The problem with Oxbridge
The problem with Oxbridge. Here are my thoughts on the matter. What do you think?
If you just imagine Oxbridge university. Think of its place, its buildings and its students. Can you see a problem with this image? To most people, it is a bastion of British goodness and in many respects is what makes Britain, Britain. There is, however, a common theme inherent in this image that most people do not recognise. Oxbridge students are mostly white, privileged upper middle class. Its buildings and architecture are symbols of historical white privilege. The towns these universities are in are very wealthy towns. If you think about the way Oxbridge delivers education, it’s worrying. Students are not only educated at Oxbridge, but they are, in the process, also indoctrinated into the upper-middle class way of doings things according to British culture, whatever this may be. Ultimately, students are led to believe they are superior, not because they have a degree, but because of where they got their degree from.
This approach to education is wrong. It has divided British society for centuries. It is a well-documented fact that Oxbridge graduates look down on other people. Education should be about inclusivity, not exclusivity. However, the way in which Oxbridge operates is designed around exclusion, from its collegiate system and arcane traditions and practices. If you look at Germany and Scandinavian countries where there is no class system, society is generally more inclusive, more caring, underpinned by a ‘socialist’ attitude of equality, fairness and respect. People there become educated, not to become better than other people as people in Oxbridge do, but to help other people. The absence of a class system structure in these countries means that people do not face the same obstacles as they do in Britain where there is low society mobility. Therefore, more people reach their potential in these countries, resulting in more people empowering the economies of those countries, which is not the case in Britain where low social mobility continues to constrain economic growth.
In Britain, education is divided along lines of wealth and status. People are put into a box and labelled early on in their lives. This chipping away at personal growth and aspiration over time limits their potential and ultimately has limited the economic growth and output of the British economy. Oxbridge, as a whole, has divided Britain along these lines for centuries because its admissions process is deeply flawed. It favours the upper-middle class identity on which institutional racism, nepotism and discrimination are predicated. Students who do not conform to this identity are discriminated against at the interview stage of the application process, regardless of their actual real ability and potential. In other words, subjectivity is introduced during this stage, where tutor’s own biased belief systems are projected onto the student to see if they ‘fit the stereotype’ that is upper-middle class Britain. Attention is given to not what the student says, but rather how they say it. This is hopelessly flawed.
What is the solution to the Oxbridge problem? Simply removing the interview stage will not solve the larger problem, which is that Oxbridge creates the class system. There is simply no place for Oxbridge in 21st century Britain. These universities are outdated, flawed and deeply unfair institutions that promote all these bad qualities wrapped inside a shiny exterior designed to fool the general public into thinking they are innocent 'do-gooders' trying to make British society a better place. This is actually the opposite of what they have been doing for centuries! Therefore, the only solution that remains is one where Oxbridge is turned into museums and homes for charities. A socialist solution like this only seems fair considering the many years of capitalism Oxbridge have promoted, which has wrecked British society through social divisions and structures.
Britain needs universities that simply educate people and do not inject a toxic class system belief structure in the process, which Oxbridge clearly has done for centuries. If Oxbridge were to be dismantled along the lines I suggest, not only would the British education system become more fairer, but the British class system would eventually disappear too. The result of this would mean more people reaching their potential as social mobility increases. Why would social mobility increase? There would be no Oxbridge graduates employed simply by virtue of their university’s reputation, but rather on their ability instead. Therefore, the graduate pool flattens out along class lines as the beating heart of the class crucible, Oxbridge, will cease to exist, resulting in a fairer Britain with a flatter social structure which would ultimately empower economic growth as it has done in Germany and Scandinavia.
If you just imagine Oxbridge university. Think of its place, its buildings and its students. Can you see a problem with this image? To most people, it is a bastion of British goodness and in many respects is what makes Britain, Britain. There is, however, a common theme inherent in this image that most people do not recognise. Oxbridge students are mostly white, privileged upper middle class. Its buildings and architecture are symbols of historical white privilege. The towns these universities are in are very wealthy towns. If you think about the way Oxbridge delivers education, it’s worrying. Students are not only educated at Oxbridge, but they are, in the process, also indoctrinated into the upper-middle class way of doings things according to British culture, whatever this may be. Ultimately, students are led to believe they are superior, not because they have a degree, but because of where they got their degree from.
