Difference of Oxford and Cambridge

College Search & Selection
21

<p>^ LOL on the complex comment. Don’t make this personal. </p>

<p>Students at Eton don’t find American schools that attractive. Only 14 of the 259 Eton grads this year pursued college in America. And, that’s not because they can’t get into a top American school or they can’t afford to study and live in America, but because American schools aren’t that popular amongst Etonians yet. As for Harrow, 15 recent grads are at Brown. 6 each at Harvard and USC. 5 each at Stanford, Yale and Duke. 4 at Princeton, and 1 each at Berkeley and Wharton.</p>

22

<p>So RML first claims that the odds are better at the ivies and then admits that they are better at Oxbridge when shown the actual numbers? Talk about inconsistency…</p>

<p>Also, if you only look at the students reading the most desirable subjects at Oxbridge (law, medicine, etc.), yes you will find them true peers of Ivy students. But then what about the less selective colleges at Oxbridge? You really can’t pick and choose this way. The only remotely fair way is to compare the overall numbers, which heavily favor the top US schools.</p>

<p>And are you actually familiar with UK high schools? Eton might be the most storied and has the best uniforms, but really academically it isn’t all that great, with what around 30? 50? schools scoring better on the league tables (don’t remember if that’s for boys schools only…). Now Westminister, that’s a good school…</p>

<p>And don’t you find it quite ridiculous to quote the college preferences of kids at British secondary schools? I am sure students from Andover or Lycee Louis le Grand or one of those top high schools in Beijing will think differently. You do realize that on the high school level, the field is wide open internationally? At least IvyPBear is looking at a school that recruits most if not all of its students from all over the globe…</p>

23

<p>Thank you for your posts! They have been incredibly helpful to me since I’ve been so clueless with so much of the information! I hear frequently that Oxbridge focus purely on grades/scores is this correct? Since I want to apply there as well as some of the Ivies and other US schools, I will be taking part in many extracurriculars, will this be irrelevant to Oxford and Cambridge?</p>

24

<p>I personally haven’t gone through the process, but I have many friends who have, so I’ll offer my 2 cents. Oxbridge do put a much greater emphasis on academics and don’t really care too much about extracurriculars. Don’t get me wrong–their extracurricular expectations are nowhere near what the top US schools expect, but you still need to demonstrate your interest in and dedication to the subject you are applying to (e.g. for medicine you need to do a bit of voluntary work and shadowing, but still far less than what American students do), in particular for the hot subjects like law or medicine. </p>

<p>The UK A-levels are easy, so everybody applying to Oxbridge has great grades. They end up looking at your raw scores, and really emphasize the interviews. The interviews are academic and pertain to your chosen field of study. But really, from what I hear from my friends, they aren’t as hard as the horrifying legends will make you believe them to be. </p>

<p>In my opinion, except for geniuses like IMO gold medalists, American schools are harder to get into because the things they look for, like leadership, service and ‘passion’, are more intangible and require multiple years of planning and hard work. While for British schools, you’re all set if you work really hard to get top scores (not grades, mind you, as straight As are so easy to get they are virtually meaningless) and are willing to put in some effort into the interviews.</p>

25

<p>rankingsaddict,</p>

<p>

I didn’t say the odds are better at the Ivies. In fact, I was saying the contrary as my data suggested. The odds of getting into Ivies are lower. The acceptance rates at most ivies hover around 10% to 12% whilst it’s 30%, more or less, at Oxbrdge. </p>

<p>

Like which majors or college, for example? Please specify so we can make a comparison.</p>

<p>

Like I said, we don’t have enough data to make a comparison. If you have data, kindly show them and let’s analyze them.</p>

<p>

Do you have their data? If you do, please show them. In my high school, Oxford and Cambridge are viewed equal to Harvard, and superior to YPSM. But not too many students apply to Oxbridge because Oxbridge are not generous with aid. (Again, only for that reason and not because Oxbridge are academically inferior to those top American schools.) Only about 10 to 15 apply to Oxbridge from our high school every year. They are usually our top 1 to top 20 whose parents can well afford to send their children to Oxbridge. </p>

