The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1
oh cambridge most definitely... but i wonder if it's because i'm applying there...
Reply 2
-pixie-
oh cambridge most definitely... but i wonder if it's because i'm applying there...


Oh, Cambridge economics hands down. :smile:
Reply 3
5-0 (poor oxford!)
Reply 4
I never considered applying for Cambridge, Oxford is a far better city in my opinion also I prefer the idea of doing Management.
Reply 5
oxford is crap at economics :p:

but cambridge is no LSE/UCL :wink: :biggrin:
Reply 6
Lol I knew it would be a little battle...personally, I prefer the cambridge course for a couple of reasons:

Firstly, it's a pure course, and there is a greater mathematical element.
Secondly, if you want to do management you can do a diploma in it at the Judge Institute.

Although, E&M at Oxford does look amazing, I think I prefer Cam
Reply 7
jamierwilliams
Firstly, it's a pure course, and there is a greater mathematical element.
I'd dispute that. My course will end up around half maths, and I'm doing E&M. It can be as much as you want really. If you want to go into pure economics, it's far better to study maths at Cambridge, choosing the financial options on part A of the tripos, and then do masters/PhD work in economics, as a friend of my brother is doing. I wouldn't want to do more than 50% maths in an economics course, personally, so I think there's plenty at Oxford. Moreover, if you don't like it, apart from the core Micro and Macro, you can stop studying maths after the first year.

jamierwilliams
Secondly, if you want to do management you can do a diploma in it at the Judge Institute.
True, but the difference between Said and Judge is a lot bigger than the difference between Cambridge Econ and Oxford Econ.

The Said Business School is amazing, the quality of teaching great, but moreover, the extra lectures, the range of speakers they get and the networking events mean we're seeing many business start while at uni, using the business school. And the difference in econ teaching is just 24-23 points, hardly a massive difference. I think it all depends on your individual tutors, personally I haven't been impressed by most of the Cambridge econ tutors I met (about 5 or 6 of them) and have got on very well academically with almost all the ones I know at Oxford (again about 5 or 6 of them).

If you just want to do economics, go to Cambridge, because Oxford doesn't offer it. IMHO, even as the person who loves economics that I am, I'd find that too dry. The mnagement I never expected to be as good as it is, the facilities are unbelieveable, the support for your ideas great and the course really interesting. E&M isn't economics with a side of management, as many (including me) expected it to be, management takes as much time and effort as the economics, and is well worth it.

I had Economics at Selwyn down on my UCAS form, until I went to Oxford and saw what the E&M degree actually entailed, and so decided that even though it's harder to get into, it was worth going for. And I'm so glad I did. I'd advise those trying to decide to actually have a look at both before deciding. I'm betting most people voting here don't have a knowledge of both, or indeed have looked at the other course.

The Guardian's table ranks Oxford ahead of Cambridge in a 1-2 in economics, and Oxford as 7th for business with Cambridge not in the top 50. The Times rates Cambridge as first and Oxford as 14th for economics, but the difference in teaching is just from 23 to 24 and marked lower because they have no figures for destinations, and has Oxford ranked 1st for business with Cambridge not in the top 100. So it's impossible to say the league tables say one is better than the other, as not only are they difference courses, different tables put them in different positions.

Personally, I choose Oxford, even not being that into management, because I prefered the teaching and the specialties of the tutors (far more into Game Theory and Uncertainty). However I was suprised when i came here how much I enjoyed management, so I think I made the right choice. It's worth going for, IMHO, even being harder to get into.
Reply 8
In terms of a city and place to be Oxford for me wins hands down.

Looking at the Economics part of the course and faculty Cambridge wins hands down - Oxford really doesn't come close to Cambridge or LSE for Economics.

In terms of reputation and employability both are blue chip and I would say about equal.

However you have to remember that the course is Economics & Management, and if you would much rather be studying the Management than the extra Economics then probably E&M is for you. It also gives you a lot more flexibility in the second and third years. The strength of E&M really lies with the Management department and the Said Business School, just as the strength of PPE lies in the Politics at Oxford. Not doing Management at Cambridge means that in the first year you take one paper in Political Science and one in Economic History, which would probably make you a more rounded Economist and these two papers would personally be very appealing. At Oxford a minimum of 25% of your degree will be Management and it's important not to discard that.
Reply 9
Oxford EM is amazing, but they don't have a college as cool as Trinity College (Cambridge).
Reply 10
jinsisi
Oxford EM is amazing, but they don't have a college as cool as Trinity College (Cambridge).

