<p>I already tend to Cambridge, but just wanted to get your opinions. I'll major in computer science, so what's the better place to be? Cambridge University or Princeton?</p>
<p>Another comparision thread eh?..
If u hav askd bout Stanford v Cambridge then I would hav preferd Stanford...cant say bout p'ton...</p>
<p>I think both are different but have about the same job opportunities i guess.</p>
<p>Cambridge might be harder to get into actually!</p>
<p>Cambridge will almost certainly require you to actually be more intelligent to get into, although Princeton may well be harder because luck will play a very big part. Do you have an offer from Cambridge or are you applying next year?</p>
<p>I believe the OP already got into Cambridge but I'm not sure.</p>
<p>
Most of the applicant who get into P'ton have All A's in their transcripts as in Cambridge. Princetonians on the other hand do ECs instead of studying for 20 hrs/day.</p>
<p>Abhi, I think Cambridge guys have a life between studying, too :)</p>
<p>Yes, I already made it into Cambridge. I think its computer science department is more prestigious than Princeton's one. I just wanted to get some other opinions.</p>
<p>I am sure that both have a world class computer science department.
If finances are not an issue, I would make my choice based on the US vs UK educational style. Do you want to study ONLY computer science and get your degree as fast as possible? Go to Cambridge. Do you want to take classes outside your major, join a club or participate in college athletics? Attend an American university, whether it be Princeton or Stanford or whatever.
If finances are a big issue, I guess Cambridge would be the better option.</p>
<p>Why do most of the Brits, Indians, Japaneses, French and German think that getting into Cambridge, IIT, Tokyo, Ecole, Heidelberg is more harder than getting into Harvard?</p>
<p>er...I dont think that....IMO, it is far more easier 2 get in oxbridge than p'ton/harvard...</p>
<p>Abhi, you're throwing so many different universities in one pool. Getting in Heidelberg is no problem at all: everybody can go there. Ecole is super-hard, certainly harder than Harvard by the way. Cambridge is something different again. And so on...
I don't think it's <em>generally</em> easier to get into Princeton than to get into Cambridge, for example. I've seen people get into Princeton that I wouldn't expect to get into Cambridge. In any case, Cambridge is certainly stricter concerning the academic abilities (whereas Princeton and the likes consider ECs, etc.).</p>
<p>Sorry about Heidelberg then.</p>
<p>But still, Princeton takes into both academics and ECs. A book worm can get into Cambridge but not into P'ton[No offence intended]. I don't think academic abilities of p'tonians is less than of Cambridge student. Most of the ppl who get into p'ton take AP classes which are almost comparable to A-level(in level of difficulty)</p>
<p>As someone who is going/has been through both systems and watched people go through both systems, you undeniably have to be better at your chosen subject, and in most cases more intelligent to get into oxbridge. Most of the applicants to oxbridge will have 8A*s+ and 3/4 As at Alevel, but this simply will not get you into oxbridge. Most subjects then have additional tests, such as LNAT, TSA, HAT or BMAT which further test natural aptitude and intelligence, removing the probability of pure 'chance' getting you in. And incase you are going to say SATs do this, that argument is purely ridiculous, just have a look at the physics test paper for oxford and you will realise one is significantly more difficult, hence will differentiate between candidates much more.</p>
<p>As for a book worm being able to get in, that is simply not the case, as I have demostrated above, aptitude is a very big part of you application, Furthermore, those who teach you actually sit and talk to you 1:1 as they interview. This is the part where someone who is just a bookworm falls, as they fail to show spark or flare. Many candidates with 5 or 6As at Alevel get rejected because they simply show no personality or passion and the tutors consider them unappealing to teach for the next 3 years.</p>
<p>As for Princeton caring about ECs, Cambridge look for actual personality that they assess in an face to face meeting, not just with an alumni who will almost always say something positive, but with a leading academic in the field, as appose to Princeton who like to see a list of ECs, fabricated or not, that probably show as much about your background as they do you as a person.</p>
<p>I think I am in a better position than most to make this judgement, as I have a friend who is now at brown, after an oxford rejection, and I hold an offer for Cambridge. I'm not going to argue that one system is hugely better than the other, they are different, but when it comes to selecting the best candidates academically (those that show promise, enthusaism and aptitude) the Cambridge system far surpasses that of the US unis. Whether you think they should do this is a different matter, but for a top academic institution the ultimate emphasis must be on academics, not time spent in a charity shop.</p>
<p>Lol, LadyLou. I am basically of your opinion (even though I would have said it slightly different ;)). I think the "Cambridge way" is far more academically, so to speak. I mean, for graduate school, it all comes down to your academic abilities - it's gonna be the same in the USA then!</p>
<p>PS: Doesn't mean that people at Princeton are not as clever as at Cambridge.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I think I am in a better position than most to make this judgement, as I have a friend who is now at brown, after an oxford rejection, and I hold an offer for Cambridge. I'm not going to argue that one system is hugely better than the other, they are different, but when it comes to selecting the best candidates academically (those that show promise, enthusaism and aptitude) the Cambridge system far surpasses that of the US unis. Whether you think they should do this is a different matter, but for a top academic institution the ultimate emphasis must be on academics, not time spent in a charity shop.
[/Quote]
Harvard and P'ton aren't just academic institution. They are places which manufacture leaders not just people who get a degree from grad school and then join the usual work force. An average P'tonian is much more successful than an average Cambridge graduate.</p>
<p>I don't believe that Cambridge students are academically superior than P'tonians.</p>
<p>I second issaac. I think HYP are harder to get into than Oxbridge, too.</p>
<p>
[quote]
An average P'tonian is much more successful than an average Cambridge graduate.
[/quote]
Would you mind giving your sources?</p>
<p>Come on, this is drifting away and becoming an absurd debate. LadyLou made her point clear, you made your point clear and so did I. But talking of Cambridge guys as people who join the "usual work force" (whatever that is) sounds very vague. I doubt you have any basis for your judgement.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I second isaac. I think HYP are harder to get into than Oxbridge, too.
[/quote]
I guess most people on <em>this</em> board will think so, simply because they <em>know</em> how hard it is to get into HYP. They are involved with this admission process and know much more about the US admission style. Statistically, about 25% of applicants are admitted to Oxbridge, while the numbers are about 10% for HYP. Does this automatically mean that it is more difficult to get into HYP? What about some low-ranking universities that have an admit rate of about 5% - are those harder to get into than HYP?</p>
<p>In the end, Princeton, Harvard, Cambridge, MIT or whatsoever are all great institutions. I was actually asking for Princeton's computer science department. Never mind...</p>
<p>Going back to aw5k's original question, I think a computer science degree from Cambridge may be better than one from Princeton. The program at Princeton is rather small and not very well known.</p>
<p>Thanks, fuzzylogic. I think you're the first one to actually answer my question :)</p>
<p>Harder to get into, yes Princeton probably is, but as has been said so many times by some many, because there is such a huge element of luck, which is obviously going to occur when 60% of applicants are almost identical. Cambridge, on the other hand, has worked to eradicate these idiosyncracies from their application process, by the indroduction of particularly testing papers, therefore the 'luck' needed to get in quickly transfers itself to actual ability. For those who are truly exceptional in their chosen field of study, Cambridge becomes a complete doddle to get into. Out of interest have you actually applied and got into cambridge?</p>