This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- How to deal with being rejected from Oxbridge with a sibling studying there?
- Mpharm with foundation year
- Obsessed with Oxbridge?
- My friend keeps telling me they feel dumb in a way that makes me feel dumber
- How to get over a Cambridge rejection
- Oxbridge Applicants
- Any singaporeans studying in leeds?
- conflicted whether to move to london for uni or go to oxford for english lit?
- My parents are pressuring me to change my a level options
- got rlly drunk, seriously messed up
- Is mental health a contextual reason for bad gcses when applying to oxbridge?
- How to get over not applying to Oxbridge.
- rejected but relieved
- Relationship problem
- A levels disaster I'm done
- Degree choice
- Is it worth giving a shot at Oxbridge?
- Relationship lies
- a-level biology tips and more...
- Dwp EO decision making reserve list 2023
Life sorted bcos of oxbridge?
Scroll to see replies
matthew
Again, you have proved my point.
I can see from your posts that you lack reasoning, even in this post you have shown that you can't see that you not knowing if I have knowledge of other universities is different from me saying you don't have the reasoning skills to study law at cambridge.
Your reasoning skills manifest themselves in your posts whereas you have no way of knowing what I do and don't know.
I can see from your posts that you lack reasoning, even in this post you have shown that you can't see that you not knowing if I have knowledge of other universities is different from me saying you don't have the reasoning skills to study law at cambridge.
Your reasoning skills manifest themselves in your posts whereas you have no way of knowing what I do and don't know.
Umm...you have no idea about how my Cambridge went. You don't KNOW that it was all based on my ablility, or lack thereof, to reason, do you? Plus, you have REASONED (as you so love the word), that ALL other universities are inferior to Oxbridge (and I doubt you've been to all of them)...and again, applying your maxims to you, you should know not to make comments on something you know nothing about (THAT was what I meant. Maybe I didn't explain myself clearly enough before). If my reasoning skills are lacking (which I don't doubt...after all I AM going to university to improve them), then please analyse yours as well. You can reason what you like from my behaviour, and I shall do the same from yours.
d750
If I were you, I think it would be best to delete your last post in this thread and apologise. There's no point insulting strangers at the best of times, but why insult people at a time when they're likely to be most emotional about acceptances / rejections?
d750...I'd like to thank you again! It was very kind of you to be so considerate of my feelings.
matthew
If I were you, I would not be such a cock and keep your nose out of business which doesn't concern you. The guy could do with learning some reasoning.
I'm actually a girl.
matthew
I can see from your posts that you lack reasoning, even in this post you have shown that you can't see that you not knowing if I have knowledge of other universities is different from me saying you don't have the reasoning skills to study law at cambridge.
I can see from your posts that you lack reasoning, even in this post you have shown that you can't see that you not knowing if I have knowledge of other universities is different from me saying you don't have the reasoning skills to study law at cambridge.
That is the strangest sentence ever.
Jools
but having met about 100 ppl who do either of these, it's clear that the workload is considerably less than at Oxford, and especially at Nottingham getting a 1st requries a lot less work.
.
.
mate, you normally talk a lot of sense but i feel i ought to question this statement. i read a recent piece of research comparing firsts at nottingham and lse i believe it was,showing how it was possible to achieve a first at lse with an average of 58%(obv extreme) as they only look at the top 6 marks whilst at nottingham you have to maintain 70% average across all units, hardly an 'easy' first
secondly from talking to friends at oxbridge, whilst you guys do write two 'essays' a week this usually means reading two or three books at the most, they readily admit they do not go into anywhere near as much depth as people at other universities who have three essays a term (um
), my last essay had 50 references, most of my friends cannot say the same *shrug*
rah2
i read a recent piece of research comparing firsts at nottingham and lse i believe it was,showing how it was possible to achieve a first at lse with an average of 58%(obv extreme) as they only look at the top 6 marks whilst at nottingham you have to maintain 70% average across all units, hardly an 'easy' first
Exams aren't the same standard at every uni, if you need 58% for a 1st at LSE and 70% at Nottingham then the LSE paper's most likely to be harder.
rah2
secondly from talking to friends at oxbridge, whilst you guys do write two 'essays' a week this usually means reading two or three books at the most, they readily admit they do not go into anywhere near as much depth as people at other universities who have three essays a term (um ), my last essay had 50 references, most of my friends cannot say the same
), my last essay had 50 references, most of my friends cannot say the same "Essays" here are usually 2,000 - 3,000 words and should cover at least 8 books/chapters in History, Geog, Theology etc, for English maybe 2 full novels.
d750
No problem. I had hoped a PM might stop this thread in its tracks, but there's no stopping some people when they want an argument, it seems.
I had hoped a PM might stop this thread in its tracks, but there's no stopping some people when they want an argument, it seems.Don't worry...elitist arses won't beat me down!
(Now WATCH the 'reasoning' lecture I'll get from that!)
Jools
Exams aren't the same standard at every uni, if you need 58% for a 1st at LSE and 70% at Nottingham then the LSE paper's most likely to be harder.
.
