University and Qualfication prestige...

[aardvark]

Not true. Not trying to sound cocky, but myself and other individuals at my university got the grade requirements for oxford and cambridge but didn't apply. Why? Because we consider university a social education as much as an academic one, thats why.

true - i got the grades to apply for oxford /cambridge but decided not to - i went to leeds instead - and i don't regret it for a second.

 

[Brynn]

Aaaah, in what though... research or teaching?

Teaching....apparantly. They must have awarded it post-humously, as they cant have come to the lectures - otherwise they would have realised how dire they are

 

[w11tho]

Not true. Not trying to sound cocky, but myself and other individuals at my university got the grade requirements for oxford and cambridge but didn't apply. Why? Because we consider university a social education as much as an academic one, thats why.

Hate to be the burster of bubbles, but loads of people get the grade requirements - but there's a fair bit more to getting into Oxbridge than that. And for the record, you're also able to have a social education there. If you're of the opinion that the places are just full of rich toffs and geeks, then I'm afraid I'm going to have to pull out my hypothetical haddock of justice, and beat you into a squirming ooze of ignorance! Oxbridge is full of people with one common denominator: academic talent. People feel the need counteract someones gift with some form of defect: art students can't count, models are stupid, scientists are socially inept etc.

Degrees can't be measured with one single yard stick, and employers know this. Hence the weighted opinions given to seemingly similar degrees from different Universities.

 

[Nitefly]

Hate to be the burster of bubbles, but loads of people get the grade requirements - but there's a fair bit more to getting into Oxbridge than that.

Of course there is, but the assumption was made that people in Oxford and Cambridge are the best. If not academically, in what way compared to those that didn't want to apply?

And for the record, you're also able to have a social education there. If you're of the opinion that the places are just full of rich toffs and geeks, then I'm afraid I'm going to have to pull out my hypothetical haddock of justice, and beat you into a squirming ooze of ignorance!

You are able to in Oxford by going to 'Park End' every week I suppose...

I live there. Its boring, dull, chavy and to be honest quite miserable. Not saying the studants are, but I consider Oxford a very dull and unfreindly place to studants compared with bigger cities such as Leeds, Manchester and Bristol. So if I was to have the better time.... where would I choose to go to? Hmm... As for the comments of Oxford being full of 'toffs', please. As long as people go there to get the best education rather than for the prestige or being 'better' *groan* than everyone else, thats awesome. Good for them. I personally don't view the 0.8% or whatever it is between the 'Times online ranking' between the oxford course and my one (Ranked 3rd) reason enought to chose Oxford as a place to study over somewhere where I will meet people who are more up for having a laugh and to have a bigger social experience. This in comparrison than to go to a place to have 8 weeks of almost solid work, have countless essays then go home....

Oxbridge is full of people with one common denominator: academic talent. People feel the need counteract someones gift with some form of defect: art students can't count, models are stupid, scientists are socially inept etc.

You confuse me. I never said that people at Oxford were not clever. I'm not putting them down for their choice, but I DO think that people who to go Oxford and Cambridge are more concerned with the prestige than actually having a good time. Otherwise why the hell would you go there (As I already said)?

Degrees can't be measured with one single yard stick, and employers know this. Hence the weighted opinions given to seemingly similar degrees from different Universities.

Not going to talk about what you said, but to conclude I think that any employer that judges an applicant for a job by weighing up which of the 'top 20' (or so) universities they went to would be a bit of a moron.

 

[oxist258]

Hate to be the burster of bubbles, but loads of people get the grade requirements - but there's a fair bit more to getting into Oxbridge than that. And for the record, you're also able to have a social education there. If you're of the opinion that the places are just full of rich toffs and geeks, then I'm afraid I'm going to have to pull out my hypothetical haddock of justice, and beat you into a squirming ooze of ignorance! Oxbridge is full of people with one common denominator: academic talent. People feel the need counteract someones gift with some form of defect: art students can't count, models are stupid, scientists are socially inept etc.

Absolutely and wholeheartedly agree. Am sure to get the 'biased' accusation, and maybe that is justified, but the misconceptions that many people carry on are frustrating, and I say this as someone who has seen both sides of the story.

I did not want to go to Oxford. I refused at the first instance, laughed at all those who suggested it, and resisted at every opportunity; and was ultimately given very little choice. But I ended up here nonetheless, and I could not have asked for a better education in any sense of the word. I'm not the conventional Oxford student, and neither are the huge majority of my friends. I know that a lot of people get the grade requirements, but that isn't what Oxford want. I studied with a boy who was incredibly clever, but threw his degree away because all he wanted to do was drink, club and play university cricket and football. Tell him that he hasn't had the full university experience!

