Click here to go to the NEW College Discussion Forum

Hey. These two colleges have been on my dream list for as long as I can remember. I know this is a predominantly US/Canadian college board, but I'm really interested to hear about these two.

Being from the United States, they are something of a mystery to me. I know only their reputations, and very little else that can't be gleaned directly from their sites.

So, those in the know from the UK or the US -- especially those attending who originated from either the UK or the US -- what did it take to get there? Is it really as great as it's said to be (I have no doubts here)? Any suggestions for an American student without IB/international credits, only AP and SAT/ACT testing? Is it on par with Ivy admissions? Is there anything particularly different (including their unique interview procedure)? Tell all. I'm dying to know.

-- Undecided.

By Ctmom (Ctmom) on Wednesday, April 09, 2003 - 08:20 am: Edit

This was covered on the Princeton Review students board a while back - if you do a search you should come up with the info you're looking for.

By Shelinda (Shelinda) on Wednesday, April 09, 2003 - 01:00 pm: Edit

Ok, here are some basic facts about Oxbridge:

1) You can only apply to one of them, not both.

2) Yes they are both good, but coz of funding cuts they are both slipping a bit. However, they still teach mainly by tutorials, which are usually 1/2/3:1 sessions a few times per week. There are also big lectures as well.

3) From what I've heard from a few Americans I met at interviews, they place more weight on AP grades than SATS. I think this is because in the UK, we study very few (usually 3/4) subjects at a fairly advanced level, so unis welcome depth of study rather than breadth.

4) Interviews are like oral tests. They are not friendly chats - they ask you subject related questions, and you answer on the spot. In subjects you haven't previously studied, e.g. Biochemistry, Engineering, Oriental languages etc, they ask you about subjects related to it, like literature or maths. So, for my Chinese interview, I was asked about the character Iago from Othello, and a few grammatical rule questions.

Anything else?

By Undecided (Undecided) on Wednesday, April 09, 2003 - 01:08 pm: Edit

Ctmom: Thanks for pointing that out. I tend to ignore the PR boards for a bunch of a flames, but I suppose they're worth looking at anyway.

Shelinda: Thank you!
1) I knew about this; I also know of the exception stating something about being a particular music student and/or graduate. I am neither. ;)

2) Didn't know about the funding cuts. Sad to hear that. I like the idea of tutorials -- I definitely benefit from smaller class sizes.

3) That's what I figured. The AP tests I'm taking are mostly interconnected, so I'm assuming that's good.

4) This is what I'm dreading: the interview. I'd heard rumours about it, that it was definitely not what the American universities usually do in their interviews. What I want to know is whether these are truly difficult "tests" or just a sort of surface skimming to make sure you know what I've basically heard described as American freshman year topics in your intended subject?

-- Undecided.

By Shelinda (Shelinda) on Thursday, April 10, 2003 - 01:43 pm: Edit

Ok, the interview.

It is really not as bad as it seems!

Some subjects (e.g. Philosophy) give you actual tests to do, in exam conditions, and then an interview based on your general knowledge of the subject (so, you could be asked about the effect philosophy has in the world today, or how it affects politics, or something like that).

Other subjects (e.g. Chinese) give you a passage to read and then you have to talk about what you've just read. This will be something to do with your intended subject - it could be about the politics of the Middle east if you intend to study Arabic, or an English poem or passage for an English student etc. For most subjects, this will not require specialist knowledge, but you will need to read up a bit on your subject.

Actually, reading is the main thing. If you can prove you know something about your subject, that you can argue your point, and that you can adapt your ideas quickly, they will love you.

One question: Which subject do you want to do, and which college do you want to apply to?

By Undecided (Undecided) on Thursday, April 10, 2003 - 05:14 pm: Edit

Originally, I had intended to go pre-med -- particularly in the field of neuroscience. Given Oxbridge's standards for that (I know that Cambridge at least has a specific test for students studying the medical), I've decided there'd be no better place for me to finish out my humanities -- probably English, then, or Linguistics. If I'm really enterprising (ie, insane) English and Classics. Something along those lines.

-- Undecided.

By Anotherdad (Anotherdad) on Thursday, April 10, 2003 - 05:29 pm: Edit

I attended a lecture by a British School counselor about a year ago. It was scary. You can only apply to one of Oxbridge. Unless you are IB, you have no chance without going to the UK and taking a full year of additional work to bring yourself up to the level that they expect of their applicants. Students must already be motivated in specific fields because you probably cannot change majors -- University of Richmond in London is the closest to the American model. And finally, it is tough to get in because they have truely worldwide applicant pools.
I once gave a lecture at Cambridge and can see why so many students would like to go there. Unfortunately, it is just almost impossible. However, I understand that MIT (in Cambridge, Mass) and Cambridge have established a pretty good exchange program, so the easier strategy may be to go to MIT first.

By Unicorn (Unicorn) on Friday, April 11, 2003 - 01:16 am: Edit

for the interview: just be ready to think on ur feet and guess intelligently. Honestly, it really does depend alot on luck (like a lot of things)

By Shelinda (Shelinda) on Friday, April 11, 2003 - 04:49 am: Edit

I really think that you should just go for it. If you are serious about your subject, and you believe you would benfit from the intensive environment, then apply. The worst that can happen is that you will be turned down. And if you are, then you just go somewhere else.

I promise, you really do not have to be a genius. It's true that there are some incredibly intelligent people there. You will meet people who will blow your mind. But if you get accepted, it's because they believe you can handle it.

And if you can handle it, then you are worthy of it.

By Undecided (Undecided) on Friday, April 11, 2003 - 02:29 pm: Edit

Anotherdad: I knew about the 'only apply to one' stipulation in Oxbridge; doesn't bother me that much, because as much as I'd like to go there I think it's turning more and more into a 'what the hell' kind of thing (in other words, I have about a 1 in 1000 chance of getting anywhere with it). I knew about the disadvantage I have being a non-IB student from the US, but unfortunately too late to do anything about it. If I have a better chance at getting into MIT than Cambridge, I think that, in a short turn of phrase, I am screwed. Thanks for the insight.

Unicorn: Isn't that true of any interview? ;) Ah, luck. Well, if I can get so far as to actually sound less than stuffed at an interview, I'll know I've got luck on my side. Thanks for the tip.

Shelinda: Promising, and exactly what I was thinking as far as applying goes. A good portion of the (American) schools I intend to apply to I am applying to only because I would truly love to go there and I think I have a shot as a wildcard -- academics as a whole are rather uninteresting, and certainly not the stellar examples of 4.0 and 1600/2400 that seem so prolific. I pretty much know where I'll end up, but if fate is on my side this fall I might just end up somewhere else entirely. It's good to hear that not everyone is a genius; even if it were true, I'm sure they would need an audience. Every school needs someone to be at the bottom of their class anyway. ;)

I only hope that I am worthy. But I guess we'll see, yeah? Thanks for the advice, it's very much appreciated.

-- Undecided.

By Divingin (Divingin) on Saturday, April 12, 2003 - 08:08 pm: Edit

even with IB it's a killer. trust me, i do IB, my entire class does, and so do ppl who have transferred out of my school to go to other schools that have "better" IB programs ... anyways i do know ppl who are incredibly smart, their predicted IB scores are awesome and they're getting turned down. so yeah, even w/ IB it's a killer.

By Sybil_Vain (Sybil_Vain) on Wednesday, April 16, 2003 - 08:04 pm: Edit

it's not a killer, come on!
it truly depends on which college you're applying to...
basically if you want to really raise your chances do St. Hilda's, which is an all girls school and for which demand is pretty low (of course if u're a boy... u obviously can't apply there).
this year St. hilda's accepted a total RETARD from my school, so it mustn't be THAT hard.
Of course i should probably mention that this girl also had connections in Oxford.

However, other colleges are killers. An absolutely brilliant friend of mine got rejected by two colleges (Corpus christi and Wadham)and he totally deserved to get in! Oh and by the way, bear in my mind that you can be sent to more than one college for interview, i.e if ur college of choice is thinking of rejecting you but they suppose you might have a shot at another college which has more open places they send you there.

The College I was accepted to (St Hughes) is an average one, not too hard and not too easy to get in either. However, for the course I applied to, namely Eonomics and management, they had very many applicants this year, due to the fact that last year they had one of the highest ratios of acceptance in Oxford and thus many people thought they could get in easy (how ironic, this year was one of the hardest to get in actually because they all decided to apply there!).

