This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- Oxbridge reapplication/Durham
- Applying for oxbridge in September
- Oxbridge admissions process - which one cares most about GCSEs?
- if i redo yr 12, would it effect my oxbridge application
- Question regarding Cambridge admissions
- Oxford Law GCSE Grades
- Is a Oxbridge Mst valuable for someone with non-Oxbridge undergraduate degree?
- chances for oxbridge base on gcse
- A levels subjects
- oxbridge gsce grades
- Oxford with 9 GCSEs
- Predicted Grades - Advice urgently needed please!
- Oxford Biochemistry / Biology
- 1st vs 2:1 from "target uni" for consulting
- Does LSE actually reject people applying before Oxbridge deadline?
- A level subjects for computer science at oxford n other unis
- How to choose unis in UCAS application for CS undergraduate course?
- Medicine
- Am I going to be ok?
- A* grade Maths achieved, would I only need AA in French and Further Maths?
Personal connotation(s) of Oxbridge Candidates
Scroll to see replies
hobnob
Heh, actually it would seem that he just couldn't decide whether we're destined to rule the world or lead it, and that must have thrown me off.
Should be rule. Then Take That's 'Rule The World' could be our theme song
.
With all due respect for Stephen Fry, but what does a picture of him smiling a weakly "I hate your guts, really"-type of smile on the backseat of a car have to do with perceptions of Oxbridge candidates?
Anyway, for what it's worth, my idea of an Oxbridge candidate would be someone who has good school grades and is reasonably clever, reasonably hard-working and motivated, reasonably capable of original thought, reasonably interested in his subject and is both willing to put up with pressure and able to perform well under it. An Oxbridge graduate would be more or less the same, but with an actual degree under his belt, so he also has the sense not to think of "getting in" as the achievement of a lifetime.
Anyway, for what it's worth, my idea of an Oxbridge candidate would be someone who has good school grades and is reasonably clever, reasonably hard-working and motivated, reasonably capable of original thought, reasonably interested in his subject and is both willing to put up with pressure and able to perform well under it. An Oxbridge graduate would be more or less the same, but with an actual degree under his belt, so he also has the sense not to think of "getting in" as the achievement of a lifetime.
oxbridge has a certain wow factor.
it just isnt on the same level as ucl/imperial, etc...
to argue otherwise is really nieve
it just isnt on the same level as ucl/imperial, etc...
to argue otherwise is really nieve
SouthernFreerider
oxbridge has a certain wow factor.
it just isnt on the same level as ucl/imperial, etc...
to argue otherwise is really naive
it just isnt on the same level as ucl/imperial, etc...
to argue otherwise is really naive
It even affects your capacity to spell
And Oxbridge really isn't the be all and end all. The difference between them and their competitors for certain subjects (such as economics at the LSE, engineering at Imperial, History at Durham) isn't exactly massive.
I look upon Oxbridge candidates as these irritating people who should be seen and not heard. They're allegedly intelligent but all seem to be either constantly worrying that they won't get in because they only have grade 7 in a musical instrument or going on about their manifest destiny to rule the world and how they could never possibly be rejected. Unfortunately both species are equally annoying and they seem to make most of the posts on here. If I had my way we'd have culls of these people, then the doubtless large majority of non-stupid candidates could be the prominent candidates as well as being the ones who actually get in.
Andy the Anarchist
It even affects your capcity to spell
And Oxbridge really isn't the be all and end all. The difference between them and their competitors for certain subjects (such as economics at the LSE, engineering at Imperial, History at Durham) isn't exactly massive.
And Oxbridge really isn't the be all and end all. The difference between them and their competitors for certain subjects (such as economics at the LSE, engineering at Imperial, History at Durham) isn't exactly massive.
i never said it was the be all and end all.
im not talking about specific job opportunities or anything.
i know full well that say, for a job in the city, a 1st from lse is better than a 2.1 or 2.2 from cambridge.
im talking about the impressions a layman has.
its not fair, its not accurate, but its just the way it is.
its liiiike, the best example i give is, maths at oxford is much much much much much much much easier to get an offer for than cambridge. warwick and imperial are harder to get maths offers for than oxford. however, 99.9% of the population dont know this, and so, for the layman, a math degree from oxford is an impressive as a maths degree from cambridge.
SouthernFreerider
i never said it was the be all and end all.
im not talking about specific job opportunities or anything.
i know full well that say, for a job in the city, a 1st from lse is better than a 2.1 or 2.2 from cambridge.
im talking about the impressions a layman has.
its not fair, its not accurate, but its just the way it is.
its liiiike, the best example i give is, maths at oxford is much much much much much much much easier to get an offer for than cambridge. warwick and imperial are harder to get maths offers for than oxford. however, 99.9% of the population dont know this, and so, for the layman, a math degree from oxford is an impressive as a maths degree from cambridge.
im not talking about specific job opportunities or anything.
i know full well that say, for a job in the city, a 1st from lse is better than a 2.1 or 2.2 from cambridge.
im talking about the impressions a layman has.
its not fair, its not accurate, but its just the way it is.
its liiiike, the best example i give is, maths at oxford is much much much much much much much easier to get an offer for than cambridge. warwick and imperial are harder to get maths offers for than oxford. however, 99.9% of the population dont know this, and so, for the layman, a math degree from oxford is an impressive as a maths degree from cambridge.