People have different reasons for choosing their university... excellence of the department or university, want to move away from home, or other opportunities. But those who reject Oxbridge on the basis that they want a 'social' university career are sadly misguided - you are just as likely, or unlikely, to have that here as anywhere else.

Although I freely admit that clubs in Oxford do suck

 

[w11tho]

Oooh, wicked - a (quote) - (reply) - (quote) - (reply) jobby. Here we go:

Of course there is, but the assumption was made that people in Oxford and Cambridge are the best. If not academically, in what way compared to those that didn't want to apply? You are able to in Oxford by going to 'Park End' every week I suppose...

Easy tiger - I responded to your "I got the grades and didn't go... I want social education...". I haven't made any such assumption. Certainly, Oxbridge attracts a large proportion of high achievers, but that's not to say it attracts them all.

I live there. Its boring, dull, chavy and to be honest quite miserable. Not saying the studants are, but I consider Oxford a very dull and unfreindly place to studants compared with bigger cities such as Leeds, Manchester and Bristol. So if I was to have the better time.... where would I choose to go to? Hmm...

Is this more about you trying to prove you could have gone to Oxford, but didn't want to? Nobody cares, and I certainly didn't indicate a wishfulness to learn of your opinion of Oxford. I've said two things: need more than straight A's to get in, and you can get a social education there.

As for the comments of Oxford being full of 'toffs', please. As long as people go there to get the best education rather than for the prestige or being 'better' *groan* than everyone else, thats awesome. Good for them. I personally don't view the 0.8% or whatever it is between the 'Times online ranking' between the oxford course and my one (Ranked 3rd) reason enought to chose Oxford as a place to study over somewhere where I will meet people who are more up for having a laugh and to have a bigger social experience. This in comparrison than to go to a place to have 8 weeks of almost solid work, have countless essays then go home....

Again, excellent story, but I'm not too interested! I'll reiterate, for the sake of rigour: it takes more than straight As to get into Oxbridge, and you can get a social education there.

You confuse me. I never said that people at Oxford were not clever. I'm not putting them down for their choice, but I DO think that people who to go Oxford and Cambridge are more concerned with the prestige than actually having a good time. Otherwise why the hell would you go there (As I already said)?Not going to talk about what you said, but to conclude I think that any employer that judges an applicant for a job by weighing up which of the 'top 20' (or so) universities they went to would be a bit of a moron.

Don't worry about the confusion, easliy done! I should have perhaps inserted a line break, although it did tie in with my sentiments proceeding the *if you're of the opinion...*. No one goes to Oxbridge for the nightlife - it's not a world beater in that dept. But that doesn't mean all the people there aren't interested going out and having fun. I do hope that my comment about the stereotypical stupid model made some sense though - it is very relevant to the boring Oxbridge student comparison.

From my limited experience, people are always very ready to knock Oxbridge students: whether it's claiming that it's only for toffs, or that the people there are socially inept, or that it's only for super geeks etc. In the big scheme of things, Oxford and Cambridge are just two Universities full of students. There's going to be very little that seperates a random sample from either, from any other good University.

 

[Nitefly]

Oooh, wicked - a (quote) - (reply) - (quote) - (reply) jobby. Here we go:

Is this more about you trying to prove you could have gone to Oxford, but didn't want to?

Maybe some truth there. I am just tired of perhaps misguided oppinion that Cambridge and Oxford are the best universities to go to.

I've said two things: need more than straight A's to get in, and you can get a social education there.

My school friend there when I spoke to him says all he does is work and nothing else. All day all night. Granted he's a medic, but one of my university friends said that for my course someone was giving over 40 essays for the first term alone (Over 8 weeks). I proberly got around 20, that was bad enough. That seems to me that it rather would cut into play time, wouldn't you?

Don't worry about the confusion, easliy done! I should have perhaps inserted a line break, although it did tie in with my sentiments proceeding the *if you're of the opinion...*. No one goes to Oxbridge for the nightlife - it's not a world beater in that dept. But that doesn't mean all the people there aren't interested going out and having fun. I do hope that my comment about the stereotypical stupid model made some sense though - it is very relevant to the boring Oxbridge student comparison.

I don't think they are boring at all. I just don't think its as possible to have as much fun in an environment which is ... well.... VERY average compared to others. Therefore I would go to a place that I would consider far more fun. My best friend, a member of these forums nevertheless, decided to shun Imperials offer for computer science to go to Bristol for this reason. He doesn't regret it.