<p>And lastly, Eton is a great school. You are ignorant about the school if you believe otherwise.</p>

26

<p>RML: Okay how do I quote messages like what you did?</p>

<p>1) I’m sorry I misinterpreted what you said in post #8 (“The odds of getting into Oxbridge is lower than those of the Ivies.”) to mean that the odds for Oxbridge are lower. Now I know that you actually meant to say that they are higher.</p>

<p>2) Well okay I admit I am not familiar with the exact admissions statistics, but what about the non-professional majors? And perhaps colleges other than say Trinity or Clare? </p>

<p>3) What I’m referring to here, is a simple comparison of the number of students vs potential applicants. This assumes that Oxbridge take the best UK students, and the top-ranked US schools take the best US students. I know this is a very simplistic view, but with the UCAS limitations, international apps, different application cultures, financial aid woes, and the option of LACs, state schools and London universities I think it’s really the only way to do a broad comparison.</p>

<p>The numbers are as follows:</p>

<p>US high school graduates/year: ~4,000,000
UK GCSE candidates/year: ~750,000 (Here I use GCSE instead of A-levels because a lot of people are already weeded out at this level, while most Americans can graduate from high school)</p>

<p>So US : UK high school grads = ~ 5:1</p>

<p>Oxbridge places/year: ~6,000 (this is likely an underestimate, as I couldn’t find exact figures and had to deduce it from the total number of undergrads, adjusting for the varying lengths of different courses)</p>

<p>Top 10 US schools places/year: ~15,500
(I use USNews here, and leave out Caltech because it’s so specialized and so small it could skew the figures. I’ve generally rounded up the numbers, so I’m actually giving Oxbridge a boost here. Harvard: 1800; Yale: 1300; Princeton: 1280; MIT: 1060; Stanford: 1720; Columbia: 1800; Penn: 2600; Dartmouth: 1050; Duke: 1600; Chicago: 1300)</p>

<p>So in our (very simplistic) comparison:
Oxbridge take the top 0.8% of UK students
US top 10 take the top 0.38% of US students</p>

<p>I guess this shows quite clearly that the top US schools are more selective?</p>

<p>4) Will you kindly reveal the location of your high school? Right now, it’s just your word versus IvyPBear’s. No, I don’t have exact figures for these schools, but for example, from what I hear from my friends in China, Chinese students who go abroad view the US schools as the pinnacle of tertiary education, not Oxbridge. </p>

<p>5) I agree Eton is a great school. It just isn’t the “most elite” when we consider hard numbers (e.g. A-level marks), and given its aristocratic heritage, I’d imagine its students are not the most globally-minded unbiased bunch in the world…</p>

27

<p>Number of US grads is at an all time high, and is closer to 3mill than 4. If it drops to 2 mill over the next few years, and the US top ten are then taking the top 0.8% of US students, does that mean the schools are not as good? There is also the factor of international applications - it is quite tedious to apply to Cambridge from the US so there are very few applicants, but it is , I believe , fairly straightforward to apply to US schools from outside the US. Do those numbers tip the scales? Does the fact that the top US schools take some students with lower academic qualifications who have great sports cred change the equation? How about the relative drop out rates in the US and UK? About 70% of our kids get hs diplomas. If a higher percentage of UK kids do, does that make the UK pool more competitive or less?
Impossible to say, I suspect.</p>

28

<p>The odds of getting into any single Ivy are lower than the odds of getting into Oxbridge, but that doesn’t mean that the odds of getting into an Ivy may not be higher. Bright US kids often apply to ALL the Ivies and may get into just one. Or they may get into five. The odds cannot be directly compared.</p>