Have you seen what Trinity is like when you're there? And if you like colleges like that, have you been to Christ Church, Oxford? It has a similar granduer of main quad, it has a better hall (where they shot Harry Potter) and it has better accomedation. It doesn't have quite as nice a chapel, but if that's whaty you were looking for, I'd presume King's, Cambridge would be your top choice.
Reply 11
isnt oxford great for the arts and cambrige great for the sciences
Reply 12
isnt oxford great for the arts and cambrige great for the sciences


at cambridge economics is considered an art, which i think is pretty special. that's what i like so much about the economics course at cambridge-there's equal emphasise on the art and science aspects of the subject.
Reply 13
That used to be the general asumption but in reality, Oxford is not much better for arts (maybe for one or two subjects), but Cambridge does have the edge on science and maths.
Reply 14
Amrad
Looking at the Economics part of the course and faculty Cambridge wins hands down - Oxford really doesn't come close to Cambridge or LSE for Economics.

I'd disagree on the latter. Talking to people at LSE doing economics with another subject (such as management), we've done just as much work as them so far, and covered just as much. Indeed, in many cases, we've gone to a far greater depth - but this is generally my college, as out tutor pushes us quite a bit and tries to make us think far beyond the basics we're learning - the same happens when looking at what we're doing compared to another college. However in terms of how much you cover, we have the same as a joint LSE econ course; in terms of how much work we do, we have more; in terms of how much contact time we have, we have more; so I don't think you could say LSE is better than Oxford for E&M.

Amrad
In terms of reputation and employability both are blue chip and I would say about equal.

In terms of starting salaries E&M is far higher than Cambridge econ. That's possibly because many more Cambridge econ grads go onto further study and academia, whereas many more E&M grads go on to the city and traditionally high paying jobs, plus entrepreneurship. So it depends what you want to do, Cambridge's course is better for academia, and Oxford's for financial/city work.

Amrad
However you have to remember that the course is Economics & Management, and if you would much rather be studying the Management than the extra Economics then probably E&M is for you. It also gives you a lot more flexibility in the second and third years. The strength of E&M really lies with the Management department and the Said Business School, just as the strength of PPE lies in the Politics at Oxford. Not doing Management at Cambridge means that in the first year you take one paper in Political Science and one in Economic History, which would probably make you a more rounded Economist and these two papers would personally be very appealing. At Oxford a minimum of 25% of your degree will be Management and it's important not to discard that.

All very true. IIRC Cambridge Econ has 5 first year papers - political economics, macro, micro, econ history and maths & stats. Hence 1/5 of the first year is mathematical, 2/5 not at all mathematical (hist and pol), and 2/5 somewhat mathematical (micro and macro). At Oxford, the first year has 3 papers - management, maths & stats, and micro & macro. SO we have 1/3 being totally maths, 1/3 being part maths, and 1/3 being not at all maths. Which implies that Oxford's course is more mathematical for the first year.

In the second and third year, Cambridge has more compulsory maths, and more compulsory micro and macro, whereas Oxford has more options, 6 of which are economics, as opposed to 8. So basically Oxford's 2nd and 3 year can be exactly like Cambridge's, but with 2 management modules instead of an extra micro and macro, and has more options and fewer compulsory courses. Sounds about right. My guess is, havign looked at Cambridge first year econ exams, that if you looked at the equivilent modules, they'd be almost exactly as hard as each other.
Reply 15
-pixie-
at cambridge economics is considered an art, which i think is pretty special. that's what i like so much about the economics course at cambridge-there's equal emphasise on the art and science aspects of the subject.


Hear hear, although I really like the look of the Oxford E&M I think that the Cambridge course 'floats my boat' a little more. I get the impression that Cambridge takes more students, for example, Trinity Cambridge takes 14-16 students annually, whereas ChCh Oxford only takes 2-3 for E&M, but I don't know whether this should decide an application.
Reply 16
The more Drogue puts his argument across, the more appealing E&M appears to be...
Reply 17
Btw, Drogue, what college are you at? Are there any colleges at Oxford that are well-established/reputed for E&M? There are a few colleges I like and if I decided for Oxford it would be between Christ Church, New College and Trinity, based on what I have seen on their website.
Reply 18
jinsisi
Oxford EM is amazing, but they don't have a college as cool as Trinity College (Cambridge).


Trinity College, cool? Do you even know what that word means? LMH is cool, no contest.
Reply 19
jamierwilliams
That used to be the general asumption but in reality, Oxford is not much better for arts (maybe for one or two subjects), but Cambridge does have the edge on science and maths.

:rolleyes:
So since the universities are similar in the league tables (Oxford topping the Times and the Guardian, Cambridge topping the Telegraph, IIRC), Cambridge is better for sciences and they're the same for arts? I'll admit, Cambridge is better the sciences, especially maths, but Oxford's similarly better for arts, especially politics - and the difference in quality between PPE, a subject that is one of Oxford's best regarded, and SPS, one where the students signed a petition stating how bad the teach was, is greater than the difference between Oxford and Cambridge maths, even though there is considerable difference in the latter. Overall there is little difference, as shown by the tables, thus for subjects, it must come out to something resembling and equilibrium.