This approach to education is wrong. It has divided British society for centuries. It is a well-documented fact that Oxbridge graduates look down on other people. Education should be about inclusivity, not exclusivity. However, the way in which Oxbridge operates is designed around exclusion, from its collegiate system and arcane traditions and practices. If you look at Germany and Scandinavian countries where there is no class system, society is generally more inclusive, more caring, underpinned by a ‘socialist’ attitude of equality, fairness and respect. People there become educated, not to become better than other people as people in Oxbridge do, but to help other people. The absence of a class system structure in these countries means that people do not face the same obstacles as they do in Britain where there is low society mobility. Therefore, more people reach their potential in these countries, resulting in more people empowering the economies of those countries, which is not the case in Britain where low social mobility continues to constrain economic growth.
In Britain, education is divided along lines of wealth and status. People are put into a box and labelled early on in their lives. This chipping away at personal growth and aspiration over time limits their potential and ultimately has limited the economic growth and output of the British economy. Oxbridge, as a whole, has divided Britain along these lines for centuries because its admissions process is deeply flawed. It favours the upper-middle class identity on which institutional racism, nepotism and discrimination are predicated. Students who do not conform to this identity are discriminated against at the interview stage of the application process, regardless of their actual real ability and potential. In other words, subjectivity is introduced during this stage, where tutor’s own biased belief systems are projected onto the student to see if they ‘fit the stereotype’ that is upper-middle class Britain. Attention is given to not what the student says, but rather how they say it. This is hopelessly flawed.
What is the solution to the Oxbridge problem? Simply removing the interview stage will not solve the larger problem, which is that Oxbridge creates the class system. There is simply no place for Oxbridge in 21st century Britain. These universities are outdated, flawed and deeply unfair institutions that promote all these bad qualities wrapped inside a shiny exterior designed to fool the general public into thinking they are innocent 'do-gooders' trying to make British society a better place. This is actually the opposite of what they have been doing for centuries! Therefore, the only solution that remains is one where Oxbridge is turned into museums and homes for charities. A socialist solution like this only seems fair considering the many years of capitalism Oxbridge have promoted, which has wrecked British society through social divisions and structures.
Britain needs universities that simply educate people and do not inject a toxic class system belief structure in the process, which Oxbridge clearly has done for centuries. If Oxbridge were to be dismantled along the lines I suggest, not only would the British education system become more fairer, but the British class system would eventually disappear too. The result of this would mean more people reaching their potential as social mobility increases. Why would social mobility increase? There would be no Oxbridge graduates employed simply by virtue of their university’s reputation, but rather on their ability instead. Therefore, the graduate pool flattens out along class lines as the beating heart of the class crucible, Oxbridge, will cease to exist, resulting in a fairer Britain with a flatter social structure which would ultimately empower economic growth as it has done in Germany and Scandinavia.
(edited 5 years ago)
Scroll to see replies
I'm sure there's a good rebuttal to this, but I can't articulate it.
@Doonesbury
@Doonesbury
Did you come from The Guardian?
Original post by Tolgarda
"Service unavailable" sums it up really
Original post by BlondeBookworm
Did you come from The Guardian?
Considering the former editor of The Guardian is principal of an Oxbridge college and many Guardian journos are Oxbridge alumni I doubt it.
Original post by studentshello
The problem with Oxbridge. Here are my thoughts on the matter. What do you think?
If you just imagine Oxbridge university. Think of its place, its buildings and its students. Can you see a problem with this image? To most people, it is a bastion of British goodness and in many respects is what makes Britain, Britain. There is, however, a common theme inherent in this image that most people do not recognise. Oxbridge students are mostly white, privileged upper middle class. Its buildings and architecture are symbols of historical white privilege. The towns these universities are in are very wealthy towns. If you think about the way Oxbridge delivers education, it’s worrying. Students are not only educated at Oxbridge, but they are, in the process, also indoctrinated into the upper-middle class way of doings things according to British culture, whatever this may be. Ultimately, students are led to believe they are superior, not because they have a degree, but because of where they got their degree from.