It's actually easier to get an offer from Cambridge for maths, given the fact that Cambridge make more offers per place than Oxford, since they attach STEP grades to their offers, which not all offer holders meet.
Andy the Anarchist
It's actually easier to get an offer from Cambridge for maths, given the fact that Cambridge make more offers per place than Oxford, since they attach STEP grades to their offers, which not all offer holders meet.
That doesn't follow.
southernfreerider
its liiiike, the best example i give is, maths at oxford is much much much much much much much easier to get an offer for than cambridge. warwick and imperial are harder to get maths offers for than oxford.
You're overstating your case somewhat.
Teebs
That doesn't follow.
No it doesn't, sorry, it would only follow if the quality of applicants applying to both was approximately equal, and the ratio of applicants to places was roughly equal.
Assuming both those things, it would follow that a university that makes more offers per place than another is easier to receive an offer from.
For example, in 2007, Cambridge received 1174 applications for maths, and made 461 offers
In 2008 (sorry, I cannot find the 2007 figures) Oxford received 914 applications for maths and made 169 offers.
Assuming a roughly similar ratio of applicants to places in the years 2007 and 2008 ( a massive assumption I know, but the numbers seem pretty stable for Cambridge between 2004 and 2007) it would appear to be easier to get an offer from Cambridge, assuming the applicants to the two universities were of roughly equal average talent.
Sources:
http://www.cam.ac.uk/admissions/undergraduate/statistics/subjects.html#maths
http://129.67.67.36/CMS/files/2008%20ratios%20of%20undergraduate%20applicants%20to%20places%20across%20the%20University%20of%20Oxford.pdf
Andy the Anarchist
No it doesn't, sorry, it would only follow if the quality of applicants applying to both was approximately equal, and the ratio of applicants to places was roughly equal.
Assuming both those things, it would follow that a university that makes more offers per place than another is easier to receive an offer from.
For example, in 2007, Cambridge received 1174 applications for maths, and made 461 offers
In 2008 (sorry, I cannot find the 2007 figures) Oxford received 914 applications for maths and made 169 offers.
Assuming a roughly similar ratio of applicants to places in the years 2007 and 2008 ( a massive assumption I know, but the numbers seem pretty stable for Cambridge between 2004 and 2007) it would appear to be easier to get an offer from Cambridge, assuming the applicants to the two universities were of roughly equal average talent.
Sources:
http://www.cam.ac.uk/admissions/undergraduate/statistics/subjects.html#maths
http://129.67.67.36/CMS/files/2008%20ratios%20of%20undergraduate%20applicants%20to%20places%20across%20the%20University%20of%20Oxford.pdf
Assuming both those things, it would follow that a university that makes more offers per place than another is easier to receive an offer from.
For example, in 2007, Cambridge received 1174 applications for maths, and made 461 offers
In 2008 (sorry, I cannot find the 2007 figures) Oxford received 914 applications for maths and made 169 offers.
Assuming a roughly similar ratio of applicants to places in the years 2007 and 2008 ( a massive assumption I know, but the numbers seem pretty stable for Cambridge between 2004 and 2007) it would appear to be easier to get an offer from Cambridge, assuming the applicants to the two universities were of roughly equal average talent.
Sources:
http://www.cam.ac.uk/admissions/undergraduate/statistics/subjects.html#maths
http://129.67.67.36/CMS/files/2008%20ratios%20of%20undergraduate%20applicants%20to%20places%20across%20the%20University%20of%20Oxford.pdf
...
Teebs
... or going on about their manifest destiny to rule the world...
Ahem...
Teebs
1) I'm not an applicant.
2) I say it with a smile on my face and a twinkle in my eye rather than a rather creepily intense look and a slightly twitching eyebrow.
2) I say it with a smile on my face and a twinkle in my eye rather than a rather creepily intense look and a slightly twitching eyebrow.
That is true...
Related discussions
- Oxbridge reapplication/Durham
- Applying for oxbridge in September
- Oxbridge admissions process - which one cares most about GCSEs?
- if i redo yr 12, would it effect my oxbridge application
- Question regarding Cambridge admissions
- Oxford Law GCSE Grades
- Is a Oxbridge Mst valuable for someone with non-Oxbridge undergraduate degree?
- chances for oxbridge base on gcse
- A levels subjects
- oxbridge gsce grades
- Oxford with 9 GCSEs
- Predicted Grades - Advice urgently needed please!
- Oxford Biochemistry / Biology
- 1st vs 2:1 from "target uni" for consulting
- Does LSE actually reject people applying before Oxbridge deadline?
- A level subjects for computer science at oxford n other unis
- How to choose unis in UCAS application for CS undergraduate course?
- Medicine
- Am I going to be ok?
- A* grade Maths achieved, would I only need AA in French and Further Maths?
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 hour ago
Weidenfeld Hoffmann Trust (WHT) Scholarship Notification (2024-2025)Last reply 2 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 1 hour ago
Weidenfeld Hoffmann Trust (WHT) Scholarship Notification (2024-2025)Last reply 2 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?
