The Oxbridge Tutorial System?
TSRers,
I was wondering what the main differences are within the Tutorial system as compared to the Lecture system in the US. As far as I know (correct me if I'm wrong), the Tutorial system at Oxbridge revolves around homework (research papers, essays, etc), then coming in several times a week to present it and discuss it with your Law professor and a small handful of fellow students. You are then graded on the content of your work as well as how you present the material. Is this more or less the "system" of learning?
When I was at Uni here in the US, I had a split of lecture classes and group discussion courses. In lecture, I'd take notes and ask questions, do homework, etc., and then sit on an examination afterwards. In my group discussion courses, classes still had lecture-style lessons but were broken up intermittedly with group projects, research, and individual papers.
I am asking this because I want to know how to best be receptive to the type of environment going on at my upcoming Oxbridge interviews (I read somewhere that the interviews are also a test to see if you can learn well under their system and setting).
Anything you can share about the nature of the learning environment at Oxford and Cambridge would be useful, thanks!
I was wondering what the main differences are within the Tutorial system as compared to the Lecture system in the US. As far as I know (correct me if I'm wrong), the Tutorial system at Oxbridge revolves around homework (research papers, essays, etc), then coming in several times a week to present it and discuss it with your Law professor and a small handful of fellow students. You are then graded on the content of your work as well as how you present the material. Is this more or less the "system" of learning?
When I was at Uni here in the US, I had a split of lecture classes and group discussion courses. In lecture, I'd take notes and ask questions, do homework, etc., and then sit on an examination afterwards. In my group discussion courses, classes still had lecture-style lessons but were broken up intermittedly with group projects, research, and individual papers.
I am asking this because I want to know how to best be receptive to the type of environment going on at my upcoming Oxbridge interviews (I read somewhere that the interviews are also a test to see if you can learn well under their system and setting).
Anything you can share about the nature of the learning environment at Oxford and Cambridge would be useful, thanks!
Scroll to see replies
Other people will probably put this more eloquently, but: I *think* you've got the wrong end of the stick.
You get, say, an essay every week; and one Tutorial ('Supervision', in Cambridge - we'll call them tutorials for now) to go with that essay. Some people might have two, three, or even four pieces of work (essays, or translations, or problem sheets), and you have a corresponding number of tutorials to go with them.
The tutorial itself is normally 1-to-1, up to 1-to-3. In those, the discussion is normally very tailored to your interests, your work, and your problems. Then there are small classes, anything from about 4 people to about 15 -- these are obviously less personal, but all discussion-based.
Lectures, of course, vary according to subject. English students, for instance, don't have any compulsory lectures, but about 8 possible ones to go to (they don't help one pass exams, they are just interesting, usually!). Science subject have FAR more lectures, which are essential for getting the information to pass exams (but attendance is not, as far as I know, actually compulsory -- it's just wise!).
You are NOT (absolutely NOT) graded on the work done for or in the tutorials, classes or lectures. ALL grading is done based on a big set of exams at the end of each year (ish), and there is some element of coursework (dissertation/thesis/portfolio of essays/research project) that can be submitted too. All of the tutorials are part of the learning, not grading, process.
Does that make some sense?
As far as I know (correct me if I'm wrong), the Tutorial system at Oxbridge revolves around homework (research papers, essays, etc), then coming in several times a week to present it and discuss it with your Law professor and a small handful of fellow students. You are then graded on the content of your work as well as how you present the material. Is this more or less the "system" of learning?
You get, say, an essay every week; and one Tutorial ('Supervision', in Cambridge - we'll call them tutorials for now) to go with that essay. Some people might have two, three, or even four pieces of work (essays, or translations, or problem sheets), and you have a corresponding number of tutorials to go with them.
The tutorial itself is normally 1-to-1, up to 1-to-3. In those, the discussion is normally very tailored to your interests, your work, and your problems. Then there are small classes, anything from about 4 people to about 15 -- these are obviously less personal, but all discussion-based.
Lectures, of course, vary according to subject. English students, for instance, don't have any compulsory lectures, but about 8 possible ones to go to (they don't help one pass exams, they are just interesting, usually!). Science subject have FAR more lectures, which are essential for getting the information to pass exams (but attendance is not, as far as I know, actually compulsory -- it's just wise!).