Anyway, the reason I chose it is because of its more laid- back atmosphere, and i'd suggest it to anyone wanting to experience Oxford without the arrogant individuals and unbelievable academic pressure that some of the most well- known Colleges have (i.e Balliol etc). another really cool college with a lovely student bar is Wadham (very liberal place).
BEAR IN MIND: Your chance of acceptance does not only depend on which College youre applying to, but ALSO WHICH COURSE, something that does not apply as much for american Universities. Like there are some courses in some colleges where the rates of acceptance can be as high as, say, 70% and some others where you've got like an 8% chance to get in!(the ratios of acceptance for each college -how many got in/ how many applied- can be found in the University's prospectus).
also i think for American students it's sort of easier to get in than for europeans (like me) cause you pay more if u go there (EU residents pay a ridiculously small amount of money).

Oh, but be warned!

Ive heard some people in Oxford study for ridiculous amounts of time. My ex's sister, studying Classics, studies for 8 hours a day, every day...

Oxford, the city itself, is extremely pretty, quite wealthy, very clean and seems pretty safe. However, entertainment can only be found in the student bars, which close VERY early, in my opinion.
Few clubs, some totally ••••, one acceptable. Good Mexican and Chinese restaurants.

Interview: Not scary at all, tutors in the College i went to were really friendly, the interview did not require very specific knowledge, but was more like an IQ/political- cultural awareness test. Of course this also depends on College, some ive heard are pretty scary and weird...
Test very hard, but enables you to prove your abilities,also IQ -style for the most part, but also requiring a summary and an evaluation of an old economic theory (MALTHUSIAN) discussed in a given text (basically no preparation needed though).

Oh and by the way people, although I seem to know a lot about oxford, i still don't know whether I should go there or to Yale... any suggestions?

By Anotherdad (Anotherdad) on Thursday, April 17, 2003 - 12:10 pm: Edit

Oxford. Both very prestigious, but Oxford is the more global institution. And remember, the gothic buildings of Yale were put there less than a century ago to emulate the atmosphere of Oxford!

By Moshe (Moshe) on Thursday, April 17, 2003 - 01:01 pm: Edit

Cambridge is a far nicer town, and the better university (but I live here). But the Oxford colleges look more impressive. Neither are very hard to get into (for British students). But it depends very much on the subject, and it's much harder, I think, for internationals. Most of the students aren't especially clever - they just work quite hard, and went to good schools.

"Ive heard some people in Oxford study for ridiculous amounts of time. My ex's sister, studying Classics, studies for 8 hours a day, every day" ... that's only in the lead up to finals... the second year is quite easy.

By Undecided (Undecided) on Thursday, April 17, 2003 - 06:08 pm: Edit

Wow. Thank you very much for your input, Sybil_Vain! I hadn't looked into St. Hilda's and I'm generally against single sex institutions, but it's worth a look-see for certain. My biggest (ie, "larger than Eurasia and Africa combined") problem is that I'm more interested in reading medicine than much else. Then again, all things being equal, I might just end up trying to go for English instead. Depends.

Though I know relatively little about either college, I do recommend Oxford over Yale. Oxford has, in general, a much better undergraduate experience -- or so I've heard. Obviously, I'm not a very reliable source. ;)

I'm expecting good AP scores, most of which are interrelated and most of which would provide a sort of introduction to reading for medicine, at least as it's described in Merton's prospectus. (Customs inspected the materials in my folder and ended up damaging some of it beyond recognition, sadly...)

I am not afraid of study, and I'm not afraid of a lack of readily available activities. I'm all for the "torture myself now to enjoy the future" karma theory. I just hope it works. ;)

I'm glad to hear about the communication between the colleges regarding potential applicants -- makes me feel better about what happens. (Too bad the Ivy league doesn't do that!) Is it possible, though, to initially *apply* to more than one college? I wasn't clear on that.

-- Undecided.

By Unicorn (Unicorn) on Friday, April 18, 2003 - 02:25 am: Edit

u cant apply to more than one college, but the university assigns you to 2 more 'backup' colleges, in case u dont get into ur first choice (the one u apply to). usually, rhe backup colleges will be easier to get in than ur first choice

By Arealtexan (Arealtexan) on Saturday, April 19, 2003 - 03:55 am: Edit

Undecided, Cambridge has a maximum of 20 places to study Medicine for foreign students a year. This is because the government strictly limits the number of people who study Medicine.

And don't worry about the scores. I had AAAB on my AS-levels and the weakest GCSE scores of any of the History candidates applying to Peterhouse (Cambridge). But I did well on the entrance exam and the interview, and got an ABC offer.

The interviews really are killer if you aren't used to arguing your own ideas and defending yourself. If you want me to send you a more thorough description of the interview process, just drop me an e-mail and I'll be happy to do so.

By Tuannguyen (Tuannguyen) on Saturday, April 19, 2003 - 11:44 am: Edit

Arealtexan, give me an email on the interview...

cleanmonkey@mail.com

Thanks

By Shelinda (Shelinda) on Sunday, April 20, 2003 - 11:26 am: Edit

A piece of random info about St Hilda's: the Chinese tutor was probably the most horrible woman I've ever met in my entire life (luckily I got accepted to Pembroke, so it doesn't matter).

Anyway... I am biased, but I would apply to Oxford instead of Cambridge. Cambridge is really really small (plus when I visited, the first thing I saw was a person walking down the road in a rabbit suit...), and the Cambridge colleges completely dominate the town.

In Oxford, there are two seperate unis, so if you suddenly feel bored with your college bar, you can go to the Oxford Brookes union instead.

I had a friend apply to Merton for medicine, she didn't get in, but she said it was a really lovely place, and the people were friendly - there was nothing cut-throat about it at all.

If you want any other info, email me:

shelinda_the_witch@hotmail.com

By Arealtexan (Arealtexan) on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 03:56 am: Edit

There are also two universities in Cambridge. Cambridge itself, and Anglia Polytechnic University. If you think there is a lot of love between Oxford Brookes and real Oxford, take a look at this article:

http://www.oxfordstudent.com/2002-02-28/features/1

My favourite quote is this one: "bunch of nerds... snobby little rich kids who ride bikes with wicker baskets... they all think they're fantastic."

By Shelinda (Shelinda) on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 06:04 am: Edit

Lol, I know that Oxford students and Brookies hate each other. But apparently the Brookes campus has much better bands come to play than any of the Oxford colleges, so people go there anyway.

I didn't know there were two unis in Cambridge though... but I guess everyone just automatically thinks of Cambridge uni itself when they say Cambridge, so I didn't know about the other one.

By Arealtexan (Arealtexan) on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 06:49 am: Edit

A couple of my friends applied to Brookes (one of them is going there.) They described it as the "university version of our school." (I go to an extremely poor rural comprehensive, everything is run down, finish in the bottom 20 nationally for A-level results, etc.) And apparently the Brookes tour guides tried to convince them that there is "absolutely no" animosity between Brookes and Oxford.

By Shelinda (Shelinda) on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 10:34 am: Edit

Lol, I like that - "absolutely no animosity between Brookes and Oxford." Uni tour guides just tell you whatever they think you want to hear, don't they?

What A levels are you doing? You must be damn smart to get an offer of ABC from Cambridge. My offer is AAA for Oxford, and as I'm currently completely messed up on French grammar, it looks like I'm heading to the uni of crapsville.

Anyway, most important question... are you really a texan? Like, a real one?

By Arealtexan (Arealtexan) on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 11:22 am: Edit

No, I am not a real texan. I got the name from http://yellow5.com/pokey/archive/index140.html

The permutations of my nationality are quite tedious, and I won't go into them here. ;)

I'm doing English, German, History and Politics. Got AAAB on the AS-levels. Not that great. Yourself? And what do you mean by uni of crapsville? I'm not holding an insurance (all my other offers are higher than ABC), so I'd better get the grades or I'm in trouble.

About the tour guides.. when I was at King's London there was a drunken toff who kept telling us how bad the Student Union is, and how much he hates the fees protesters (it was the day of the big rally in London).

By Shelinda (Shelinda) on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 07:30 am: Edit

Lol, I like that site. Cute penguins ;)

I'm doing French, English Literature and Psychology. I dropped History after last year, even though I did well in it, basically because the teacher was the most boring person I've ever met in my life, and each lesson of hers was like being in a coma. I got AAAB on AS levels too, but my B was in French, so maybe I shoulda dropped that... oh well, too late now. I'm doing an extra GCSE in Astronomy too, it's not compulsary or anything, but it's just something I've always been interested in.

It was a bit of poetic license to say uni of crapsville, since my insurance is Edinburgh, so either way I'll have a great education. That's as long as I don't completely mess up French and miss my insurance offer...