29

<p>Nemom:</p>

<p>According to this US Census Bureau document (<a href=“http://www.census.gov/prod/2006pubs/07statab/educ.pdf[/url]”>http://www.census.gov/prod/2006pubs/07statab/educ.pdf&lt;/a&gt;), there are (15.5+1.3) 16.8 million kids enrolled in high school in 2004. So I assume that there are at least 4 million potential graduates per year? I know the actual graduation rate is less than 100%, but then many UK students drop out before their GCSEs too, and the GCSE numbers are inflated by the number of retakers. Not to mention the university entrance exam is actually the A-levels, which are taken 2 years after the GCSE. I’m trying to compare the overall number of high school students there are in each country, and therefore the number of potential applicants. </p>

<p>UCAS isn’t that tedious, it’s just different from the free-for-all system in the US. If anything, it’s easier. Outside of the US, American apps are the ones that are notorious for being a huge hassle, not the other way round. </p>

<p>If we consider the recruited athletes, then I’d imagine it would tip the scales in the American schools’ favor. Think about it this way–the recruits are star athletes, and they constitute an application pool that is separate from the mainstream. So if you are talking about the chances of a regular applicant, then the recruits just take up more places and therefore lower your chances. And again, I’m not comparing the academic rigor of the admission requirements. It is pretty obvious that British and American schools look for very different qualities. I’d say that with the minimal extracurriculars most Oxbridge applicants have (relative to the crazy overachievers in the US, of course), many of them won’t make it to the US top 10. </p>

<p>Concerning drop-out rates, I suspect that the completion rates are a lot higher at the top schools? I don’t have access to the premium stats on USNews, but I remember they are over 90% for, say, the top 20? And again, why would drop-out rates factor into selectivity?</p>

<p>Being able to apply to all the Ivies isn’t really relevant. At the end of the day, the Ivies only take a set number of students, and no matter how many offers a student holds, he can only attend one school. So if we make the simplistic assumption that the top 10 schools take the best students, then ultimately they will still end up with the same top 0.38% of students, regardless of whether they are admitted through ED, RD or the wait-list.</p>

<p>And I think I haven’t made myself clear enough. I’m just trying to show that Oxbridge aren’t harder to get into than the top US schools, which is something quite a few on this forum believe to be true. I’ve never tried to compare the quality of the schools. It’s almost impossible to compare the undergrad educational experiences because they are so different. And if you compare the research output, most rankings put a lot of schools US schools ahead of Oxbridge.</p>

30

<p>Rankingsaddict - I can’t find the link right now, but because of the considerable drop out rate (about 75 to 80% of kids make it through) , the number of grads is closer to 3 mill than 4. I’m not sure how to find a similar number for the UK. I suspect one could google around and find out number of kids applying to college for each which might be better.
We’ve just gone through the application process for Cambridge from the US. The UCAS isn’t too bad, but it does want information in a very different way which took a while to work out. The COAF was a fair bit of work. It has to be printed, on A4 paper, filled in by hand, then posted in time to be received at Cambridge by the 15th. With it must go some official paperwork from the school, and a reference letter. It took some effort to put all this together roughly a month before anyone around here is used to it - our college counselor is busy with other aspects of the process. And, we had to find a way for my child to take whatever exams are needed (probably just STEP, maybe TSA). We had to pay the UCAS and Cambridge fees online - and the sites don’t take all US credit cards. But , of course, we did manage. However, I suspect that some American students, without somebody to help them through the process, will just give up. </p>

<p>My point about the selectivity was not aimed at you - you are arguing a different point - but to make the point that comparing the difficulty of getting into Oxbridge with the Ivies is complicated by the fact that you can only apply to one of Oxbridge, but all of the Ivies. </p>

<p>I don’t know about the stats for successful overseas applicants to the Ivies. I know they are viewed differently - they get some bonus points, as it were, for being from out of the country since schools here like diversity. Money MAY come into it - many schools here have no money for internationals, and therefore , they MAY get some ‘bonus points’ as full pay candidates.</p>

31

<p>Oh, and you need a passport to fill out the UCAS as an international - just another thing that makes it a bit harder. A senior who started looking at the actual logistics of Oxbridge in September (which is when most get serious about college applications here) who didn’t have a passport and a pretty savvy counselor would be out of luck.
In the end, Harvard admits about 10% internationals in undergrad. I don’t know how many internationals Oxford admits.</p>