You are NOT (absolutely NOT) graded on the work done for or in the tutorials, classes or lectures. ALL grading is done based on a big set of exams at the end of each year (ish), and there is some element of coursework (dissertation/thesis/portfolio of essays/research project) that can be submitted too. All of the tutorials are part of the learning, not grading, process.
Does that make some sense?
You ARE graded for tutorial work but it does NOT count towards your degree.
I've only ever been given one grade on one essay!
Sorry, I interpreted "graded" as 'actually mattering'. Of course there is some judgement upon the work when it's done -- but it's largely irrelevant. It's only the exams (and the occasional bit of 'coursework') that matter.
(I knew someone would say it better!
)
Sorry, I interpreted "graded" as 'actually mattering'. Of course there is some judgement upon the work when it's done -- but it's largely irrelevant. It's only the exams (and the occasional bit of 'coursework') that matter.
(I knew someone would say it better!
)im not a big fan of tutorials at all to be honest. i read my essay out, a few points get picked on to talk about for a little while, then its basically a case of 'what do you want to talk about?' Given the convo is so informal and fluid too, its impossible to make notes which are anything more than random scrawling, plus its rude to be writing when a dude is asking you questions and talking to you.
I dont understand how its seen as such as great way to learn. tutes, along with lectures, are ****e. All of the stuff (and i mean all of it) has been learnt by me reading books and making notes, and then writing the essay, not chatting about the essay or going to lectures. There also isnt really any set out way to get the students to get an initial 'spine' of understanding. You just amble from one theme to another within a topic.
I dont understand how its seen as such as great way to learn. tutes, along with lectures, are ****e. All of the stuff (and i mean all of it) has been learnt by me reading books and making notes, and then writing the essay, not chatting about the essay or going to lectures. There also isnt really any set out way to get the students to get an initial 'spine' of understanding. You just amble from one theme to another within a topic.
im not a big fan of tutorials at all to be honest. i read my essay out, a few points get picked on to talk about for a little while, then its basically a case of 'what do you want to talk about?' Given the convo is so informal and fluid too, its impossible to make notes which are anything more than random scrawling, plus its rude to be writing when a dude is asking you questions and talking to you.
I dont understand how its seen as such as great way to learn. tutes, along with lectures, are ****e. All of the stuff (and i mean all of it) has been learnt by me reading books and making notes, and then writing the essay, not chatting about the essay or going to lectures. There also isnt really any set out way to get the students to get an initial 'spine' of understanding. You just amble from one theme to another within a topic.
That's a real shame. I guess there's no reason why the tutorial system *should* work for everyone.
I find it's the best place for bringing all my week's work together -- because an essay doesn't use very much of the overall material read, it's a great chance (for me, anyway) to chat about all the *other* stuff! I agree that conversations can be a bit random, but having had superisors who tried to structure the hour, I'm of the general opinion that I learn *less* when they're restrictive about stuff.
As for writing notes when they talk...I have to admit that I do that. They don't seem to mind (and, if I'm writing something when I'm meant to be talking, I do apologise! Doesn't happen much, but I'm not at any great pains to avoid it).
Have never yet had to read an essay out. I'm glad oof that, too, because it would mostly be a waste of time for all concerned!
I hope your tutes are better next term.
epitome
Sometimes it can be tutor-dependent, though (i.e. some really do just discuss your essays with you, but thankfully those tend to be rare).
As for writing notes when they talk...I have to admit that I do that. They don't seem to mind (and, if I'm writing something when I'm meant to be talking, I do apologise! Doesn't happen much, but I'm not at any great pains to avoid it).
Heh, somehow I could never quite manage to do that, because I'm a bit of a rubbish note-taker. I either didn't bother taking anything down, as it didn't strike me as all that vital, or couldn't, because I was too busy with the actual discussion.
One thing that is apparent is the different level of tutor support at different Oxford Colleges. Some offer a broader range than others (i.e. extra tutorials or 'at home' times when you can discuss specific problems). Much depends on how well staffed a particular College is in a particular subject and, of course, the motivation of the tutors.