By Quink (Quink) on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 08:14 am: Edit

Hi, I'm a parent - at a college fair, I spoke to a representative of the organization that attempts to get more US students to apply to Oxbridge (blanking out on the name at the moment). I mentioned that my son was interested in classics, and she told me that due to the classics having been dropped from the UK school system, the best universities were hungry for qualified candidates for their classics programs. She stated specifically that Cambridge had told her they wanted to recruit more students.

Hope this tip from an insider helps!-

By Dubiastic (Dubiastic) on Saturday, May 03, 2003 - 05:29 pm: Edit

Shelinda... Oxford! Chinese! Me, too.
I'm American...tell me what you know about Chinese @ oxford. I'm from the US.
if you have yahoomessager: dubiastic.

By Bn37 (Bn37) on Saturday, May 03, 2003 - 07:36 pm: Edit

Hey from what I've heard it's relatively easy to get into Oxford from America, much easier than the ivies. They just want to see 1400s or higher on the SATs and scores of 4 or better on 3 or more APs. The easiest college to get into is Pembroke, and it's about half American (between study abroad kids and enrolled americans). The reason it's easy is because they're starved for cash (British kids don't pay to go to Oxbrdige) so they'll take all the American money they can get. So, if you pick the right college, should be an easy task. Ask someone in the know and i'm sure they can rank colleges as far as ease of admissions for American students.

By Undecided (Undecided) on Saturday, May 03, 2003 - 07:45 pm: Edit

Thanks guys. You've all been amazing help to me, and I hope to other Americans flirting with the idea of an education at Oxbridge.

By the way... does the British system accept ACT scores?

-- Undecided.

By Bn37 (Bn37) on Saturday, May 03, 2003 - 07:46 pm: Edit

I'm not sure about that. if you want me to rank all the colleges in terms of how easy they are to get in, just tell me and i will

By Bn37 (Bn37) on Saturday, May 03, 2003 - 07:55 pm: Edit

alright i've taken it upon myself to rank them. i've excluded St. Hildas cuz it's all girls. It would be the easiest (tied with Pembroke probably if you're a girl). complain if you think i'm wrong.

Colleges (number 1 being easiest to get into, 14 hardest)
1.Pembroke
2.Wadham
3.St. Peters
4.Worcester
5.Exeter
6.Hertford
7.Somerville
8.Lincoln
9.New
10.Merton
11.Lady Margaret Hall
12.University
13.Balliol

By Dubiastic (Dubiastic) on Saturday, May 03, 2003 - 08:07 pm: Edit

Bn37-- are you an Oxford student? Do you know how hard it is to get in? An Easy task....what the HELL are you talking about!?!?!?!

Oxford is the most respected and most well known university in the world. A degree from Oxford has no equal. People stateside are taken aback when mention its name....
Oxford has been for 900 years, and will be in the future, the ultimate status symbol of intellectual achievement and it certainly not EASY to get into. 1400 and thats it? Are you kidding?

I excuse myself if you find my post rude, but I think those who got in/go/went are more suited to cast dispersions on the ease of admission.

By Bn37 (Bn37) on Saturday, May 03, 2003 - 08:30 pm: Edit

Dubiastic - while i chose not to apply to Oxford myself after much thought, my sister is in Worcester College, and i know lots of American students there, so i have a good understanding of what it takes to get in. Of course, it's not simple to get into Oxford, but it's not as hard as, say, Harvard/Yale/Princeton to get into.

They're looking for a different kind of applicant - not someone well-rounded, but who has good test scores. On the website for international students, they say they look for 1400 and 3 or more APs with 4 or above - you can look at the site yourself, i'm not making it up. In fact some of the American students at Oxford whom I know chose it because they didn't get into any American schools they wanted to go to, took off a year, and reapplied to Oxford.

One more thing to look at: Compare the population of England to that of America. There's no way that Oxbridge can have the same kind of selectivity as say, Harvard, because the applicant pool just isn't big enough.

Two of the reasons i chose not to apply: First, you don't get the same kind of support structure coming out of Oxford as you do from an American school: no American investment banks looking to recruit, no career-counseling offices who'll find you jobs in America. Secondly, after reading up I've discovered the standard BA from Oxford probably won't get you into an American grad school - they want to see the higher degree, another 2 years. So while it seems to be 3 years, it's really 5 years before you can get into a grad school.

That being said, congrats on getting in to Oxford. It's truly a great place, the best place to go if you know what you want to study, and I plan on going there for some degree after I graduate from my American college. And it's certainly more beautiful than any American school.

By Dubiastic (Dubiastic) on Saturday, May 03, 2003 - 11:22 pm: Edit

I found this posted by "arealtexan" in another folder, I think it is pertinent to the conversation we are having here, so I have nicely copied and pasted it. Remember, Dubiastic didnt write this, arealtexan did:

"Hildegard, here are some figures comparing Oxford with Yale.

Completion rate: (students who graduate from the undergraduate programs), Oxford - 99%, Yale - 88%
Corroboration of these figures can be found on these two websites:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/2585101.stm
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/college/rankings/brief/webex/higrad_brief.php

Class sizes: Oxford has an average class size of 1, with some tutorials being in groups of up to about 4. Yale says on their website that 29% of their classes had fewer than 10 students.

This is probably unimportant for lots of people here, but the cost of studying at Oxford for an overseas student is less than studying at Yale. Oxford asks for (in the arts) fees of £7,500 or around $12,000. Yale asks for $20,700.

I couldn't find anything on the Oxford website about North American students, however the Cambridge website does have these gems to offer on the subject. Here is one of them:

"Candidates should be aware of a possible mismatch between the broad liberal arts curriculum of the North American high school and the specialist emphasis of British degree courses. Very few students enter a Cambridge College directly from a US High School: last year only three offers (out of 3000) were made conditional on SAT and Advanced Placement scores."

They then go on to advise the following courses of action for the majority of Americans who want to study at Cambridge:

"To spend a year at a British further education college studying for Advanced GCEs while applying for a British university place for the following year. This route is most often taken by people educated in the American system, but with family here they can live with.

To apply for a Cambridge undergraduate course after a year spent in suitable preparation at an American university."

Students at Yale have a median SAT I Math score of 730, and verbal of 720. Students at Oxford have an average A-level points score across 3 subjects of of 29.5 (10 points for an A, 8 for a B, 6 for a C, etc. etc.)

The reputation of Oxford outweighs that of Yale as well. Do you see Oxford bleating about how many of their students managed to get into Yale? http://www.yale.edu/opa/v30.n14/story1.html

And would you rather attend the university of John Wycliffe, Adam Smith, John Locke, Thomas Hobbes, Benazir Bhutto, Manfred von Richthofen, Dr Seuss, Kris Kristofferson, Indira Gandhi, 26 of Britain's 53 Prime Ministers, and Bill Clinton? Or that of William Howard Taft, Jodie Foster, Gerald Ford, the two George Bushes and uh... Bill Clinton? That of 46 Nobel Laureates (Oxford) or 18 (Yale)?

This is just a collection of facts, interpret them in whatever way you want. I still wouldn't say that Oxford has the "best undergraduate education in the world", but it has a claim to being one of the world's top universities. And if you think that Oxford will give you a "narrow" education, you obviously have never seen an episode of University Challenge. "

By Dubiastic (Dubiastic) on Saturday, May 03, 2003 - 11:28 pm: Edit

Also, I would like to add: Oxford students are the most highly recruited students in the world. Go to Harvard, you will work for Enron, if thats your cup of tea. Where do you think all those maniacal Ken Lays come from?

Also, I didnt get a 1400 on my SAT. I have never taken an AP. Oxford is not EASIER than HYP, much harder, and, jesus, much more prestigious. Harvard graduates thousands a year, Oxford-- no way... Its accept rates are below 10%. It also boasts a REALLY high grad rate...

Truth be told, Oxford University is one of world's oldest, and certainly the finest center for learning in the world--its reputation precedes it.

By Bn37 (Bn37) on Saturday, May 03, 2003 - 11:40 pm: Edit

I'm not doubting that Oxford is one of the world's top universities. What I am doubting is that it's extremely hard to get into from America. First off, Oxford's acceptance rate is about 50%. Harvard's is 9.8%. Granted, you can only apply to Cambridge or Oxford, but that still doesn't account for such a high number. Oxford is HUGE and has plenty of space for american students.

Secondly, Oxford is quite poor (most colleges are at least), especially compared to Harvard who has an endowment about equal to the 50 poorest country's GDP combined (read that somewhere). Some of the colleges are going broke, namely Pembroke. If you go to Pembroke, you won't even get internet access in your dorm. Because it's poor, the colleges are more than happy to take our high American tuition money (remember, British students GET PAID a stipend to go to Oxbridge).