32

<p>nemom</p>

<p>There are way less internationals at top US universities than British ones. Regardless of teh requirements for the UCAS. </p>

<p>However both Oxbridge have a very low number of internationals- about 10% and this is supposed to have risen considerably</p>

33

<p>Nemom: Yes the number of actual grads is about 3.3 mil, but I reckon about 4 mil kids start high school every year. Yes many students drop out before graduating, but then many don’t make it past the GCSEs either. And due to the weeding-out done at grade 11 in the UK, comparisons just involving the number of actual applicants are a little unfair to the Brits.</p>

<p>I congratulate you and your child on finishing the app! I wish you the best of luck. However, I suspect that your finding the UCAS process difficult is because you and your child’s college counselor are used to the American system. If you came from a non-American, non-British background, then I assure you, the American apps are much worse. Multiple references have to be solicited and mailed, multiple personal statements have to be written instead of one, transcripts have to be prepared and certified, etc… Not to mention having to figure out SATs and ACT and TOEFL (In my days, for where I’m from, you had to fax the toefl application to a processing center that’s in another country. Naturally they didn’t accept any credit cards or checks except ones from their country and I had to get a money order prepared). And the passport issue is, I suspect, a peculiar American problem. </p>

<p>I know you aren’t allowed to apply to both Oxford and Cambridge, but then wouldn’t that lower the competition? For each school, you are in fact only competing against half of top student pool. In the end I think it works out to be a fair comparison, for the top US schools hand out more offers because of sub-100% yield, and at Oxbridge you only have to beat half the number of students to get in. The catch is, the American population is 5x the size, while the American schools are actually smaller. </p>

<p>As for the proportion of internationals, the percentage is comparable to top US schools, I believe.</p>

34

<p>I think it is just hopeless to try to compare the Ivies with Oxbridge based on selectivity - whether measured by percentile of applicants admitted or percentile of students from the applicant population. There are top students in the US that don’t apply to the Ivies. There are very good students who get in based, in part, on legacy and sports. So, although the Ivies have a smaller percentage of students from the applicant population, that does not mean that they are a more elite group, academically, than the population at Oxbridge.</p>

35

<p>

</p>

<p>100% word. Applying to the US as an international is way more difficult. You could be a stellar student but the fact that your high school teachers are not versed at writing recommendations would kill your chances.</p>

36

<p>Actually, the reasons that the UCAS was difficult were several, and were not entirely because of unfamiliarity. OUr counselor has dealt with UCAS apps before. The passport issue is common to all non-UK applicants to Cambridge (and , I think, Oxford). There is also the problem of the interview. And, for the COAF, obtaining A4 paper. We could afford Fedex express service, but the app still had to be at the Fedex office on Oct 9 (and still isn’t at Cambridge, although it is nearly there…)
Lack of recommendations won’t kill your chances. There are great kids here who also have poorly written recommendations. Admissions officers make some allowances.
My very strong impression is that there are far fewer Americans at Oxbridge than there are internationals at top US schools, but I don’t know about specifically UK kids. Certainly, I know of very few top students considering UK schools.
My point was that there may be a relative imbalance of non-native students at top US schools compared to Oxbridge, making the comparison of the relative quality of the schools more difficult.</p>

37

<p>Some very back-of-the-envelope numbers…
Scoring at or above 700 on any one section of the SATs puts you in roughly the top 5%. If we look at the common data set for Harvard, about 25% of students scored below 700 on any one section, putting them, by this one (and admittedly flawed) measure, below the top 5%. Similarly, at Stanford, slightly more than one third scored below 700 on Reading, with a slightly smaller number for math.
Looking at the SAT percentile ranks for R/M/W combined, the top 2% score at or above 2170, the top 1% at or above 2210. Yet there are many at the top ten US schools whose scores are below this number.
Now, of course, other measures come into play. And, I have argued elsewhere that the SAT is a crude instrument at best. But, I think it is difficult to make the case that Ivies are composed solely of the ‘best of the best’.
A considerable but difficult to measure number of top US students go elsewhere. There are other schools, most small, but still adding up numberically, that have SATs/GPAs as high as the top 10. Some top students seek out top departments or individual professors. Some go to schools of lesser ratings because of finances. Some simply do not want to go to school far from home.
Now, it may well be that the hard data for Oxbridge is similar. But my point still holds - it is impossible to assert that the set of students at the top ten US schools is equal to the set of the top 0.38% students in the US.
That all being said, there could be a way to validly argue for either the top US schools or Oxbridge as ‘the best’ - I just don’t think the simple math suggested by rankingsaddict is adequate.</p>