Generally, Colleges have adequate full-time academics for the subjects offered. Note, however, that this is NOT the case for PPH's. If you read the University's recent review of PPH's, you will see that there are concerns about their teaching capabilities in anything other than their core subjects (which tend to be Theology). Remember, this is the University speaking and basically acknowledging that the teaching provision in the PPH’s often falls well short of that of the main Colleges. It appears that the students themselves are becoming more aware of these issues. Relatively few students apply direct to the PPH’s. Those who are effectively ‘pooled’ remain largely unaware that they’ll be walking into an environment where the teaching provision is somewhat lower than they might expect. Of course, the University is reluctant to acknowledge this reality (despite the evidence from their own Report). In turn, the Faculties tend to hide behind the Colleges as it is they who determine teaching provision.
So, think carefully about where to apply and don’t be afraid to ask the more detailed questions about the level of teaching provision. It’s easy to assume that the provision is standard across the University; it’s not. As a result, your ultimate class of degree may be affected.
Generally, Colleges have adequate full-time academics for the subjects offered. Note, however, that this is NOT the case for PPH's. If you read the University's recent review of PPH's, you will see that there are concerns about their teaching capabilities in anything other than their core subjects (which tend to be Theology). Remember, this is the University speaking and basically acknowledging that the teaching provision in the PPH’s often falls well short of that of the main Colleges. It appears that the students themselves are becoming more aware of these issues. Relatively few students apply direct to the PPH’s. Those who are effectively ‘pooled’ remain largely unaware that they’ll be walking into an environment where the teaching provision is somewhat lower than they might expect. Of course, the University is reluctant to acknowledge this reality (despite the evidence from their own Report). In turn, the Faculties tend to hide behind the Colleges as it is they who determine teaching provision.
So, think carefully about where to apply and don’t be afraid to ask the more detailed questions about the level of teaching provision. It’s easy to assume that the provision is standard across the University; it’s not. As a result, your ultimate class of degree may be affected.
Consie
im not a big fan of tutorials at all to be honest. i read my essay out, a few points get picked on to talk about for a little while, then its basically a case of 'what do you want to talk about?' Given the convo is so informal and fluid too, its impossible to make notes which are anything more than random scrawling, plus its rude to be writing when a dude is asking you questions and talking to you.
I dont understand how its seen as such as great way to learn. tutes, along with lectures, are ****e. All of the stuff (and i mean all of it) has been learnt by me reading books and making notes, and then writing the essay, not chatting about the essay or going to lectures. There also isnt really any set out way to get the students to get an initial 'spine' of understanding. You just amble from one theme to another within a topic.
I dont understand how its seen as such as great way to learn. tutes, along with lectures, are ****e. All of the stuff (and i mean all of it) has been learnt by me reading books and making notes, and then writing the essay, not chatting about the essay or going to lectures. There also isnt really any set out way to get the students to get an initial 'spine' of understanding. You just amble from one theme to another within a topic.
Hmmm, you seem to have a vastly different experience to me, I absolutely love supervisions. It's pretty much the highlight of my (academic) week. I love discussing what I've learnt with someone who knows so much more than me, and is actually willing to not only explain things I've written about in more depth (with a lot of reference to primary sources) but I also get told about groundbreaking developments in historical academia.
In my supervision today for example, my essay had been on Henry VI who, in incredibly basic terms, was a king who was completely ****, he was an idiot, gave away money/land without thinking it through and then in 1453-4 fell into a catatonic state. Almost all historians regard him as a complete tit, who made nonsensical decisions and that his mental breakdown of 1453-4 was due to a genetic illness which his grandfather, Charles VI of France, also had. Now today, it turns out my DoS was told a few weeks ago by a doctor that Henry VI displayed the symptons of a certain mental illness throughout his reign, which explains his irrational behaviour, his catatonic state and his almost non-existance afterwards. This one piece of information, which isn't available in any history books has just completely revamped the view of his reign, including the perception of the actions of the nobility - who organised his household to hide and manage his mental illness - and some of his disastrous policies. I am probably one of thirty or forty people in the world who know of this development, and without the supervision system or being privy to this kind of information (I could cite about a few more examples of very similar kinds of revelations throughout my supervisions this year), my essay would simply live in the books I'd read. In the cheesiest possible way, my supervisions bring what I've read alive.
I may just have the world's best supervisor, but they're awesome.