This is why I'm surprised so few Americans apply to Oxford. As mentioned before, if you apply to courses like Oriental Studies or Classics where they get few applicants, and you pick the right college, it should not be that hard to get in. If you apply to Magdalen or Christ Church or one of the other big guns, then it won't be quite so easy. Just do your homework on where and when to apply, get good AP scores, and you should get in. If you can get into any of the Ivies here in America, you should get into at least one college in Oxford.

And it is quite possible that Oxford is the best undergraduate education in the world. My sister loves studying English, and absolutely loves going to Oxford. You just need to know what you want to study. If you're looking to party, or do lots of Extracurriculars in college, or study lots of different things, it's not the best education. While Oxford students aren't quite as bright as the students at America's top universities (or so my sister says), the atmosphere is a lot more intellectual. Certainly no frat scene, and the drinking age is 18 so kids don't get crazy with binging. And each college has its own bar. fun stuff

By Bn37 (Bn37) on Saturday, May 03, 2003 - 11:48 pm: Edit

Hmm just looking over the Oxford website. Depending on the course you apply for, the acceptance rate is between 30 and 70 percent for the most part. Definitely not under 10. The lowest is Economics at 16.5%, but there is none other close to that. Guess lots of kids want to get into business.

http://www.admissions.ox.ac.uk/courses/

By Bn37 (Bn37) on Saturday, May 03, 2003 - 11:49 pm: Edit

Dubiastic - just curious, what are your stats? Are you American? what college/course did you apply for? When are you starting?

By Bn37 (Bn37) on Saturday, May 03, 2003 - 11:56 pm: Edit

Undecided - just a tip. New Hall College, a med college for women at Cambridge, was actively recruiting kids at my American school (nobody applied though). I assume they'd be very eager to take you. You should look into it. the whole medical system is different in England though. I know nothing about it except that there's no real "med school," i believe you go straight from college to an internship where you learn the practical skills. But don't take my word for it.

By Arealtexan (Arealtexan) on Sunday, May 04, 2003 - 05:51 am: Edit

50%? The acceptance rate is usually around 33% if you average out all of the subjects. Harvard's is, according to US News 11%. You say that the fact that you can only apply to Oxford or Cambridge must have some impact on the disparity, but you miss the most obvious reason for the acceptance rate being high. It has nothing to do with the respective populations of the United States and United Kingdom. Bristol, the LSE and Nottingham all have similar acceptance rates to Harvard (9%, 9% and 11%) and most of the top non-Oxbridge universities tend to hover in the 12-18% band. It has, however, everything to do with the interview.

I cannot stress strongly enough how much the interview discourages potential applicants. Oxford and Cambridge compulsorily interview all candidates. This is why the acceptance rate is so high.

Your argument about the graduate recruiting is wildly inaccurate. I can only say that the points you made about graduate recruiting from Oxbridge display a staggering ignorance about job markets in the UK and Commonwealth.

I would be interested to see if you could provide a link about the story regarding American university's and their rejection of the Oxbridge BA. To me, it smacks of BS. Particularly when you say that - they want to see the higher degree, another 2 years. This is wrong, a taught course masters can be done in one year in the UK.
You also assert that Oxford aren't looking for well rounded candidates, but are looking for those with high test scores. I'm going to say this straight out - you're wrong. Why do you think they have low minimum grade requirements? (AAB, for A-levels, 1400 for SATS) It's because that allows the admissions tutors to accept well rounded and intelligent students who don't have the best grades. If all you do is study all day? You are not going to get into Oxford.

If you're looking to party, or do lots of Extracurriculars in college, or study lots of different things, it's not the best education.

This is another comment that I have trouble fathoming. There are no fraternities, this is correct. But if drinking and partying is your thing, the constant formal and informal balls are there, the college, university and society bars exist as well as countless drinking societies in each college. There are a similar number of student societies and clubs at Oxford to the Ivy League schools. And they are good. Where do you think the Monty Python chaps or Rowan Atkinson learned about comedy? Or where did Roger Bannister and Charles Burgess Fry train?

While Oxford students aren't quite as bright as the students at America's top universities

I think we can again assume that you've missed the mark here. Remember (and this is not me talking, but the OECD), Britain has one of the best education systems in the world, for all its faults. And in the last major survey of the world, Britain beat the United States by quite a margin. Oh, and the last time Oxbridge went against the Ivy League in a University Challenge special, the Oxbridge victory was by over 300 points. Also, if those American students are so bright, then why are they failing to graduate from an undergraduate education system which isn't as rigorous as Oxbridge? 99% completion rates exist at Oxford and Cambridge, versus just 83%, 88% and 92% at HYP.

In addition, British students DO pay to attend university. Currently it is a very low rate, but it will be rising in 2007. If you claim to have such an inside knowledge of the British education system, you really should be aware of the controversy surrounding university fees.

And one more thing - and I think this is demonstrative of your lack of Oxbridge knowledge more than anything else - New Hall is not a "med college for women" it is a "college for women". None of the colleges, with the exception of a few theological halls at Oxford only offer a single subject.

Whilst I will distance myself from Dubiastic's enthusiastic gushing over Oxford - which is entirely understandable, as the reputation of Oxford in the US is inflated by its association with the Rhodes Scholarships (it really isn't better than Cambridge) - I will also challenge your arguments, Bn37.

By Dubiastic (Dubiastic) on Sunday, May 04, 2003 - 09:14 am: Edit

Arealtexan, are you an Oxford student?
Bn37, which better American school do you attend ? ;-)

Yes, Bn37, I am American and was accepted to read Chinese (my passion) starting next year. I'm sure you'll think being a Chinese major gave me a leg up: it probably did, in the same way that it got got me into Ivies, as it is not the world's most popular subject.

By Bn37 (Bn37) on Sunday, May 04, 2003 - 09:44 am: Edit

Hmm i'm not sure about the controversy over fees but I also know most of my sister's british friends not only have little money to spend but also have the same amount of money to spend - some sort of stipend. maybe you could explain it to me? As for ECs, they're not the same as they are in America, my sister rows crew and says by far that's the most popular thing to do. If you want to do something else there are places to do it, but it's not jumping out at you like in the US. Harvard was 11 percent last year, 9.8 this year. And i said the thing about new hall because undecided said she was interested in studying medicine, and new hall has a limited number of courses, medicine being one they stress.

By Dubiastic (Dubiastic) on Sunday, May 04, 2003 - 10:02 am: Edit

Are you going to tell us where you study, Bn37?

By Arealtexan (Arealtexan) on Sunday, May 04, 2003 - 11:56 am: Edit

Okay, I'll explain the fees/stipend situation in Britain. Reading my first response to Bn37, it seems a little harsh. I'm going to have to apologise for the ad hominem nature of it and blame it on early Sunday morning grumpiness.

Up until 1997, you would be correct in saying that all British students received government grants and their higher education for free. This is because of the way that universities evolved in Britain. They are not private institutions, but public ones (they even elected their own Members of Parliament) - and they were intended to be used by the intellectual elite. That has changed, and the 1992 expansion of the Royal Charter placed a strain on the funds used for higher education. So, in 1997 fees were introduced. In 2007 some universities will be granted the power to raise the fixed fees because their is an obvious discrepancy where you pay the same amount to attend Edinburgh as South Bank.

But the bottom line is - and the aborted merger between UCL and Imperial was an inkling of this - that the UK's top 22 universities (the so-called Russel Group) will probably go private by the end of the decade.

Hrm... New Hall has a limited number of courses like the University of Cambridge has a limited number of courses. Medicine is a traditional strength, but they offer the full range of subjects available.

And no, Dubiastic, I'm not an Oxford student. Why else do you think I would stress that Oxford is no better than Cambridge? ;)

By Undecided (Undecided) on Sunday, May 04, 2003 - 12:18 pm: Edit

Okay, so now that we have some pretty solid commentary about Oxford and its colleges and the general British way of it, how about Cambridge?

-- Undecided, who finds this helpful and amusing all at the same time.

By Dubiastic (Dubiastic) on Sunday, May 04, 2003 - 01:01 pm: Edit

Are you an American, arealtexan?

By Arealtexan (Arealtexan) on Sunday, May 04, 2003 - 02:10 pm: Edit

I'm getting a touch of deja vu, Dubiastic. Just scroll up and check where someone else has asked me the same question before. ;)

About Cambridge. Understand that I am holding an offer from Cambridge, and I prefer it to Oxford - so this bias will probably influence what I write about the university.