From my limited experience, people are always very ready to knock Oxbridge students: whether it's claiming that it's only for toffs, or that the people there are socially inept, or that it's only for super geeks etc. In the big scheme of things, Oxford and Cambridge are just two Universities full of students. There's going to be very little that seperates a random sample from either, from any other good University.

I completely agree with the above. Well said.

 

[Sequoia]

.....

From my limited experience, people are always very ready to knock Oxbridge students: whether it's claiming that it's only for toffs, or that the people there are socially inept, or that it's only for super geeks etc. In the big scheme of things, Oxford and Cambridge are just two Universities full of students. There's going to be very little that seperates a random sample from either, from any other good University.

I agree, there is some of that. Maybe it's jealousy; maybe ignorance. Who knows.

But it isn't one-way. It is as much a fallacy to assume that Oxbridge students are necessarily the brightest, and there are reasons why bright students choose to go elsewhere, and as I said earlier, academic brilliance from an Oxbridge graduate doesn't necessarily mean they have all the qualities an employer is looking for. Much will depend on the job. The qualities I would be looking for in a lab researcher won't necessarily be the same as those I'm looking for in a consultant that will be doing board-level presentations and social schmoozing.

Essentially, what I'm saying is that an Oxbridge degree won't guarantee you the job .... but it usually won't hurt. Oh, and there are other universities have have comparable reputations in specific subjects, and one shouldn't forget that their are universities outside the UK ..... especially in the postgrad world.

Having said all that, I would also firmly support the notion that you generally need more than grades to get into Oxbridge and (at least in my day), you also didn't need grades at all, providing you had the minimum necessary number of passes AND had sat and passed Matriculation papers.

But, Oxford and Cambridge can set very high entrance standards for a reason, and their reputation is not undeserved. Academic standards are high, staff are generally top-class (as are staff at some other uni's) and if you have top-class staff teaching a challenging curriculum to high-achiever students, you ARE going to end up with a graduate with a degree representing a high level of achievement.

Nobody should underestimate the value of an Oxbridge degree .... but it isn't the only arbiter of employability.

 

[Ultra_Extreme]

arab student refuse to study or finally treat veneral diseases, that still sucks huh !? im going to bed

 

[oxist258]

Nobody should underestimate the value of an Oxbridge degree .... but it isn't the only arbiter of employability.

Not at all - Oxbridge rewards not only intellect, but motivation in every field. If you take a random sample of Oxbridge graduates, I guarantee that you will find virtually all of them to have huge success in arts, sports or in the world of work entirely unrelated to their degree. I'm not saying that's specific just to Oxbridge, but it certainly makes them more employable generally.

 

[Ultra_Extreme]

Not at all - Oxbridge rewards not only intellect, but motivation in every field. If you take a random sample of Oxbridge graduates, I guarantee that you will find virtually all of them to have huge success in arts, sports or in the world of work entirely unrelated to their degree. I'm not saying that's specific just to Oxbridge, but it certainly makes them more employable generally.

If your intelligent enough ton get an oxbridge degree then its sad that said person is close minded enough to work for someone else, a tradgedy really.

 

[oxist258]

If your intelligent enough ton get an oxbridge degree then its sad that said person is close minded enough to work for someone else, a tradgedy really.

I don't follow.

 

[Psyk]

My best friend, a member of these forums nevertheless, decided to shun Imperials offer for computer science to go to Bristol for this reason. He doesn't regret it.

Weird, I did the exact same thing! For the same reasons as well.

 

[Sequoia]

Not at all - Oxbridge rewards not only intellect, but motivation in every field. If you take a random sample of Oxbridge graduates, I guarantee that you will find virtually all of them to have huge success in arts, sports or in the world of work entirely unrelated to their degree. I'm not saying that's specific just to Oxbridge, but it certainly makes them more employable generally.

You missed my point, I think. An Oxbridge degree is good for employment chances, but it is not the only factor in the employment decision. When you put two candidates up against each other, those other factors may outweigh the Oxbridge degree.

 

[oxist258]

You missed my point, I think. An Oxbridge degree is good for employment chances, but it is not the only factor in the employment decision. When you put two candidates up against each other, those other factors may outweigh the Oxbridge degree.

Maybe I phrased it badly, or maybe I did misunderstand you. What I meant was that I completely agree that an Oxbridge degree, whilst signifying high academic achievement, is certainly not enough to guarantee a job. But I believe that the majority of Oxbridge students (I'm most definitely not saying all, by any stretch) would demonstrate enough of those other factors which, combined with the degree, would get help them get the job.

 

[Ultra_Extreme]

I don't follow.

