How Many Abers Actually Like To Watch...
ChatterBank0 min ago
Oxford / Cambridge Universities
22 Answers
I know I should know this but it's another one of that's facts that has past me by.
I know you can't go to Oxford or Cambridge University, you study at one of the many colleges within Oxford and Cambridge. My question is, does every college in those cities come under the umbrellas of OxBridge Universities?
Should I be extra impressed if, for example, my solicitor tells me he graduated from St Crooks College, Cambridge?
I know you can't go to Oxford or Cambridge University, you study at one of the many colleges within Oxford and Cambridge. My question is, does every college in those cities come under the umbrellas of OxBridge Universities?
Should I be extra impressed if, for example, my solicitor tells me he graduated from St Crooks College, Cambridge?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by barry1010. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Oxford Brookes is entirely separate to the University of Oxford. It's the old Oxford Polytechnic, which became a university in 1992. It's got a long history though, having started out as Oxford School of Art in 1865.
With regard to being impressed (or otherwise) by an Oxbridge degree, it's worth remembering that a Master's degree from Oxford or Cambridge (such as MA(Oxon) or MSc(Cantab)) is actually less impressive than other Masters' degrees.
To get a Master's degree elsewhere, you have to study for three years to get a Bachelor's degree and then study (and/or carry out research) for a further year in order to be awarded a Master's degree. People who've obtained a Bachelor's degree from either Oxford or Cambridge can (for historical reasons) simply wait a year and then pay a fee to elevate their degree to a Master's one.
With regard to being impressed (or otherwise) by an Oxbridge degree, it's worth remembering that a Master's degree from Oxford or Cambridge (such as MA(Oxon) or MSc(Cantab)) is actually less impressive than other Masters' degrees.
To get a Master's degree elsewhere, you have to study for three years to get a Bachelor's degree and then study (and/or carry out research) for a further year in order to be awarded a Master's degree. People who've obtained a Bachelor's degree from either Oxford or Cambridge can (for historical reasons) simply wait a year and then pay a fee to elevate their degree to a Master's one.
er did
you went MA - because with really bad degrees you cdnt. So it shows you had a decent degree.
Old style all the science degrees were BA - so MSc missed out.
The big thing was the degree was Part I and Part II ( two years and then one) and you cd mix and match. I did ('read') Law in my third year.
BUT
rules changed.
Some masters degrees are by exam, and others are by thesis.
Some mathematicians are soooooo bright they can do three y course at Cge in two years ( eek!)
and then in the third year they did a Part III which was what the lectured Master's course was called (*)
Now they can do the same - but come out with an MMath, I think.
(*) everyone accepted for a part III wd pass. it depended on whether you got a star. THAT meant you cd progress to a PhD under someone like Hawking. - specimen question: Discuss the hilbertian space.
You wrote for an hour on that, or three hours. cant remember which
you went MA - because with really bad degrees you cdnt. So it shows you had a decent degree.
Old style all the science degrees were BA - so MSc missed out.
The big thing was the degree was Part I and Part II ( two years and then one) and you cd mix and match. I did ('read') Law in my third year.
BUT
rules changed.
Some masters degrees are by exam, and others are by thesis.
Some mathematicians are soooooo bright they can do three y course at Cge in two years ( eek!)
and then in the third year they did a Part III which was what the lectured Master's course was called (*)
Now they can do the same - but come out with an MMath, I think.
(*) everyone accepted for a part III wd pass. it depended on whether you got a star. THAT meant you cd progress to a PhD under someone like Hawking. - specimen question: Discuss the hilbertian space.
You wrote for an hour on that, or three hours. cant remember which
PS: With regard to being impressed with any university degree (based solely upon the institution that awarded it), it's worth remembering that some universities are particularly noted for their excellence in certain subject fields. A degree from a relevant university might then be regarded as far more impressive than an Oxbridge degree in the same discipline.
For example, a degree in Marine Biology from Southampton University might be regarded as particularly impressive, as would one in Environmental Sciences from the University of East Anglia or in Engineering from UMIST.