Cambridge is in a smaller town than Oxford, and the centre of the town is dominated by some of the Cambridge colleges. There are expansive parks throughout the town, restaurants and bistros all over the place - all very picturesque. If it gets a little too much for you, London is about an hour away by train (pretty much the main mode of travel for many people in Britain).

Of the two universities, Cambridge is the richer one, with a $2.7 billion endowment compared with Oxford's $2 billion. It is also slightly smaller, although the difference in student size is negligible (about 800 students). It also has fewer colleges, and there is less wealth disparity between the colleges. Academically, it has the better reputation in the sciences and humanities (except politics) than Oxford, but the differences between them really are minute.

For more detailed information on the academic rankings of the different departments it's probably best to purchase the Times Good University Guide from http://www.amazon.co.uk - although bear in mind that for the most part, there is little to choose between Oxford and Cambridge. Maybe examining the course criteria at both universities for your chosen subject can help?

It has a slightly higher average A-level entrance score, and 1% more overseas students than Oxford. The alumni roll call of the two can be compared at: http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/smb1001/alumni.htm
If you look closely at the Cambridge page, you'll see that Hans Blix went to the Trinity Hall. How strange.

If you just say which colleges you are considering, Undecided, I can try my best to explain what I know about them?

By Bn37 (Bn37) on Sunday, May 04, 2003 - 03:08 pm: Edit

sure, dubiastic. i'll be at middlebury next year, studying Chinese as well. I got into Ivies, but Middlebury has the strongest Chinese program around (the CIA trains there too for languages!) and I like the small schools better, so I figured I'd give it a shot.

Sorry this has devolved into a fight - Oxford is certainly a great place to study, but i'm certainly not the first one on these boards to say that it's nowhere near impossible to get into. Of course, you still need great stats, but if you are someone deserving of going to HYPS, or even some other near-elites (non-athlete, non-legacy, etc.) then there is no reason you wouldn't get into Oxford (not sure about Cambridge, know nothing about it, sister's at Oxford). Again, this isn't because it's any less good, simply because some colleges need money and therefore would love American students paying for 3 years. And the fact that the interviews scare away people doesn't mean anything - 50 percent, or even 33 percent, is still a whole different ballgame than 10 percent.

As far as "Well-rounded student," they don't look the same way American colleges do...they want you to be knowledgeable about your subject and well-read, but they don't care if you worked on your yearbook or started a club to help cancer patients. They're looking for someone who can write and speak eloquently and has passion for the subject.

To answer you about recruitment, I'm sure it has incredible recruitment offers for British companies, but I'm American and want to spend my life here after college. This was less of a concern for me than my parents when i was considering oxford, i'm not worried about that just yet. you'll just get a different, british, set of connections.

By Dubiastic (Dubiastic) on Sunday, May 04, 2003 - 03:12 pm: Edit

I'd say a decidely "international" set of connections... Very funny that we are both Chinese majors. Good luck at Club Midd next year!
Have you studied Chinese in high school? And yes, Middlebury does have one of the best language programs in the country and certainly the best summer program, if not the best program all-around.

By Undecided (Undecided) on Sunday, May 04, 2003 - 03:13 pm: Edit

This is a rather arbitrary list; I haven't done too much in-depth research into any of the colleges. That said, these are the colleges I'm interested in at Cambridge, in no particular order:

St John's, Trinity Hall, Queens', Downing, Emmanuel, Gonville and Caius

Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated -- every little bit helps, and has helped.

-- Undecided.

By Dubiastic (Dubiastic) on Sunday, May 04, 2003 - 03:14 pm: Edit

Go to Oxford ;-)

By Bn37 (Bn37) on Sunday, May 04, 2003 - 04:34 pm: Edit

hey Dubiastic - my HS doesn't offer Chinese but I've studied it at The China Institute in NYC (65th and Park) quite a bit. Also went to china last summer for 6 weeks, picked up a bit there. Still deciding between East Asian Studies Major, History Major with Asian area concentration, or Chinese Major (too many options for a small school!)

best of luck in Oxford! If you have any questions about being American at Oxford I can ask my sister for ya.

By Dubiastic (Dubiastic) on Sunday, May 04, 2003 - 04:58 pm: Edit

You didn't happent to travel with Choate, did you?

By Bn37 (Bn37) on Sunday, May 04, 2003 - 05:19 pm: Edit

nope, didn't. It was with where there be dragons. and it was actually two summers ago, last summer i spent at the china institute.

By Bn37 (Bn37) on Sunday, May 04, 2003 - 05:32 pm: Edit

Hey Dubiastic, no offense but just read this that ya posted:

"I have an 1200, SATII: 800/560/630 and got into Oxford, I'm waited at harvard and yale."

Not to say that you're not impressive or anything, but isn't that proof enough of my point that it's not as hard as the Ivies to get into? Since you got into Oxford and not the Ivies. case in point if ya ask me.

By Bn37 (Bn37) on Sunday, May 04, 2003 - 05:33 pm: Edit

by the way, what college are ya in?

By Arealtexan (Arealtexan) on Monday, May 05, 2003 - 03:26 am: Edit

Okay Undecided, here goes:

St John's - It's a very big and rich college. The second largest behind Trinity, and this brings both positives and negatives. The accomodation is nice and there are plenty of facilities - but the amount on offer within college can lead some to never leave St John's. It has a bit of a reputation for heartiness, and if you want to play sports but aren't excellent then don't bother applying here. The male/female ratio is 61/39. The size of the college can be daunting, and means that there is less of a community spirit at John's.

Trinity Hall - The nickname is "Tit Hall". What more needs to be said? It's small, quite friendly (although not nearly as small as Corpus Christi or Peterhouse) but has a reputation as a bit of a boaty college. It's much stronger in the Arts than the Sciences. Male/female ratio: 55/45. The bar is also quite small and is the most expensive in Cambridge. Also the sports teams are pretty weak.

Queen's - Large college, not enormously wealthy but has absolutely loads of facilities and things to do. You live in college (not in a hostel down the road) for all three years, and the buildings are nice though not spectacular. It's not a very 'outgoing' college, like St John's there is loads to do within college so there is hardly a reason to leave. When there aren't exams on, it is a great place, but exam time is a nightmare. It's one of the most seriously studious of the colleges and hardly anyone emerges from their room during the final term of each year. Male/female ratio: 59/41

Downing - The "law college", with lovely Georgian neo-classical architecture. Also has a reputation for excellence in medicine. It's also very sporty, with a reputation for being hard-playing, hard-drinking rugby players and boaties. I can't stress enough how wonderful the college looks - the neo-classical stuff is quite different from the gothic nature of most colleges, but still looks nice (unlike Churchill or New Hall). The bar policy makes it difficult for non-college members to drink there, which makes it a bit of an exclusive college. They also tend to give more money to sporting activities than say the drama or music groups, which leads to a social divide. Male/female ratio: 55/45

Emmanuel - Make sure not to pronounce this college as you would pronounce a series of French skin flicks of the same name (or do, my interviewer seemed to find it hilarious.) It's another large college, with a policy of encouraging deferred entry (taking a gap year). The bar is very cheap, and run by students - although the Lager they serve is nasty and tastes like chemicals. Similarly, it doesn't have much of a reputation for its food. It's very friendly and somewhat insular, although the sports teams are fairly dire. It's also one of the least academically pressurised colleges in the university. Male/female ratio: 55/45

Gonville and Caius - Caius is pronounced "Keys". Excellent reputation for medicine, stunning buildings, centrally located, and one of the richest colleges. It has a bit of a Home Counties, "It" girl reputation, but is very traditional and if you like all of the strange ceremonies and traditions of Cambridge then you'll love Caius. It has the lowest proportion of state school students and women of any college (35% state, 37% women) and the rents are fairly high. Sports are fairly relaxed.

By Moshe (Moshe) on Monday, May 05, 2003 - 11:34 am: Edit

The admission rates can be ridiculously high for unpopular subjects (e.g. Chemistry, Chinese, Classics are 80%+). But the figures for more popular subjects are misleading, only very good applicants apply (which is not really the case for the top American universities). It's still quite easy to get in. But far easier for domestic students than internationals.

<i>"Oxford students are the most highly recruited students in the world"</i>

Oxbridge degree's are respectable but thousands of students have them and compete for the same jobs. Statistically Imperial graduates get the highest salaries.

By Arealtexan (Arealtexan) on Monday, May 05, 2003 - 12:07 pm: Edit

Not to say that you're not impressive or anything, but isn't that proof enough of my point that it's not as hard as the Ivies to get into? Since you got into Oxford and not the Ivies. case in point if ya ask me.