38

<p>Nemom: Thanks for your thoughtful responses. I haven’t thought of the SAT issue before. Although it will complicate things, I think my argument still stands. Many Brits will prefer the London schools, and I think everybody here understands how useless the SAT is as a measure of a student’s abilities. Not to mention that American and British schools are simply looking for different sort of applicants. The average kid at Oxbridge might perform better on standardized tests, but does that mean that he has more academic potential than his friend at an Ivy? Perhaps I have not made my point clear enough–I am simply trying to say that it is harder to get into the Ivies if you look at the probabilities for their domestic applicants. Cross-admits from across the Atlantic are different, simply because Americans are better at playing the American college app game, while the Brits know that focusing on academics is more important for their schools. Looking at SAT scores is too useful here. I am sure if the US schools took the British grades-centric approach, their SAT ranges will be a lot higher.</p>

<p>And I empathize with the challenges you encountered. But really, many of your problems are because you are in the US. Everybody else uses A4 paper, and the percentage of Americans who have passports is notoriously low compared to other countries. </p>

<p>As somebody has pointed out somewhere, the percentages of international students at Oxbridge and the top US schools are similar, both hovering around 10%. Fewer Americans at Oxbridge doesn’t mean that Oxbridge are somehow more selective. For example, the number of Hong Kong students at Oxbridge is much higher than that at the top US schools. Does that measure alone prove that Oxbridge are less selective? If you want to go for personal impressions, my friends at international schools (in multiple countries) are almost unanimous in saying that the US schools are harder to get in. Now some still choose Oxbridge because of various reasons (the dreaming spires, gowns, posh dinners, tutorials, etc.), but that’s besides the point.</p>

39

<p>Thanks, rankingsaddict. You are right about A4 paper, I think, and probably about passports. But that was part of my point - it’s very hard for Americans to apply overseas because of these annoying things which have nothing to do with the quality of the applicant. And, thanks for your good wishes.
So, if we are looking at the relative difficulty of admissions at Ivies and Oxbridge for domestic applicants, that does narrow things down a bit. The fact that roughly equal percentages of internationals attend both systems means we can presume that the final number of slots for domestics is equally affected, and therefore, take that out of the equation.
Now, one reason US schools use SATs is that there is such a HUGE variance in grading. We have APs as something of a leveling force, but there are plenty of kids who simply cannot take many APs because their schools don’t offer them. Schools that do offer them are inconsistent in their requirements for admissions to the courses as well. There is no national standard for courses, and kids may be in regular, college prep, remedial or honors courses. So, a student could have an A (4.0) average in remedial or regular classes but be far weaker than a student with a B (3.0) in honors or college prep courses. I’ve seen kids get As for just showing up and turning in the homework and I’ve seen kids get Cs for not following an exact rubric for a major piece of work.
The US method, in theory, lets each applicant find a way to shine - but admittedly - in practice it is flawed.
Now, down to the real point (at last, you cry!) - If you look only at the Ivies, and Oxbridge, the numbers would say that it is harder to get into the Ivies. But, that does’t mean that the Ivies have the better students. There is the whole question of sports and legacies - it is hard , if not impossible to know how this affects things. There is the question of measuring quality.</p>

40

<p>Most of the legacy students are smart- they just are not Harvard smart. That does not mean they are not smart. Most legacy students have good grades but not good SAT scores or Vice versa. Rarely would schools pick losers in both sections. Legacy makes up for a defect but its not an automatic admission.</p>