This approach to education is wrong. It has divided British society for centuries. It is a well-documented fact that Oxbridge graduates look down on other people. Education should be about inclusivity, not exclusivity. However, the way in which Oxbridge operates is designed around exclusion, from its collegiate system and arcane traditions and practices. If you look at Germany and Scandinavian countries where there is no class system, society is generally more inclusive, more caring, underpinned by a ‘socialist’ attitude of equality, fairness and respect. People there become educated, not to become better than other people as people in Oxbridge do, but to help other people. The absence of a class system structure in these countries means that people do not face the same obstacles as they do in Britain where there is low society mobility. Therefore, more people reach their potential in these countries, resulting in more people empowering the economies of those countries, which is not the case in Britain where low social mobility continues to constrain economic growth.
In Britain, education is divided along lines of wealth and status. People are put into a box and labelled early on in their lives. This chipping away at personal growth and aspiration over time limits their potential and ultimately has limited the economic growth and output of the British economy. Oxbridge, as a whole, has divided Britain along these lines for centuries because its admissions process is deeply flawed. It favours the upper-middle class identity on which institutional racism, nepotism and discrimination are predicated. Students who do not conform to this identity are discriminated against at the interview stage of the application process, regardless of their actual real ability and potential. In other words, subjectivity is introduced during this stage, where tutor’s own biased belief systems are projected onto the student to see if they ‘fit the stereotype’ that is upper-middle class Britain. Attention is given to not what the student says, but rather how they say it. This is hopelessly flawed.
What is the solution to the Oxbridge problem? Simply removing the interview stage will not solve the larger problem, which is that Oxbridge creates the class system. There is simply no place for Oxbridge in 21st century Britain. These universities are outdated, flawed and deeply unfair institutions that promote all these bad qualities wrapped inside a shiny exterior designed to fool the general public into thinking they are innocent 'do-gooders' trying to make British society a better place. This is actually the opposite of what they have been doing for centuries! Therefore, the only solution that remains is one where Oxbridge is turned into museums and homes for charities. A socialist solution like this only seems fair considering the many years of capitalism Oxbridge have promoted, which has wrecked British society through social divisions and structures.
Britain needs universities that simply educate people and do not inject a toxic class system belief structure in the process, which Oxbridge clearly has done for centuries. If Oxbridge were to be dismantled along the lines I suggest, not only would the British education system become more fairer, but the British class system would eventually disappear too. The result of this would mean more people reaching their potential as social mobility increases. Why would social mobility increase? There would be no Oxbridge graduates employed simply by virtue of their university’s reputation, but rather on their ability instead. Therefore, the graduate pool flattens out along class lines as the beating heart of the class crucible, Oxbridge, will cease to exist, resulting in a fairer Britain with a flatter social structure which would ultimately empower economic growth as it has done in Germany and Scandinavia.
If you just imagine Oxbridge university. Think of its place, its buildings and its students. Can you see a problem with this image? To most people, it is a bastion of British goodness and in many respects is what makes Britain, Britain. There is, however, a common theme inherent in this image that most people do not recognise. Oxbridge students are mostly white, privileged upper middle class. Its buildings and architecture are symbols of historical white privilege. The towns these universities are in are very wealthy towns. If you think about the way Oxbridge delivers education, it’s worrying. Students are not only educated at Oxbridge, but they are, in the process, also indoctrinated into the upper-middle class way of doings things according to British culture, whatever this may be. Ultimately, students are led to believe they are superior, not because they have a degree, but because of where they got their degree from.
This approach to education is wrong. It has divided British society for centuries. It is a well-documented fact that Oxbridge graduates look down on other people. Education should be about inclusivity, not exclusivity. However, the way in which Oxbridge operates is designed around exclusion, from its collegiate system and arcane traditions and practices. If you look at Germany and Scandinavian countries where there is no class system, society is generally more inclusive, more caring, underpinned by a ‘socialist’ attitude of equality, fairness and respect. People there become educated, not to become better than other people as people in Oxbridge do, but to help other people. The absence of a class system structure in these countries means that people do not face the same obstacles as they do in Britain where there is low society mobility. Therefore, more people reach their potential in these countries, resulting in more people empowering the economies of those countries, which is not the case in Britain where low social mobility continues to constrain economic growth.