Consie
im not a big fan of tutorials at all to be honest. i read my essay out, a few points get picked on to talk about for a little while, then its basically a case of 'what do you want to talk about?' Given the convo is so informal and fluid too, its impossible to make notes which are anything more than random scrawling, plus its rude to be writing when a dude is asking you questions and talking to you.
I dont understand how its seen as such as great way to learn. tutes, along with lectures, are ****e. All of the stuff (and i mean all of it) has been learnt by me reading books and making notes, and then writing the essay, not chatting about the essay or going to lectures. There also isnt really any set out way to get the students to get an initial 'spine' of understanding. You just amble from one theme to another within a topic.
I dont understand how its seen as such as great way to learn. tutes, along with lectures, are ****e. All of the stuff (and i mean all of it) has been learnt by me reading books and making notes, and then writing the essay, not chatting about the essay or going to lectures. There also isnt really any set out way to get the students to get an initial 'spine' of understanding. You just amble from one theme to another within a topic.
Yes but in another thread you told us that you like to do the bare minimum of work for your essays, and that you can get away with doing rubbish essays. This means you've probably done less reading, and have been less 'inspired' by your subject. If you've not covered all the suggested work that is supposed to be inspiring you then you probably aren't in a position to benefit from your tutorials in the way that they intend you to benefit. You aren't having discussions which are fanning your inspiration further, and planting new ideas into what you've already conceptualised. Furthermore you mentioned you don't mind exchanging being 'ripped to pieces' in your tutorials in order to get away with minimal work. So evidently your experience of a tutorial won't be the same as that of someone else who isn't being ripped apart, but is having an enjoyable exchange of ideas. If you go to a tutorial well prepared and with some formed areas of interest on the matter, they can be helpful and fun.
themoat
One thing that is apparent is the different level of tutor support at different Oxford Colleges. Some offer a broader range than others (i.e. extra tutorials or 'at home' times when you can discuss specific problems). Much depends on how well staffed a particular College is in a particular subject and, of course, the motivation of the tutors.
Generally, Colleges have adequate full-time academics for the subjects offered. Note, however, that this is NOT the case for PPH's. If you read the University's recent review of PPH's, you will see that there are concerns about their teaching capabilities in anything other than their core subjects (which tend to be Theology). Remember, this is the University speaking and basically acknowledging that the teaching provision in the PPH’s often falls well short of that of the main Colleges. It appears that the students themselves are becoming more aware of these issues. Relatively few students apply direct to the PPH’s. Those who are effectively ‘pooled’ remain largely unaware that they’ll be walking into an environment where the teaching provision is somewhat lower than they might expect. Of course, the University is reluctant to acknowledge this reality (despite the evidence from their own Report). In turn, the Faculties tend to hide behind the Colleges as it is they who determine teaching provision.
So, think carefully about where to apply and don’t be afraid to ask the more detailed questions about the level of teaching provision. It’s easy to assume that the provision is standard across the University; it’s not. As a result, your ultimate class of degree may be affected.
Generally, Colleges have adequate full-time academics for the subjects offered. Note, however, that this is NOT the case for PPH's. If you read the University's recent review of PPH's, you will see that there are concerns about their teaching capabilities in anything other than their core subjects (which tend to be Theology). Remember, this is the University speaking and basically acknowledging that the teaching provision in the PPH’s often falls well short of that of the main Colleges. It appears that the students themselves are becoming more aware of these issues. Relatively few students apply direct to the PPH’s. Those who are effectively ‘pooled’ remain largely unaware that they’ll be walking into an environment where the teaching provision is somewhat lower than they might expect. Of course, the University is reluctant to acknowledge this reality (despite the evidence from their own Report). In turn, the Faculties tend to hide behind the Colleges as it is they who determine teaching provision.
So, think carefully about where to apply and don’t be afraid to ask the more detailed questions about the level of teaching provision. It’s easy to assume that the provision is standard across the University; it’s not. As a result, your ultimate class of degree may be affected.
PPHs?
Thankyou
In arts supervisions (tutorials) you're certainly not graded/assessed/measured on how you 'present' your material - and in my subject at least it's rare for even the essay to be given a mark, although supervisors will usually put comments about what's good/bad on it.