Oxford and Cambridge tend to come top of the rankings for subject such as Mathematics (although I'd argue that Edinburgh, ICL, Nottingham and Sheffield should all be near to the top of the list too) and Law (where I'd suggest that the LSE, KCL and Durham should also be close to the top).
For example, a degree in Marine Biology from Southampton University might be regarded as particularly impressive, as would one in Environmental Sciences from the University of East Anglia or in Engineering from UMIST.
Oxford and Cambridge tend to come top of the rankings for subject such as Mathematics (although I'd argue that Edinburgh, ICL, Nottingham and Sheffield should all be near to the top of the list too) and Law (where I'd suggest that the LSE, KCL and Durham should also be close to the top).
There's quite a bit of elitism when it come to university degrees. For example, I sat in the same examination hall as BSc students with the same examination papers in front of me. However, because I was a student within the Faculty of Education, I was awarded a BEd (Hons) degree (which many people class as a 'Mickey Mouse' degree), instead of a BSc (Hons) degree (which those same people class a 'proper' degree).
It's also worth noting that, officially, a university degree isn't a 'qualification' at all; it's a 'class of membership' of the university. That explains why
(a) universities are able to award honorary degrees to people who've done no studying whatsoever and haven't passed any exams ; and
(b) universities are allowed to withhold degrees from people who've passed all of their exams with flying colours but who haven't, say, returned all of the books that they borrowed from the university library.
It's also worth noting that, officially, a university degree isn't a 'qualification' at all; it's a 'class of membership' of the university. That explains why
(a) universities are able to award honorary degrees to people who've done no studying whatsoever and haven't passed any exams ; and
(b) universities are allowed to withhold degrees from people who've passed all of their exams with flying colours but who haven't, say, returned all of the books that they borrowed from the university library.
One of the things that annoys me is people who have received honorary doctorates styling themselves 'Dr'. The poet John Cooper Clarke (who, by the way, I like) was given an honorary doctorate by the University of Salford, and now styles himself 'Dr John Cooper Clarke' in all his publicity material now, and it really rankles.
Discussion in the media - about the dropping the H bomb - letting on that one has been to harvard and when.
now that A levels have gone a bit wobbly - there is the vexed question about whether to have a separate admission exam ( yes then no and now yes). and what do they test? - Cge says it identifies those candidates who will benefit from the courses they run !
There is a view ( me and others) that doing well at Part III papers see above, just measures whether you are good at doing Pt III questions. oops!
I was contemporary with someone who got a 1* ( starred first) in physiology ( Part 1A) . Five years later when we re-met, he said "All it shows was I was very very good at Physiology at that time. which was true, I spent all my time reading physiology papers. It has no relevance to my current job"
One young lady got the hoojy-woojy prize in Law but an over all 2:1. SHE said, "I wrote the best paper in the exam in Philosophy of Law ( Jurisprudence). But I didnt do so well in the others". Oh.
I came top in Pathology once ( beating those who had done a whole year at Path at Cge) and there were loud screams to disbelief (having done er Law). Louder than the screams and jeers that greet my posts on AB. God the howling - louder than a thing that howls. And now I just doodle in Latin on AB
now that A levels have gone a bit wobbly - there is the vexed question about whether to have a separate admission exam ( yes then no and now yes). and what do they test? - Cge says it identifies those candidates who will benefit from the courses they run !
There is a view ( me and others) that doing well at Part III papers see above, just measures whether you are good at doing Pt III questions. oops!
I was contemporary with someone who got a 1* ( starred first) in physiology ( Part 1A) . Five years later when we re-met, he said "All it shows was I was very very good at Physiology at that time. which was true, I spent all my time reading physiology papers. It has no relevance to my current job"
One young lady got the hoojy-woojy prize in Law but an over all 2:1. SHE said, "I wrote the best paper in the exam in Philosophy of Law ( Jurisprudence). But I didnt do so well in the others". Oh.
I came top in Pathology once ( beating those who had done a whole year at Path at Cge) and there were loud screams to disbelief (having done er Law). Louder than the screams and jeers that greet my posts on AB. God the howling - louder than a thing that howls. And now I just doodle in Latin on AB
