Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nina)
    Of course they are. But that article is clearly very biased without any knowledge of the style of a Cambridge interview.
    What, and the style of the Cambridge interview is to patronise, be unfair to, and to implicitly ridicule the applicant? I think not.

    (That's assuming the stuff about her getting less time to read the sheets etc. is true which neither or us know for sure)
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NJHL)
    "I'll leave the Greek alphabet to the mathematicians, thank you very much."

    what about the classicists?
    Yeah, what about us?

    And the Greeks for that matter. I think they should have at least some say in the matter.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jismith1989)
    Yeah, what about us?

    And the Greeks for that matter. I think they should have at least some say in the matter.
    Nah, the mathmos have dibs on it. You can have some of the crap letters. Like rho, nu and iota. And, if you promise to be careful, we might lend you chi on alternate Tuesday afternoons.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Arrogant Git)
    Nah, the mathmos have dibs on it. You can have some of the crap letters. Like rho, nu and iota. And, if you promise to be careful, we might lend you chi on alternate Tuesday afternoons.
    :p: Well, I want ξ (xi), simply because it's such an odd character. The only problem would be that my only speech would tend to imitate a deflating snake.
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    (Original post by Arrogant Git)
    Nah, the mathmos have dibs on it. You can have some of the crap letters. Like rho, nu and iota. And, if you promise to be careful, we might lend you chi on alternate Tuesday afternoons.
    No, we physicists need those! We need our density, resitivity and frequency :hmmm:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I could live without resistivity. Density too, come to that.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    Sorry people, as a linguistic scientist I'm going to have to claim all the letters. You can still use them, provided you pay us royalties.
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    (Original post by Scipio90)
    I could live without resistivity. Density too, come to that.
    Density yeah probably. One of my Cambridge interviewers asked me if I knew what it was :o:
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    As long as you pay us loyalties for engineering that you may make use of, i.e. houses, bicycles, computers, stereos, paper, pens etc. etc.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ukebert)
    As long as you pay us loyalties for engineering that you may make use of, i.e. houses, bicycles, computers, stereos, paper, pens etc. etc.
    Surely everyone should pay Social and Political Scientists for the privilege of living in a society then? :yep:
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ukebert)
    As long as you pay us loyalties for engineering that you may make use of, i.e. houses, bicycles, computers, stereos, paper, pens etc. etc.
    I already buy them - you just use letters and language for free. :rolleyes:
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The West Wing)
    Surely everyone should pay Social and Political Scientists for the privilege of living in a society then? :yep:
    (Original post by Supergrunch)
    I already buy them - you just use letters and language for free. :rolleyes:
    Ah, but you merely study society/language, rather than physically making or designing it, ergo we must pay you nothing
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ukebert)
    Ah, but you merely study society/language, rather than physically making or designing it, ergo we must pay you nothing
    Yep, you caught the blatant flaw. I'm still keeping the letters though. :p:
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Supergrunch)
    Yep, you caught the blatant flaw. I'm still keeping the letters though. :p:
    I WON THE THREAD :banana:
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ukebert)
    Ah, but you merely study society/language, rather than physically making or designing it, ergo we must pay you nothing
    :p:

    So what masterpieces of engineering have you designed? :ninja:
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jismith1989)
    :p:

    So what masterpieces of engineering have you designed? :ninja:
    Many :yes: Just that none of them have been / could be constructed
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thisisyesterday)
    I think it highlights the sad truth about the elitist element of Cambridge, and how social background will determine whether or not you get in.

    So I'd say that is newsworthy, yes.
    Honestly it's simply not true. There are tonnes of people here from distinctly unlcassy backgrounds. There's loads and the interviews are clever enough to realise class doesn't matter. Moreover loads of the academics seem to be pretty left wing.

    I would suggest the writer of that article was simply had a chip on her shoulder and tried to exaggerate everything. I mean for goodness sake she even criticised Cambridge for the weather being bad compared to at Warwick. I mean to me that just screams that she was trying to find reasons to criticise it rather than relying on things that were relevant. Also interviews can sometimes say things in jest are that are quite clearly not taking the piss, but when removed out of context sound like an insults (re: Adolf Hitler comment). I agree she might not have had the best interview experience but I'm sure a lot of it was a characature of reality. Few people state the absolute truth in matters like this, especially when they're trying to discredit something.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    "A selling point for Oxbridge is its ability to keep class sizes to a minimum, offering one-to-one or one-to-two classes at times. At universities like Warwick, this is not feasible and not desirable. Seminars are about interacting with those around you and sharing ideas; much more can be drawn from a seminar of eight than from a group of two or three."

    Yeah, because Oxbridge don't have seminars as well as tutorials/supervision, do they? I think when they're needed a lot of courses have them. I do History which is heavily independently based and even then we still have seminars for certain subjects. She's simply angry at Cambridge. And she doesn't care what false comments she makes to try and convince people she's right.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ukebert)
    Ah, but you merely study society/language, rather than physically making or designing it, ergo we must pay you nothing
    Does that mean students of literature and language reap all then?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ploop)
    Does that mean students of literature and language reap all then?
    :lolwut:
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.