The opposite argument could be made by citing this case, Bn37:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/759114.stm

By Dubiastic (Dubiastic) on Monday, May 05, 2003 - 01:28 pm: Edit

Case in point?--wow that's low. First off, the discussion was about SATs and that's why I posted my stats.When someone is accepted by Oxford with a 1200, it shows one that SAT scores do not determine school choice...this is because most people, besides you, Bn37, are frankly blown away by Oxford. I know three people who are also going this year. Two have 1600s and one is royalty. Choate, one of the best schools in the US, gets TWO KIDS EVERY TWO YEARS INTO OXFORD. You have no clue what you are talking about!

..I question how the hell you came up with a list of easy Oxford colleges....

I have to say, I think you are a dick.
I was accepted by other non HY Ivies with my "case in point" 1200. I am incredibly proud of my accomplishments and the fact that I overcame my low math score and got into the world's best university and Ivy League schools that kinda trump Middlebury...an little ivy-wannabe.

By Arealtexan (Arealtexan) on Monday, May 05, 2003 - 01:32 pm: Edit

..I question how the hell you came up with a list of easy Oxford colleges....

It looks like the wealth list in reverse order, though I could be wrong. I didn't think that LMH was a particularly rich college.

By Moshe (Moshe) on Monday, May 05, 2003 - 02:02 pm: Edit

There are huge inequalities between colleges and the colleges that are easy to get into are famous for it ... if make an open application you'll be assigned to the least subscribed colleges.

"this is because most people, besides you, Bn37, are frankly blown away by Oxford"

Or me, Oxford's 'blown away' [in England alone] by Cambridge in most subject areas, LSE in economics, Imperial in sciences.

By Dubiastic (Dubiastic) on Monday, May 05, 2003 - 02:15 pm: Edit

I was talking about Americans, as this is an American website. As you know, Oxford has a lot of visibility in the US and has a cult status.

By Bn37 (Bn37) on Monday, May 05, 2003 - 09:58 pm: Edit

Hmm i got into non-HY ivies too and i didn't think they trumped Middlebury. that's why i'm going to Middlebury. i didn't like the whole ivy atmosphere, and the schools were too big for me. As for the list, it was put together for me by one of my sister's british friends when I was considering Oxford.

cheers

By Bn37 (Bn37) on Monday, May 05, 2003 - 10:00 pm: Edit

"Oxford has a lot of visibility in the US and has a cult status."

if that's the only reason you're going, you're stupid. it's visibility still isn't close to HYP, especially in America. don't go just for the prestige. also, would you mind telling us what college at Oxford you'll be in?

By Bn37 (Bn37) on Monday, May 05, 2003 - 10:41 pm: Edit

>>When someone is accepted by Oxford with a 1200, it shows one that SAT scores do not determine school choice<<

make up whatever rationale you want, i don't care, make yourself happy. to me it shows that it's not that hard to get into Oxford. let's remember that this whole debated started because I was encouraging Undecided to apply to her "dream school." Is there any harm in that? wasn't i being nice?

I'm sorry that you feel the need to defend Oxford and their decision to accept you by attacking me for being nice. it's quite an immature thing to do, and shows that your self-confidence is quite low. grow up

By Dubiastic (Dubiastic) on Monday, May 05, 2003 - 11:00 pm: Edit

getting a little salty, Bn37?

Encourage away, but pursuade with facts or opinions, not blanket lies about the UK system and how easy it is to slide in..before you know it, students rejected from all US schools to which they applied, instead of going to community college will go to Oxford, right? After all, its such a cinch to get in! You did say, "In fact some of the American students at Oxford whom I know chose it because they didn't get into any American schools they wanted to go to, took off a year, and reapplied to Oxford". Wow!

I don't think I have to go into your other stupid, uninformed comments...

and after all you are the Chinese major so listen, zhe ge lun dian wan le. Ni
diu lian diu mian zi. Ni kan de dong zhong wen ma?

By Dubiastic (Dubiastic) on Monday, May 05, 2003 - 11:00 pm: Edit

getting a little salty, Bn37?

Encourage away, but pursuade with facts or opinions, not blanket lies about the UK system and how easy it is to slide in..before you know it, students rejected from all US schools to which they applied, instead of going to community college will go to Oxford, right? After all, its such a cinch to get in! You did say, "In fact some of the American students at Oxford whom I know chose it because they didn't get into any American schools they wanted to go to, took off a year, and reapplied to Oxford". Wow!

I don't think I have to go into your other stupid, uninformed comments...

and after all you are the Chinese major so listen, zhe ge lun dian wan le. Ni
diu lian diu mian zi. Ni kan de dong zhong wen ma?

By Bn37 (Bn37) on Monday, May 05, 2003 - 11:25 pm: Edit

hah this is the last thing i'll say, because i don't have the energy to post any more. wouldn't you think that I'd know more than you about this, as my sister has been going to Oxford for two years and I speak to her on a daily basis? Don't you think I'd know more about her friends and other American students there than you would, as you've probably only been there once or maybe never. Yes, many of her friends are at Oxford because they didn't like the American schools they got into. Yes, it's very easy to get into some colleges at Oxford. No, it's not easy to get into all colleges at Oxford.

I'm certainly not dissing Oxford, why would I? my sister who is quite brilliant goes there, and i plan on going there myself for grad school.

and after all you are the Chinese major so listen: cao ni ma

cheers

By Dubiastic (Dubiastic) on Tuesday, May 06, 2003 - 08:01 pm: Edit

Wow...I actually said something intelligent in Chinese and you respond with an expletive.

Bai LaoShi, whom I'm sure you are unfamiliar with, and the rest of the Middlebury Summer program will certainly straighten you out. Try to keep with it, you've got a long way to go.

By Bn37 (Bn37) on Tuesday, May 06, 2003 - 08:35 pm: Edit

hah i know of bai laoshi, at least i saw his picture on the website. were you at the midd summer program? Yah, i'm sure he'll straighten me out. Get rid of all the evil things Wang Laoshi put into my head. As great as he was, he's one of the most politically incorrect people i've ever met. sometimes he says stuff and we just cringe.

cheers

By Shelinda (Shelinda) on Wednesday, May 07, 2003 - 12:25 pm: Edit

Hey Dubiastic

I only just checked back to this board and saw that you were doing Chinese too. I'm taking a gap year, so I won't see you in October (I probably won't see you next year either, as I am currently mucking up my exams, but never mind).

So what college did u get accepted to? I got accepted to low -ranking Pembroke, but who cares?

Just a question (for anyone): why does it matter which group of universities (out of Oxbridge vs. Harvard et al.) is "harder to get into"? Surely what matters is how much you put into your university life, and what degree you come out with at the end? I mean, it's not like employers spend their time comparing college acceptance rates when deciding between job applicants...

Employer 1: Ah, this person went to XXXXX! They have a first class degree in History! Let's hire them!
Employer 2: Hey wait! The acceptance rate that year was 55%! They may have a good degree, but underneath all that intelligence, humour and sparkle they must really suck to go to a place with a rate of 55%!
Employer 1: You're right. Damn.

As if.

By Bn37 (Bn37) on Wednesday, May 07, 2003 - 10:46 pm: Edit

Right on, Shelinda, you've made my point very clearly.

Dubiastic should not take pride in oxford only because it is hard to get into. that's what i've been telling her all along.

By Unicorn (Unicorn) on Sunday, May 11, 2003 - 08:07 am: Edit

let me say something also (though im 4 days late)

im not saying selectivity is a the most impt factor (i agree totally with Shelinda). Im just a bit annoyed that some ppl seem to diss oxford over HYP, by saying pretentious and america-gratifying bs that is just, simply, crap.

try applying to New College or St Johns for Econs + Mgmt, or Magdalen (or whatecer, cant be bothered to look up the spelling) for Politics. The acceptance rate is close to 12%, and im talking about one of the most self-selective applicant bodies in the world. In the UK, applying to Oxford gets u a pat on the back jus because u had the balls to do it. Next time u diss Oxford (or its acceptance rate compared to HYP), check if u have some (balls that is)

By Shelinda (Shelinda) on Monday, May 12, 2003 - 12:34 pm: Edit

Don't get me wrong, I am in no way trying to diss Oxford (that would be stupid of me, since if I do well in my A-levels I will be studying there).

I just don't see the point in worrying about acceptance rates. If you get in, you get in, if you don't, you go somewhere else.