The supervision is more like a chat between you, the supervisor, and (generally, unless you happen to be on your own) the one or two other students there with you. Some supervisors will obviously have a set of key points of discussion they will work you through, whereas with others it's very unstructured. But you're absolutely not 'presenting your material' - instead you're just discussing it with the supervisor and other students, and maybe explaining your interpetation of the issues in the essay question or what you're picked up from the literature.
I'm not sure supervisions are necessarily all they're cracked up to be - probably the main benefit is that they force you to read for and write an essay (because if you don't do the research beforehand, it's pretty obvious when you have nothing to say in the supervision) and that's where the learning is I guess.
But, the different 'takes' on the question the other students in the supervision present can sometimes be very handy for looking at the question in a different light or seeing what you'd missed. Some supervisors do seem to treat them as an opportunity to do a bit more lecturing at you (as opposed to asking you questions and discussing) which can be sleep-inducing if they're bad but very useful to get some more in-depth 'expert' (and guaranteed to be exam-worthy) detail from the person concerned.
The supervision is more like a chat between you, the supervisor, and (generally, unless you happen to be on your own) the one or two other students there with you. Some supervisors will obviously have a set of key points of discussion they will work you through, whereas with others it's very unstructured. But you're absolutely not 'presenting your material' - instead you're just discussing it with the supervisor and other students, and maybe explaining your interpetation of the issues in the essay question or what you're picked up from the literature.
I'm not sure supervisions are necessarily all they're cracked up to be - probably the main benefit is that they force you to read for and write an essay (because if you don't do the research beforehand, it's pretty obvious when you have nothing to say in the supervision) and that's where the learning is I guess.
But, the different 'takes' on the question the other students in the supervision present can sometimes be very handy for looking at the question in a different light or seeing what you'd missed. Some supervisors do seem to treat them as an opportunity to do a bit more lecturing at you (as opposed to asking you questions and discussing) which can be sleep-inducing if they're bad but very useful to get some more in-depth 'expert' (and guaranteed to be exam-worthy) detail from the person concerned.
I love the tutorial system. Today's discussion was so rewarding since there were a few concepts that I wasn't entirely sure about.
My tutor is amazing btw, she gives us two tutorials a week (in pairs) and yet has published 6 papers this year.
She also won the AstraZeneca award recently.
She also won the AstraZeneca award recently.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- St Andrews vs Oxbridge
- UCL tutorials (small group teaching?)
- UCL tutorials, accommodation, everything
- Oxford vs Bristol
- Is Oxford reapplication truly something I should do?
- rejected but relieved
- Durham University - Full of Rich Privately Educated people?
- Top five Uni's for English Literature
- English at UCL
- Applying to oxford law after A-level results
- Oxford Law GCSE Grades
- University rankings don’t apply to undergraduate so how to decide
- Is it worth applying to Cambridge?
- How to get better at computer science
- Supercurriculars
- I’m realising that I don’t like my uni or my degree at all
- What is the workload like for psychology at Oxford?
- Difficulty of Course - Oxford BCL v Cambridge LLM
- Best university for history
- Gsce grades - oxbridge
Latest
Last reply 16 minutes ago
Official London School of Economics and Political Science 2024 Applicant ThreadLast reply 49 minutes ago
Official University of Edinburgh Applicant Thread for 2024Last reply 1 hour ago
Virgin/O2 Technology Placement - Virtual Assessment and embarrassing questionLast reply 1 hour ago
What games did everybody play on their computers at school or when they were youngerGaming
11
Trending
Last reply 10 hours ago
Weidenfeld Hoffmann Trust (WHT) Scholarship Notification (2024-2025)Last reply 13 hours ago
Oxbridge applicants for modern languages - 2025 entry (applying in 2024)Last reply 1 week ago
Will I get into Oxford with my GCSE results? - EngineeringLast reply 2 weeks ago
will 5 a levels give me a better chance at getting into oxford?Trending
Last reply 10 hours ago
Weidenfeld Hoffmann Trust (WHT) Scholarship Notification (2024-2025)Last reply 13 hours ago
Oxbridge applicants for modern languages - 2025 entry (applying in 2024)Last reply 1 week ago
Will I get into Oxford with my GCSE results? - EngineeringLast reply 2 weeks ago
will 5 a levels give me a better chance at getting into oxford?