In Britain, education is divided along lines of wealth and status. People are put into a box and labelled early on in their lives. This chipping away at personal growth and aspiration over time limits their potential and ultimately has limited the economic growth and output of the British economy. Oxbridge, as a whole, has divided Britain along these lines for centuries because its admissions process is deeply flawed. It favours the upper-middle class identity on which institutional racism, nepotism and discrimination are predicated. Students who do not conform to this identity are discriminated against at the interview stage of the application process, regardless of their actual real ability and potential. In other words, subjectivity is introduced during this stage, where tutor’s own biased belief systems are projected onto the student to see if they ‘fit the stereotype’ that is upper-middle class Britain. Attention is given to not what the student says, but rather how they say it. This is hopelessly flawed.
What is the solution to the Oxbridge problem? Simply removing the interview stage will not solve the larger problem, which is that Oxbridge creates the class system. There is simply no place for Oxbridge in 21st century Britain. These universities are outdated, flawed and deeply unfair institutions that promote all these bad qualities wrapped inside a shiny exterior designed to fool the general public into thinking they are innocent 'do-gooders' trying to make British society a better place. This is actually the opposite of what they have been doing for centuries! Therefore, the only solution that remains is one where Oxbridge is turned into museums and homes for charities. A socialist solution like this only seems fair considering the many years of capitalism Oxbridge have promoted, which has wrecked British society through social divisions and structures.
Britain needs universities that simply educate people and do not inject a toxic class system belief structure in the process, which Oxbridge clearly has done for centuries. If Oxbridge were to be dismantled along the lines I suggest, not only would the British education system become more fairer, but the British class system would eventually disappear too. The result of this would mean more people reaching their potential as social mobility increases. Why would social mobility increase? There would be no Oxbridge graduates employed simply by virtue of their university’s reputation, but rather on their ability instead. Therefore, the graduate pool flattens out along class lines as the beating heart of the class crucible, Oxbridge, will cease to exist, resulting in a fairer Britain with a flatter social structure which would ultimately empower economic growth as it has done in Germany and Scandinavia.
ayy new socialist fren
but tbh i think from what you've said, i'm even more determined to apply for oxbridge, just as a "screw you" to discrimination lol (but what if i get in? 
)
Could you provide any sources for your claim that oxbridge only having white, priviledged upper middle class students? This is just false. Cambridge takes in half as many state-school students as private schooled students, and if you look at the current postgraduates list it has loads of non-white, foreign students. I would imagine Oxford is similar. The issue of superiority is not due to the teaching, but the reputation of the schools. It is unfortunately not something you can just get rid of. The collegiate system allows the lessons to be more focused and 1-1. A massive uni all in the same class would have a much less individual teaching.
Getting rid of Oxbridge will only make the problem worse. It will cause people to look down on oxbridge graduates as they were a part of this 'toxic system' and at the same time will allow new unis to take their place, such as Durham and Imperial College.
On the point about money, did you know that studying at cambridge is, on average, cheaper than at most other unis. Cambridge is trying its absolute hardest to promote inclusivity and education, yet you still claim the opposite.
The interview process is done by a panel of tutors, not just one. The chances that all of them are biased on the same thing in the same way is extremely unlikely. Even then, if you feel like you were unfairly rejected you can complain and Cambridge will try to sort it out. The interview process is just there to see how you think and get to know you as a person. Its very hard to determine those things from UCAS.
You just seem to be angry at Oxbridge, but the unis themselves are trying to sort out these issues, not create them It's the british mindset of 'only look out for yourself' // 'us vs them' that causes this. However you can't just impose socialist rules and expect them to work. Socialism requires heavy taxation, and what is the one thing the british hate the most? Taxes.
Getting rid of Oxbridge will only make the problem worse. It will cause people to look down on oxbridge graduates as they were a part of this 'toxic system' and at the same time will allow new unis to take their place, such as Durham and Imperial College.
On the point about money, did you know that studying at cambridge is, on average, cheaper than at most other unis. Cambridge is trying its absolute hardest to promote inclusivity and education, yet you still claim the opposite.
The interview process is done by a panel of tutors, not just one. The chances that all of them are biased on the same thing in the same way is extremely unlikely. Even then, if you feel like you were unfairly rejected you can complain and Cambridge will try to sort it out. The interview process is just there to see how you think and get to know you as a person. Its very hard to determine those things from UCAS.
You just seem to be angry at Oxbridge, but the unis themselves are trying to sort out these issues, not create them It's the british mindset of 'only look out for yourself' // 'us vs them' that causes this. However you can't just impose socialist rules and expect them to work. Socialism requires heavy taxation, and what is the one thing the british hate the most? Taxes.