I can understand a person being proud of getting accepted somewhere that has a low acceptance rate, but surely the main thing is that you get accepted to the place you want to go to, whether this is Oxford, Princeton, or somewhere less well-known.

By Unicorn (Unicorn) on Tuesday, May 13, 2003 - 09:38 am: Edit

i wasn't really referring to u...

By Shelinda (Shelinda) on Tuesday, May 13, 2003 - 12:39 pm: Edit

Oh okay then.

By O71394658 (O71394658) on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 07:02 pm: Edit

How about everyone here STFU.

By Snv (Snv) on Monday, May 19, 2003 - 05:05 pm: Edit

ok, im really confused about all the campuses/colleges/differences/admission difficulty;

i just have a couple of straightforward questions:

What is the most competitive/prestigous/rich school in England for premedicine/biomed (im assuming either oxford or cambridge, i mean which specific campus?) and can i get in w/ my 1580, mad extra curriculars, research at NIH, blah blah blah....

thanks!

By O71394658 (O71394658) on Monday, May 19, 2003 - 10:18 pm: Edit

Brits don't care about ECs. They like grades and hard courseloads, like lots o' APs and IBs. They want to see an in-depth teacher recommendation as well, assessing the strenth of the student in their respective major field.

By Arealtexan (Arealtexan) on Tuesday, May 20, 2003 - 02:11 am: Edit

Premed isn't a degree offered in Britain. You start off reading a 'medicine' degree. Also, the Oxford and Cambridge system isn't a campus system (like University of London or UC). The different colleges are far too small to be considered to be campuses, and they are all in a somewhat similar location. This link explains it:

http://www.collegiateway.org/colleges/caius/ingram-1999.html

The ECs will help, but the admissions tutors will be wanting to see how well you do in the interviews and MVAT test.

By Bn37 (Bn37) on Tuesday, May 27, 2003 - 09:58 pm: Edit

alright i'm back from Oxford/Cambridge and did a little bit of research. About the atmospheres: Oxford is more urban, Cambridge feels more like an English village but seems to have just as many stores and such in its 'downtown area.' Oxford kids told me Oxford is "cooler" and more liberal, and Cambridge is more conservative, less cool. Seems like a Yale/Harvard (Ox/Cam) type of thing. They're both incredibly gorgeous and perfect settings for studying. I happened to like Oxford better, but that's just a personal opinion.

As for admissions, Oxford makes itself seem easier to get into. They say they want "satisfactory" grades, 1400 SATS and 1400 combined on 2 SAT2s OR 2 APs with 4s or 5s, as well as a solid interview. I didn't do as much looking at Cambridge but they made it seem harder than Oxford did. Also - if you want to apply, the deadline is October 1, which is real early so make sure you get your act together over the summer. hope that helps.

cheers

By Tutankhamen (Tutankhamen) on Tuesday, May 27, 2003 - 10:10 pm: Edit

So if one wanted to apply anywhere with ED or single-shot EA, can one not apply to Oxford or Cambridge, i.e., do these count as applying early?

By Arealtexan (Arealtexan) on Wednesday, May 28, 2003 - 02:45 am: Edit

You do not apply ED or EA. That concept does not exist in Britain. You apply to Oxford or Cambridge through UCAS. You also fill out a supplementary application for Oxford or Cambridge, but it is the UCAS one that is important.

Bn37, you are missing the point about admissions at both of these universities. They are interested in the interview first, exam results second.

By Heartfang (Heartfang) on Wednesday, May 28, 2003 - 03:18 am: Edit

To get into Oxbridge , you need A Levels or IB only or its equivilent. SAT IS NOT AN EQUIVILENT. NEITHER IS SAT II. Very rarely to they consider those who didn't take theseexams.

Another thing for all you Americans out there, personally, from what I read about your exam/school system, I think it is way much better than UK's exam-orientated system. I would know, because, I have been through that, and now I want out.

Also, it is not easier to get into Oxford than the ivies. Oxford, Cambridge are on par with Harvard.

By Londoner (Londoner) on Wednesday, May 28, 2003 - 03:24 am: Edit

To all those of you interested in applying to Oxbridge:

I am a British student who was accepted at Oxford to read History at University College. (Sorry, not exactly a humble way to start a message!) If I had to give advice to anyone going through the process this year, I would say two words; Interview and Personal Statement. The second is not as important. I assume you are all clear on the interview process (basically that there is one/are some!). The personal statement is comparable to an admissions essay on the UCAS form, however it is more factual and does not really require any *writing*.

The thing about Oxbridge admissions is that they receive many many homogenous applicants (private school, all As at AS/A-level, deep into their subject etc.) So the only means they have to choose their students is the interview (and to a lesser extent, the personal statement).

Interview time is HORRIBLE (at least mine was!). I arrived there at 7.30am (had to catch a 5.30am bus from london) and was pretty much immediately taken to my first interview. I had to wait with two other people (my competition)for 15 mins. You could feel the tension as we attempted to make conversation (even though we were sizing each other up). I had an a**hole as my interviewer...started asking me about 17th century Prussian trade and economic reforms there (NOWHERE had I indicated that I was interested in 17thC Prussia, nor had I ever studied it.) Was a bit of a joke really. Second interview went MUCH better...was more a conversation than me going 'ummmm'.

I don't mean to scare people. A few of my friends had really friendly interviewers (mostly Classicists). Most had thier own horror stories. Don't be fooled tho, a good interview does not = acceptance...and vice versa!

Oh, also to Bn37:
I would compare Cam to Harvard and Ox to Princeton (since they are sister schools).

Sorry for the long post peeps. I am ill and need an excuse to not revise for A-levels.

By Arealtexan (Arealtexan) on Wednesday, May 28, 2003 - 03:56 am: Edit

I'm glad you said that you were asked on things that you didn't know about. I think this happens quite a bit in interviews, and is a way of testing whether or not you can apply critical thinking and the intellectual tools of your discipline into making educated guesses. This is a way of sorting the genuinely intelligent wheat from the spoon-fed-all-their-lives chaff.

By Moshe (Moshe) on Wednesday, May 28, 2003 - 05:48 am: Edit

The two essays you send in (for humanities subjects) are usually far more of a deciding factor than the interviews - as are your A-level subjects and personal statement: although this probably varies between admissions tutors. My academic interview experience (for History) lasted less than ten minutes and the questions were all on my essays... the other interview's usually even more of a formality; I just got asked about living in Israel and it never turned political.


"I am a British student who was accepted at Oxford to read History at University College. (Sorry, not exactly a humble way to start a message!)" ... but you posted about a month ago that you were rejected by Univ (And because of "legacies" [which we don't have] ) ?

By Shelinda (Shelinda) on Wednesday, May 28, 2003 - 06:33 am: Edit

Hey Londoner,

Congrats on your acceptance for History! I remember you said before you were rejected for Ancient and Modern... so you must have been accepted for straight Modern History, right? Did you apply for Classics consideration as well?

Moshe: I am quite surprised your interview was so short... mine lasted almost 45 minutes! I don't really agree that the essays are more important than the interview - for all the interviewers know, you were spoon fed the essay by a teacher. The interview, however, is a chance to think on your feet and work things out for yourself.

(By the way texan, I emailed you yesterday)

By Dubiastic (Dubiastic) on Wednesday, May 28, 2003 - 07:22 am: Edit

Re: Heartfang's comment on SAT I/IIs and Oxford, it is possible to get in on those tests, as I did from an American HS. I wouldn't put too much weight into the exact SAT # they want, I've read on their website 1400, I didn't have that, but everyone else who went or is going that I know had way above...so who knows- Oxford Admissions is very mysterious.
SAT II-wise: 700+ period.

Hope this helps.

By Bn37 (Bn37) on Wednesday, May 28, 2003 - 08:14 am: Edit

I guess the interview is important, but it's not even required for US applicants, so it can't be that important. If you live in the middle of the country they won't make you interview.

By Heartfang (Heartfang) on Wednesday, May 28, 2003 - 08:19 am: Edit

Londoner: I am taking my A Levels too.In fact my First Semester exams are round the corner.

Hoping to aim for A's in Maths, Physics and Chem and a B in Further Maths. What did you get for your A Levels?

By Dubiastic (Dubiastic) on Wednesday, May 28, 2003 - 08:27 am: Edit

The interview is crucial for UK students and Americans. Bn37, I have no clue what you source is for "If you live in the middle of the country they won't make you interview." I know an applicant who lived in NB who was made to fly into CA for an interview.
If you live in the middle they don't make you interview? I don't think so.

