the thread that I was less able than you to have a view of this based on my experience? Surely as a British person knowing quite a lot of people who went through the process, and having lived in the UK all my life, I would be in a better, or at least as good a position to make such an evaluation, even if I haven't studied in as many universities as you?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by allymcb2)
    If they didn't go to Oxbridge, they won't have an oxbridge standard degree no matter how clever they are. That is the point.
    If they don't have an "Oxbridge standard" degree, they may miss out on one or two job interviews. However, an "Oxbridge standard" degree won't help you much past that point - once you're given a professional project to complete, you won't be able to stamp "Oxbridge!" on it and expect it to miraculously do itself through the sheer force of your Oxbridge prestige. Let's face it, your Durham-educated colleague may be a lot more capable of completing that project to a higher standard, and that's exactly what's going to matter. Once you've got your position, being "Oxbridge standard" alone won't get you too far.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lexy86)
    You do realise that these international students you speak of probably did a full IB diploma on top of various super-advanced classes, right? That said, their academic preparation will rival any Oxbridge student's any day of the week.
    Except they didn't. If they did, the average entry grades would be higher, when we know it's a way below Oxbridge.

    (Original post by Lexy86)
    The thing is, many extremely intelligent people never even applied to Oxbridge in the first place - they didn't want to go there anyway (for many reasons), so why waste time applying? Since not everyone who goes to LSE applied to Oxbridge, how many people rejected Oxbridge is entirely irrelevant.
    And the same for LSE. These arguments can be used both ways - many people know London isn't for them. There's no bias in suggesting that Oxbridge students turned down LSE a lot more than vice versa.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    Socrates, the bus to London takes 1 hour to victoria station. If you want London, you can have London, plus balls, bops, and a variety of entertainment options which are cheaper in Oxford. Plus you only have to pay 24 weeks rent, and in most colleges you can pretty much trip and you're in the centre.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drogue)
    I'd dispute this. They're very different, but many people don't see superclubs as the height of a brilliant social life. And Oxford certainly isn't a villiage, unless your villiages have 18,000 students, well over 100 bars, 5 cinemas, etc. It's not London, but there's no lack of amenities or nightlife. Add to that events you don't get anywhere else - from balls to the highest profile debates and speakers. I think the social life here is *far* better than London, although i was pleasantly surprised how much I enjoyed my summer there. It's also a lot cheaper here.
    I admit I was being facetious by calling Oxford and Cambridge "villages" (the latter moreso than the former :p: ), but I've lived in London all my life and wouldn't rather be anywhere else tbh. Of course it is a matter of personal preference, but you can't dispute that London is unmatchable when it comes to the amount of things do, place to go as well as the choice and variety available.

    Cheaper I will give you, but then everywhere is cheaper than London.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shady lane)
    Drogue, the % of further study says nothing about the number who apply and don't get in--it's the desire to study. All you need to get onto a decent master's is a 2:1--are you suggesting LSE graduates don't get 2:1s? Most LSE graduates go on to work, and it's not because they didn't get into graduate school. It is the most career-oriented university I have ever come across, probably ties with Wharton in that respect.
    Yes, but the same goes for banking. Far more LSE grads go into banking, and you tried to claim this showed they were better at it. Well the same is true for further study - far more people at Oxford go into it. The truth is, these are both because of students desires, not ability. And it takes a lot more than a 2:1 to get into *decent* masters or PhD programmes.

    (Original post by shady lane)
    Also LSE has 4000 undergrads, 50% or so of which are foreign. So obviously Oxbridge dominates in British politics.
    I wasn't just comapring to LSE, but to all other universities. Sorry, I should have been clearer here!
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I had to go to London every weekend because Oxford was so boring. I didn't apply to Oxford for grad school despite my tutor encouraging me to do so. Seriously, it's not for everyone. I hated being the only black person around and I hated the "club" scene.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drogue)
    Yes, but the same goes for banking. Far more LSE grads go into banking, and you tried to claim this showed they were better at it. Well the same is true for further study - far more people at Oxford go into it. The truth is, these are both because of students desires, not ability. And it takes a lot more than a 2:1 to get into *decent* masters or PhD programmes.


    I wasn't just comapring to LSE, but to all other universities.
    I disagree that Oxbridge grads don't want to be bankers. I think there are a good number who do and who apply, otherwise firms wouldn't bother recruiting there.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shady lane)
    I had to go to London every weekend because Oxford was so boring. I didn't apply to Oxford for grad school despite my tutor encouraging me to do so. Seriously, it's not for everyone. I hated being the only black person around and I hated the "club" scene.
    Yes the clubs are cheesy, but there are plenty of balls, theatre trips, debates at the union etc, and if you want to go to London on the weekend its not a big problem.

    I cannot understand why anyone cares about whether they are a minority or not. Its not like people are nasty about it, it isn't a racist university, its just less international.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lexy86)
    Of course! I entirely agree, but what I'm saying is it's all very individual. A degree is what you make of it. I'm not saying Oxbridge grads won't have an advantage in certain situations, however, graduates from other universities can, too, be extremely intelligent and just as (if not more) employable.
    Then we agree I don't doubt that the head of the LSE finance society is more employable than the vast majority of Oxbridge students, or that the top first from Imperial isn't a better academic than the vast majority of Oxbridge students. I just think the average, for both employability and academics, is slightly higher at Oxbridge than elsewhere, due to better entry grades, more funding, better teachign resources and prestige.

    (Original post by Socrates)
    Of course it is a matter of personal preference, but you can't dispute that London is unmatchable when it comes to the amount of things do, place to go as well as the choice and variety available.

    Cheaper I will give you, but then everywhere is cheaper than London.
    My point is, how much of that choice is available on a student's income? Even though I spent well over £3000 just in 11 weeks over the summer, I still couldn't do some of the more expensive things I wanted to do. As a student, this would be a lot more constraining.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drogue)
    Then we agree I don't doubt that the head of the LSE finance society is more employable than the vast majority of Oxbridge students, or that the top first from Imperial isn't a better academic than the vast majority of Oxbridge students. I just think the average, for both employability and academics, is slightly higher at Oxbridge than elsewhere, due to better entry grades, more funding, better teachign resources and prestige.


    My point is, how much of that choice is available on a student's income? Even though I spent well over £3000 just in 11 weeks over the summer, I still couldn't do some of the more expensive things I wanted to do. As a student, this would be a lot more constraining.
    Seconded. London is a dream city for young graduates on decent wages with the youth and a decent amount of money to spend.
 
 
 
Poll
Black Friday: Yay or Nay?
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.