Comments on: The University of Oxford – College Life

By: THthefirst

THthefirst — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 09:41:39 +0000

I read history at UCL and it has an excellent reputation. However, Oxford and Cambridge have a certain unique reputation, which is linked to history and tradition, and which set them apart. The vast majority of students would take an offer from Oxford over UCL – and employers in the top professions etc still attach a lot of kudos to Oxford.

Sounds like you are one of the UCL students I remember – chip on shoulder and trying to convince yourself it’s better than Oxford when it isn’t.

By: THthefirst

THthefirst — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 09:06:40 +0000

It won’t be destroyed because the Oxbridge – top jobs route will always be there.

By: meaning1

meaning1 — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 08:48:09 +0000

I would agree that Cambridge is discerning the elite by looking at UMS points (UCL has upped general grade requirements to A*AA, like Cambidge; whereas Oxford has remained AAA). But Oxford has absolutely nothing that would get it the best students- it is less stern with the number of As and places too much emphasis on the interview…there is a reason why Cambridge has remained on top, UCL has climbed above Oxford, and Oxford itself is having countless bad reports written about it.

By: meaning1

meaning1 — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 08:18:19 +0000

@THthefirst
I do not go to UCL, actually. I just know many, many students who go to top universities. So I am not crusading on UCL’s behalf, I assure you.

1. In terms of actual standards, Oxford is not better than UCL, and the grade requirements etc are all very similar; Oxford just has its 800 years of history that set it apart. If you meet lots of the students at Oxbridge then at other top worldwide unis, you’ll find that Oxbridge students are by no means ’superior’ (seriously).

By: THthefirst

THthefirst — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 07:24:19 +0000

What do you base these assertions on? Your opinions? You need to define “superior” and your terms.

If you actually look at the objective evidence which the Times, for intstance, takes into account, then O’bridge students have better A-level points etc than UCL students, and O’bridge leads the way for research and attracting top international students. UCL is full (and I speak from experience) of students who applied but didn’t get into Oxford, not vice versa That said, it’s no poor relation

By: THthefirst

THthefirst — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 07:15:24 +0000

The other point is that due to the demand for places at Oxbridge, which is higher than UCL, or other redbricks, because redbrick students would also love to go Oxbridge in the main, there is masive prestige in being offered a place. As a result, O’brdige can pick the best of the best, because they are all beating down the doors to get in.

The history and tradition also attract the very best, which is a self-fulfillfing prophecy, as the best want to be taught alongside the best.

By: meaning1

meaning1 — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 07:01:16 +0000

@THthefirst
I agree that many of UCL’s students are Oxbridge rejects, but that is not to say that they are lesser students. I went with a friend to an Oxford open-day, and they even professed to turning down thousands of equally good students because of limited places. I have friends with Bs and Cs who got into Oxford who were rejected from Durham; similarly, I have a friend who got 14 A*s who was rejected because he stumbled in the interview. Their entry methods do not get the best students.

By: meaning1

meaning1 — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 06:23:42 +0000

@THthefirst
It does not take a genius to see that the traditional Oxbridge dominance is in a state of decay. Their history is subsequent to their being the only two unis in Britain for hundreds of years; and, over the years, other unis have upped their standards and found more effective ways of finding the truly intelligent.

By: THthefirst

THthefirst — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 06:01:30 +0000

What facts do you use to base these bold claims? The facts are the only things we can use. And in the top professions – law, civil service, management consultancy etc – Oxbridge students have a disproportionate representation.

The league tables are pretty objective (as much as is possible) and one of Oxf or Cam have been top, and quite often 1 and 2, since the tables began.

The kudos they have in attracting the top talent is as strong as ever. Where is your evidence to the contrary?

By: THthefirst

THthefirst — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 05:18:07 +0000

You seem to be thinking that i am suggesting a student who doesn’t get into Oxbridge is somehow less of a human being – no, of course not. But objectively, they tend to be less academic – Oxbridge students have the best grades overall (that’s a fact which can be proven as records are kept) because it can afford to be so highly selective, given all the other students (inc. UCLites) who wanted to get in. UCL does give you the London experience though, which is pretty cool.