(edited 5 years ago)
Original post by LeackyBee
Could you provide any sources for your claim that oxbridge only having white, priviledged upper middle class students? This is just false. Cambridge takes in half as many state-school students as private schooled students, and if you look at the current postgraduates list it has loads of non-white, foreign students. I would imagine Oxford is similar. The issue of superiority is not due to the teaching, but the reputation of the schools. It is unfortunately not something you can just get rid of. The collegiate system allows the lessons to be more focused and 1-1. A massive uni all in the same class would have a much less individual teaching.
Getting rid of Oxbridge will only make the problem worse. It will cause people to look down on oxbridge graduates as they were a part of this 'toxic system' and at the same time will allow new unis to take their place, such as Durham and Imperial College.
On the point about money, did you know that studying at cambridge is, on average, cheaper than at most other unis. Cambridge is trying its absolute hardest to promote inclusivity and education, yet you still claim the opposite.
The interview process is done by a panel of tutors, not just one. The chances that all of them are biased on the same thing in the same way is extremely unlikely. Even then, if you feel like you were unfairly rejected you can complain and Cambridge will try to sort it out. The interview process is just there to see how you think and get to know you as a person. Its very hard to determine those things from UCAS.
You just seem to be angry at Oxbridge, but the unis themselves are trying to sort out these issues, not create them It's the british mindset of 'only look out for yourself' // 'us vs them' that causes this. However you can't just impose socialist rules and expect them to work. Socialism requires heavy taxation, and what is the one thing the british hate the most? Taxes.
Getting rid of Oxbridge will only make the problem worse. It will cause people to look down on oxbridge graduates as they were a part of this 'toxic system' and at the same time will allow new unis to take their place, such as Durham and Imperial College.
On the point about money, did you know that studying at cambridge is, on average, cheaper than at most other unis. Cambridge is trying its absolute hardest to promote inclusivity and education, yet you still claim the opposite.
The interview process is done by a panel of tutors, not just one. The chances that all of them are biased on the same thing in the same way is extremely unlikely. Even then, if you feel like you were unfairly rejected you can complain and Cambridge will try to sort it out. The interview process is just there to see how you think and get to know you as a person. Its very hard to determine those things from UCAS.
You just seem to be angry at Oxbridge, but the unis themselves are trying to sort out these issues, not create them It's the british mindset of 'only look out for yourself' // 'us vs them' that causes this. However you can't just impose socialist rules and expect them to work. Socialism requires heavy taxation, and what is the one thing the british hate the most? Taxes.
i agree with most of what youve said, but as the op stated, socialism works in scandinavia. well social democracy, but still many socialist features. and you think brits hate taxes? have you ever met an american???
Original post by Doonesbury
Considering the former editor of The Guardian is principal of an Oxbridge college and many Guardian journos are Oxbridge alumni I doubt it.
https://www.theguardian.com/education/oxbridgeandelitism
Original post by BlondeBookworm
So? I note the top line articles are:
* A piece on the back of The Sutton Trust press release
* A reader's letter about an interview 61 years ago
* More readers letters
* A cambridge student opinion piece
And Owen Jones went to Oxford...
(I'm a Guardian reader
)Original post by NetNeutrality
i agree with most of what youve said, but as the op stated, socialism works in scandinavia. well social democracy, but still many socialist features. and you think brits hate taxes? have you ever met an american???
Socialism works in scandinavia because it used to be communist. A capitalist country will find it incredibly difficult to become socialist, because it requires everyone in it to completely change their mindset. If they forced it, there would definitely be riots, and possibly even a civil war. As much as I love the idea of socialism, it just won't work here.
Both brits and americans hate taxes because their countries are among the most capitalist countries in the world. They've been conditioned to value money so much that the government taking some is horrible. It is also on part due to a lack of understanding of the importance of taxes.
Original post by LeackyBee
Socialism works in scandinavia because it used to be communist. A capitalist country will find it incredibly difficult to become socialist, because it requires everyone in it to completely change their mindset. If they forced it, there would definitely be riots, and possibly even a civil war. As much as I love the idea of socialism, it just won't work here.
Both brits and americans hate taxes because their countries are among the most capitalist countries in the world. They've been conditioned to value money so much that the government taking some is horrible. It is also on part due to a lack of understanding of the importance of taxes.