By Shelinda (Shelinda) on Wednesday, May 28, 2003 - 10:40 am: Edit

I thought the interview was required for almost everyone (obviously, unless you live in the middle of nowhere and can't get to it...), as it appears to me to be the only way the tutors can accurately guage your ability for whatever course you applied for.

Since almost everyone applying to Oxbridge has top A-levels, IB scores, etc., I imagine the interview would be a fundamental test of ability, to differentiate between those who are good, and those who are great.

By Alfalfa (Alfalfa) on Wednesday, May 28, 2003 - 06:09 pm: Edit

Hey, I'm currently a Swarthmore student and am going to spend my junior year studying at Wadham College in Oxford (I applied through the Sarah Lawrence Program). I had the option of transfering to NYU or Brown, but I felt that the combination of an Swarthmore and Oxford education was an offer I couldn't refuse. I'm in the Honors Program at Swarthmore which is modeled on the Oxford tutorial system. I'm going to be studying economic development and writing a thesis which will be used as one of my three preparations for the Honors program at Swarthmore (I will also be taking tutorials in Political Theory, Management, and Finance). I personally would not recommend American students to apply to Oxford unless they are in an IB program. As stated throughout this discussion thread, the differences in educational system between the United States and England are quite stark. Keep in mind, that in England the vast majority of schools including Oxbridge are public. Only about a quarter of English students go to college, and it is seen as a privilege, not as a right. Students in England specialize in two or three subjects in high school which they continue in college. Americans high school students recieve a much more liberal education, and as such are unprepared for Oxbridge. No one leads you by your hand there...you are expected to learn on your own. I know at Oxford, I will be meeting one on one with my tutor only once a week. I suggest that American students experience Oxbridge through study abroad once they know what they want to study and have significant background knowledge in the subject. That's just my opinion, anyway.

By Moshe (Moshe) on Wednesday, May 28, 2003 - 11:55 pm: Edit

"Moshe: I am quite surprised your interview was so short... mine lasted almost 45 minutes!"


Really, most people's don't exceed 15 minutes... I was pretty inarticulate; my English wasn't perfect; I don't even remember making a single good point, but I'm sure tutors had already decided who to admit.


I don't really agree that the essays are more important than the interview - for all the interviewers know, you were spoon fed the essay by a teacher. The interview, however, is a chance to think on your feet and work things out for yourself. " "Since almost everyone applying to Oxbridge has top A-levels, IB scores, etc., I imagine the interview would be a fundamental test of ability, to differentiate between those who are good, and those who are great. "

I assure you... and any potential history applicants that (at Cambridge) the essays you send are the main differentiator. Essay writing is the ability tutors care about most; essentially that's what your degree comes down to. Obviously it varies, for you the interview may have decided it but then Pembroke probably follows a different policy to the better colleges.

"About a quarter of English students go to college, and it is seen as a privilege, not as a right"

...maybe in the 1960's... now it's 40%, going on 50%. There are huge inequalities of funding between institutions, but to the same extent as in America? I don't think so.

"No one leads you by your hand there...you are expected to learn on your own. I know at Oxford, I will be meeting one on one with my tutor only once a week. "

On the contrary, the tutorial system is probably the most personal, not to mention guided, in world. You get set essays and can go through absolutely everything with your tutor.

By Londoner (Londoner) on Thursday, May 29, 2003 - 05:03 am: Edit

Moshe: I was rejected to read Ancient and Modern History at Univ. However, at interview they asked me if i would be prepared to read only Modern history or only Classics and I said yes. THe college phoned my school in mid-Feb to ask if i was still interested in reading mod history and in mid-March they offered me a place.
It's kinda stupid actually, cos after ALL that, im not even gonna go. Princeton sounds more appealing

In response to what you said above, I agree completely. However, what you said about the tutorial system may be true for the humanities and social sciences, but for people doing medicine/biological sciences/math I believe it's far less guided (I'm basing this on the views of 1st year peeps I know at Cambridge who are reading those subjects...so don't take what i say as fact.)

My interview were also about 15-20 mins ( I had three)

To Heartfang: I am doing my A-levels now (Ancient History, Economics, Pure Mathmatics) am expecting AAB (P. Maths is tooooo hard P1,2,3 last year and 4,5,6 this year)
At A/S level i did the above and French and got AAAA.
Good luck in your A-levels!

Alfalfa: That sounds amazing! Good friend of mine is going to Wadham in October to read Classics (Ellen Storrar...in case you ever meet!) I'm also into Economic Development...really want an internship with UN/WTO/ODI/some other development institution next year.

Who here is applying/thinking of applying to Oxbridge and for what course?

By Shelinda (Shelinda) on Thursday, May 29, 2003 - 05:33 am: Edit

"Pembroke probably follows a different policy to the better colleges."

Ooh, that's low.

By Dubiastic (Dubiastic) on Thursday, May 29, 2003 - 07:28 am: Edit

Yeah, seriously. I would shocked to learn that all Oxford colleges do not follow the same protocol. I was told by an Oxford Tutor that appropriate conditions for an acceptance were reccomended, if not set, by central admissions.

Another thing, does anyone know anything about switching subjects @ Oxford? Is it done? Possible? When and how?

By Bn37 (Bn37) on Friday, May 30, 2003 - 02:26 am: Edit

dubiastic - what college are you going to

By Shelinda (Shelinda) on Friday, May 30, 2003 - 12:11 pm: Edit

It is possible to change courses, although I don't think it's done very frequently. I met someone on an Open Day who had switched from Biochemistry to Japanese.

I believe it's easier at Cambridge to switch courses due to the Tripos system (I think you can change after the first set of exams?), but I think at Oxford unless the course you want to study is similar to the original (e.g. you want to change from Medicine to Physiology), you have to start from the first year, regardless of how long you'd studied the previous course. But I might be wrong.

By Bn37 (Bn37) on Sunday, June 01, 2003 - 12:24 am: Edit

dubiastic - what college are you going to

By Bn37 (Bn37) on Tuesday, June 03, 2003 - 09:22 pm: Edit

bump

By Inchie85 (Inchie85) on Thursday, July 03, 2003 - 01:08 pm: Edit

hey Bn37, im also going to middlebury next year, and i went to china for 3 weeks my sophmore year! hope to see you on campus next year!

By 22157 (22157) on Friday, December 05, 2003 - 07:48 am: Edit

Bear in mind that there's a lot of cynicism about Oxbridge in the UK. For one thing the league tables are compiled by 4 0r 5 news papers that are heavily staffed through Oxbridge networking.

The criteria chosen are, not surprisingly, biassed in favour of Oxbridge. For example Oxbridge is notorious for grade inflation-giving lots of high grades, compared to say LSE or Imperial (each university gives its own grades-there is no standardisation)-and instead of penalising such soft marking the tables reward it. Often without this, and without other table'criteria' that can be distorted easily (ie 'value-added'!) Imperial and LSE would easily top the tables.

Another example: there's a TV quiz here called University Challenge in which universities compete. Oxford and Cambridge are allowed to enter dozens of teams, one for each tiny component college (Oxbridge has many small constituent colleges)-everybody else, even universities as large as Oxford, is allowed only one team each-no wonder Oxbridge wins it so often-they get far more shots on target-yet you'll never hear about this is the British media.

However there have been scandals about people bribing tutors to get admission, so yes Oxford is important, but get real-starry eyes are for children, not the real world.

By Kaisersoze (Kaisersoze) on Monday, March 01, 2004 - 09:06 pm: Edit

These kind of misconceptions are the cause of any supposed cynicism in the UK against oxbridge! (which is a view held by a total minority)

'for example Oxbridge is notorious for grade inflation-giving lots of high grades'

WHAT!?!? I have heard a lot of criticism against oxbridge, but *never* grade inflation - oxbridge is renowned for being extraodinairily difficult to get similar grades. Case in point (and common to all subjects) - law in cambridge, 270 per year, 17 firsts. thats approx 6 percent, taken from some of the cleverest people in the world. Imperial/LSE average 15% - go figure.

As to the (somewhat trivial) university challenge example - Cambridge and Oxford are banned from entering as a university by the organisers! If the colleges can win anyway, imagine how well the university could do if it could select the four best from all the college teams, this seems a bit obvious really.

As to the (one reported incident in recent times) of bribery - it was refused point blank as was the admission of the child in question, seems pretty uncorrupt to me...

In all the British media is ultra critical of oxbridge, and unfairly so, because under this socialist government it makes news and sells papers - don't believe the lies, they're still the best universities in Britain (and our only world class institutions).

P.s. I know this discussion has been dead for a while, but it'll no doubt come up again and its important the posts above lies aren't seen as the true situation