You know that people with IQ's high enough to get into mensa must pay a fee totalling nearly £50 per year for a single newsletter and a certificate...

Something so ironic there...

All im saying is that you get an oxbridge degree....prove yourself as excelling above most others..... Then let some twonk boss you about your whole life, tell you when your too old and have you paid less than me for the privilidge, i dont care if i cant spell working for other people is a mugs game.

 

[oxist258]

All im saying is that you get an oxbridge degree....prove yourself as excelling above most others..... Then let some twonk boss you about your whole life, tell you when your too old and have you paid less than me for the privilidge, i dont care if i cant spell working for other people is a mugs game.

I think it's a bit farfetched to say that you can't be that successful unless you work for yourself. I don't need to run my own business in order to excel above others past my degree. For the moment, I want to be a lawyer, but I don't have to set up my own law firm to do well at that. I'll get bogged down in paperwork and accounts and similar rubbish, and I wouldn't get to work on any of the big legal projects that would actually challenge me and allow me to excel in the way that I want to. To do that, I have to work for a big law firm who are already established and make my mark there. In this case, that is the measure of sucess and excelling. You do well enough, then you don't have to worry about some muppet bossing you around constantly.

Also, I don't want to stay in law for my entire life. I want the flexibility to explore other areas, and be successful in those - I've always dreamed about going into business at some point, and ideally I would love to eventually work in conference organising. Maybe those would involve me running my own company at that point, which is something I'd enjoy. But, if you have your own business, then you can't just pass it along as easily as that when you want to pursue other dreams.

edit: And after saying all that, I've just to edit to correct spelling mistakes. Blah.

 

[Sequoia]

Maybe I phrased it badly, or maybe I did misunderstand you. What I meant was that I completely agree that an Oxbridge degree, whilst signifying high academic achievement, is certainly not enough to guarantee a job. But I believe that the majority of Oxbridge students (I'm most definitely not saying all, by any stretch) would demonstrate enough of those other factors which, combined with the degree, would get help them get the job.

In general, an Oxbridge degree certainly stands you in good stead. Very good stead. And Oxbridge students are as likely to be proficient in non-academic ways as antbody else. But the "general" position doesn't always apply.

If you don't go to Oxbridge, it is not to say you are not as bright as an Oxbridge student, or that you could not have gone there had you wished.

I also have several Oxbridge graduates currently working for me, and have passed over others in favour of non-Oxbridge graduates, for the type of reasons I mentioned earlier. And, as I said, don't forget the international angle.

All I am saying is that while an Oxbridge degree is generally good for employment chances, there are other factors involved, and sometimes, they'll be more important.

 

[Ultra_Extreme]

I think it's a bit farfetched to say that you can't be that successful unless you work for yourself. I don't need to run my own business in order to excel above others past my degree. For the moment, I want to be a lawyer, but I don't have to set up my own law firm to do well at that. I'll get bogged down in paperwork and accounts and similar rubbish, and I wouldn't get to work on any of the big legal projects that would actually challenge me and allow me to excel in the way that I want to. To do that, I have to work for a big law firm who are already established and make my mark there. In this case, that is the measure of sucess and excelling. You do well enough, then you don't have to worrk about some muppet bossing you around constantly.

Also, I don't want to stay in law for my entire life. I want the flexibility to explore other areas, and be sucessful in those - I've always dreamt about going into business at some point, and ideally I would love to eventually like to work in conference organising. Maybe those would involve me running my own company at that point, which is something I'd enjoy. If you have your own business, then you can't just pass it along as easily as that when you want to pursue other dreams.

Im with you on a lot of that, all i say is that people work their hind teeth off in universities to get these degree's that distinguish them above others and in MOST fields (not all tho for sure) you would make a better living running a company for yourself. Just makes me sick to think of all the people working their asses off 9-5 to make some other guy rich, more fool them i geuss

 

[oxist258]

In general, an Oxbridge degree certainly stands you in good stead. Very good stead. And Oxbridge students are as likely to be proficient in non-academic ways as antbody else. But the "general" position doesn't always apply.

If you don't go to Oxbridge, it is not to say you are not as bright as an Oxbridge student, or that you could not have gone there had you wished.

I also have several Oxbridge graduates currently working for me, and have passed over others in favour of non-Oxbridge graduates, for the type of reasons I mentioned earlier. And, as I said, don't forget the international angle.

All I am saying is that while an Oxbridge degree is generally good for employment chances, there are other factors involved, and sometimes, they'll be more important.

I don't disagree with any of this. I just resent the attitude sometimes - and not from you - that Oxbridge graduates expect to get a job purely because of where they studied, because I don't think they do.