Both brits and americans hate taxes because their countries are among the most capitalist countries in the world. They've been conditioned to value money so much that the government taking some is horrible. It is also on part due to a lack of understanding of the importance of taxes.
It was never communist
Original post by LeackyBee
Socialism works in scandinavia because it used to be communist. A capitalist country will find it incredibly difficult to become socialist, because it requires everyone in it to completely change their mindset. If they forced it, there would definitely be riots, and possibly even a civil war. As much as I love the idea of socialism, it just won't work here.
Both brits and americans hate taxes because their countries are among the most capitalist countries in the world. They've been conditioned to value money so much that the government taking some is horrible. It is also on part due to a lack of understanding of the importance of taxes.
Both brits and americans hate taxes because their countries are among the most capitalist countries in the world. They've been conditioned to value money so much that the government taking some is horrible. It is also on part due to a lack of understanding of the importance of taxes.
Which bits of scandinavia were communist?... however you can't talk to a libertarian spitting that tax is theft for long before you realise you're talking to someone who thinks roads fix themselves and law and order just happens on its own.
Original post by Joinedup
Which bits of scandinavia were communist?... however you can't talk to a libertarian spitting that tax is theft for long before you realise you're talking to someone who thinks roads fix themselves and law and order just happens on its own.
Finland was under communist Russian rule for a long period of time before it declared independence. If they weren't actually communist in this time then I will take back that point, but the communist rule was definitely a factor in it becoming socialist.
I agree with the rest haha,
Yep, just abolish the university so that all the world-leading research goes into the trash. There are so many other negative implications to shutting down Oxbridge. This thread is so stupid. Oxbridge isn't even the reason why we have class systems lololollolololol
Original post by studentshello
A socialist solution like this only seems fair.
And there is your problem. Socialist solutions (a) only seem fair (they are not actually fair and don't actually work) and (b) are not wanted by the vast majority of Britons. You are in a tiny minority, and are likely to remain so. Britain and the other western democracies fought a cold war against such ideologies for fifty years and we are unlikely to forget that, or to cave in to it now.
What Britain needs is a system that can educate intellectually elite people and make use of their abilities, not one that levels down the playing field to accommodate others.
You also neglect the fact that the system has turned out many socialist thinkers, though, of course, it seems to have missed out on educating a few intellectual giants like Jeremy Corbyn.
Also, Cambridge has a higher percentage of undergraduates from ethnic minorities than are present in the UK population as a whole. I suspect the same applies to Oxford.
(edited 5 years ago)
Honestly mate I get your poor and all but me and my boys just came back from fox hunting outside Cambridge university and what can i say? I love being rich! The issue isnt grades, I only have 1 real qualification, BTEC hair and beauty and Im now in the Oxford school of medicine!!! Sorry Pal
Original post by Doonesbury
So? I note the top line articles are:
* A piece on the back of The Sutton Trust press release
* A reader's letter about an interview 61 years ago
* More readers letters
* A cambridge student opinion piece
And Owen Jones went to Oxford...
(I'm a Guardian reader )
* A piece on the back of The Sutton Trust press release
* A reader's letter about an interview 61 years ago
* More readers letters
* A cambridge student opinion piece
And Owen Jones went to Oxford...
(I'm a Guardian reader
)If anyone wants Alan Rusbridger's most recent take on the Oxford admissions system and how far it is succeeding in improving access, he has written at length here https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/if-oxford-shrugs-alan-rusbridger-admissions-lmh
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Maths at oxbridge
- 71 on the MAT, rejected for interview
- How competitive is computer science and what are my chances of getting in?
- University
- How screwed am I
- alevel resits
- Computer Science vs Joint Mathematics and Computer Science
- Durham University - Full of Rich Privately Educated people?
- Are interview prep day from companies like Oxbridge Applications worth the money?
- Obsessed with Oxbridge?
- Maths Olympiads Remaining
- Applying at Oxford, Cambridge and Russells group
- Does further maths help with maths entrance exams?
- Engineering at Oxbridge or CS at other top uni
- Starting GCSES looking to get into Oxbridge Maths
- how much do oxford and cambridge consider GCSEs?
- Oxbridge Applicants
- Oxbridge math and ukmt/other math challenges
- Further maths as a third subject for studying economics
- applying for maths (uni)
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