.
perhaps i did not explain clearly, the article is from the times higher education supplement if you want to look it up, this will give you the gist of it:
" The London School of Economics and Nottingham University are both top UK universities yet the research shows that the marks required for a first at the LSE are significantly lower than at Nottingham
* According to the research, an LSE student with five papers at the first-class threshold of 70 per cent and four papers at 60 per cent - an average of 65.5 per cent - would get a first
* At Nottingham, the same set of results would not meet its requirement that a student must achieve an average mark of 70 per cent across all their second and third-year papers (with a higher weighting given to the final year) to gain a first. "
does that make more sense?
rah2
does that make more sense?
Yes, but it is assuming that the LSE and Nottingham papers are of identical standards. The LSE paper could be generally more difficult, counterbalanced by having lower requirements for a 1st.
rah2
perhaps i did not explain clearly, the article is from the times higher education supplement if you want to look it up, this will give you the gist of it:
" The London School of Economics and Nottingham University are both top UK universities yet the research shows that the marks required for a first at the LSE are significantly lower than at Nottingham
* According to the research, an LSE student with five papers at the first-class threshold of 70 per cent and four papers at 60 per cent - an average of 65.5 per cent - would get a first
* At Nottingham, the same set of results would not meet its requirement that a student must achieve an average mark of 70 per cent across all their second and third-year papers (with a higher weighting given to the final year) to gain a first. "
does that make more sense?
" The London School of Economics and Nottingham University are both top UK universities yet the research shows that the marks required for a first at the LSE are significantly lower than at Nottingham
* According to the research, an LSE student with five papers at the first-class threshold of 70 per cent and four papers at 60 per cent - an average of 65.5 per cent - would get a first
* At Nottingham, the same set of results would not meet its requirement that a student must achieve an average mark of 70 per cent across all their second and third-year papers (with a higher weighting given to the final year) to gain a first. "
does that make more sense?
But universities will have a number of ways in which a student can get a first, I think. At least Oxford has two ways. I think they're (1) 3 marks over 70 and none under 40, or (2) an average of 67 (something like that, anyway). And that means that two students who both have first could have quite a different average mark, yet still be awarded the same grade by the same university. The variation between LSE and Nottingham could just reflect that, in some way.
Jools
Yes, but it is assuming that the LSE and Nottingham papers are of identical standards. The LSE paper could be generally more difficult, counterbalanced by having lower requirements for a 1st.
surely this shows the lack of standardisation amongst universities? and is it realistic to say that for the same subject, say economics, third years at lse are going to cover subjects that are 'that' much harder than nottingham?
i guess the only way would be to compare papers, does anyone know of any such studies?
as for the oxford system, seems a little odd that someone could scrape 41s in however many papers and then get a first on the basis of three spetacular papers? not that i'm criticising it as such, i'd love that system
must go do some work before i fail tommorows exam, as to the original discussion (whoops) the answer is no, your life will not be sorted simply by virtue of an oxbridge degree, especially if you lack any semblence of personality
rah2
surely this shows the lack of standardisation amongst universities? and is it realistic to say that for the same subject, say economics, third years at lse are going to cover subjects that are 'that' much harder than nottingham?
The subjects covered may be similar, but the exam papers may have harder questions, or the marking criteria may be harsher, etc.
The lack of standardisation is a major issue - getting a high 2.2 in Economics at LSE is harder than scraping a low 2.1 in Economics at a lower-ranked uni, without a doubt. This is a problem when job ads just ask for a 2.1 from any uni and any discipline.
rah2
as for the oxford system, seems a little odd that someone could scrape 41s in however many papers and then get a first on the basis of three spetacular papers? not that i'm criticising it as such, i'd love that system
Erm, I don't think that's true? Usually here in finals for a first you need e.g. 70% in 5/8 papers and 68% or so overall. For Law mods you can get a 1st with 70, 70, 60 though.
Edit: I think d750 might mean "(1) 3 marks over 70 and none under 40, and (2) an average of 67", not either/or. Anyone graduated know for sure?
rah2
surely this shows the lack of standardisation amongst universities? and is it realistic to say that for the same subject, say economics, third years at lse are going to cover subjects that are 'that' much harder than nottingham?
the thing about standardization is, where does it stop? first, the exams are standardized. then, to make things fair, teaching is standardized. eventually, to make the playing field "level", everything else is standardized, and we get a society that begins to resemble huxley's brave new world.
imagine all uni degrees, regardless of origin, all being called Bachelor of Knowledge (no individual subjects, all graduates are to have a standard set of knowledge and skills, you see , no university names either, after all, they are all standardized and the same.)the fact remains, human beings are unique, and "standardization", whilst a noble concept, is impractical unless in broad, general terms (which basically means almost the same, but not quite, in practice.)
if standardization was really so effective and "all degrees of the same class are the same", why would people go to all that effort to secure places in reputable universities (oxbridge, LSE, UCL, etc.)?
-------------------------------------------------
on to workloads:
anybody can choose to spend an inordinate amount of time and effort on any given piece of work, and claim that they have to do lots, using said piece of work as an example. rah2, i'm not demeaning your workload, but the question that begs answering is - does the average student at your university do as much work as you do, or are you exceptional?
anecdotal evidence shows that most students here at cambridge, and i'm quite certain it's true at oxford too, feel that they are stretched quite hard by their courses. and we are talking about the pick of the litter here, mostly straight A students with a proven academic record. (okay, that sounded a bit pompous, but who cares
) this is in direct contrast to stories of how friends of friends at other universities seem to be having the time of their lives boozing and generally making merry, rather than wading through books, papers and essays. (seems to be a common topic of conversation when unhappy friends wonder if they made a good decision to come to cambridge and sign away the better part of their social lives to do work...)-----------------------------------------
random idea regarding standardization - someone should do an experiment regarding marking criteria and stringency.
pick 10 universities, across a range of "difficulty" and "prestige". pick a representative sample, say, 3 essays of each classmark (I, IIi, IIii, III and fail) from student answers from each uni. (i'm assuming that the SAME question has been set for EVERY uni in the experiment). get the examiners to grade the essays and watch the sh*t hit the fan when they start comparing notes
rinse and repeat for a few different departments/courses.khl31
rah2, i'm not demeaning your workload, but the question that begs answering is - does the average student at your university do as much work as you do, or are you exceptional?
rah2, i'm not demeaning your workload, but the question that begs answering is - does the average student at your university do as much work as you do, or are you exceptional?
i wouldn't say i'm exceptional at all, however i'm a second year with 10hrs a week contact time so i have much more time to focus on my specific coursework. what i was trying to ineloquently say was quantity does not necessarily mean quality
from my own experience, and not to claim i work 'harder' than equivalent oxbridge students, especially whilst i can specialise in politics whilst they cover another two subjects, but i know from friends on the courses that they have done no extra topics to mine, in terms of difficulty, and simply do not know them in as much detail
meh, maybe my friends are lazy, either way in terms of workload oxbridge is immense and i do not envy you guys at all
Jools
Edit: I think d750 might mean "(1) 3 marks over 70 and none under 40, and (2) an average of 67", not either/or. Anyone graduated know for sure?
I did mean either / or, and I'm fairly sure that's right. I've just graduated myself. There are definitely two ways (at least) of getting a first, but I may be wrong about the figures.
EDIT: Just remembered actually, it's something like either (1) 3 marks of 70, no marks below 40 and an average of 65 or (2) an average of 67.
Or something like that, anyway. The upshot is that one student can get a first with a 65 average, and another with a 67 average. It may not sound like a big difference, but two marks is quite a lot in finals papers.
Hey.
After talking to one of my tutors today, I found out that some of the things I had said in this discussion were incorrect. Mainly, the bit where I said that it was just as difficult to get a first at any other university in the country as it is at Oxbridge. My tutor told me that actually different groups of universities (usually composed according to prestige) will have different external examiners to regulate the standards each university requires to achieve a first/2:1/2:2...
HOWEVER, part of my main point still stands. What I know only comes from what I know about the procedure in grading Law exams, but I assume a similar method applies to all subjects. She said that Oxbridge share the same external examiners for Law as, for certain the London universities of the 'Golden 5' (UCL, LSE, KCL) and some of the other Russell Group universities. I assume this is the same also for other subjects.
Just thought that was quite insightful.
After talking to one of my tutors today, I found out that some of the things I had said in this discussion were incorrect. Mainly, the bit where I said that it was just as difficult to get a first at any other university in the country as it is at Oxbridge. My tutor told me that actually different groups of universities (usually composed according to prestige) will have different external examiners to regulate the standards each university requires to achieve a first/2:1/2:2...
HOWEVER, part of my main point still stands. What I know only comes from what I know about the procedure in grading Law exams, but I assume a similar method applies to all subjects. She said that Oxbridge share the same external examiners for Law as, for certain the London universities of the 'Golden 5' (UCL, LSE, KCL) and some of the other Russell Group universities. I assume this is the same also for other subjects.
Just thought that was quite insightful.
Related discussions
- How to deal with being rejected from Oxbridge with a sibling studying there?
- Mpharm with foundation year
- Obsessed with Oxbridge?
- My friend keeps telling me they feel dumb in a way that makes me feel dumber
- How to get over a Cambridge rejection
- Oxbridge Applicants
- Any singaporeans studying in leeds?
- conflicted whether to move to london for uni or go to oxford for english lit?
- My parents are pressuring me to change my a level options
- got rlly drunk, seriously messed up
- Is mental health a contextual reason for bad gcses when applying to oxbridge?
- How to get over not applying to Oxbridge.
- rejected but relieved
- Relationship problem
- A levels disaster I'm done
- Degree choice
- Is it worth giving a shot at Oxbridge?
- Relationship lies
- a-level biology tips and more...
- Dwp EO decision making reserve list 2023
Latest
Trending
Last reply 6 hours ago
Weidenfeld Hoffmann Trust (WHT) Scholarship Notification (2024-2025)Last reply 9 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 3 weeks ago
will 5 a levels give me a better chance at getting into oxford?Trending
Last reply 6 hours ago
Weidenfeld Hoffmann Trust (WHT) Scholarship Notification (2024-2025)Last reply 9 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 3 weeks ago
will 5 a levels give me a better chance at getting into oxford?
