<p>
[QUOTE]
I do not understand why you devaluate Harvard's academic value. Need I remind you that all global rankings state that Harvard is number one globally, especially in terms of academics? On the contrary, the fact that Harvard, in spite of providing its students with education just as stellar as Oxbridge, puts emphasis on the social and humanitarian aspect of the students' lives. I for one have seen a very smart, but very introvert and destitute in terms of ecs student get rejected from Harvard and get into Oxbridge. By that I do not mean that Oxbridge is just a body of miserable students who are stuck in their books all day long. I am simply saying that you are fallaciously evaluating Harvard simply because of its emphasis on extracurriculars.
[/QUOTE]
Need I remind you that rankings are regularly criticised by many academics, and furthermore are a ranking of the UNIVERSITY not the undergraduate education they offer. On top of that, arguing the difference between number 1 and 2 is like splitting hairs and completely pointless. Harvard's sucess is firstly because of its graduate departments and graduate students, which make up 2/3 of the student body. </p>
<p>I am not going to fill in this post with lists of anecdotal evidence along the lines of "i know a two headed freak who got into Harvard, stupid affirmative action" and "we had one kid at our school who hadn't turned up to our math class for like 6 months and he got into oxford" because it's pointless, and much like using the Bible, you can prove any point with anecdotal evidence.</p>
<p>As to the US not 'overvaluing grades', well the reason they don't is because, on the whole, their grades are very bad descriminants. Oxbridge have a similar issue, hence the emergence or such demanding aptitude tests at interview that make it very difficult for the next great physicist to slip through the net. I am not 'devaluting Harvard' or whatever you imply, I am just asserting that the selection process for oxbridge is based on academic rigor much more than the US system, which, is appropriate because it has been using a similar approach for the last 800 years and been churning out some of the most influential academics in the world, including, incidentally, the founder of Harvard.</p>
<p>It is pretty much undeniable that in your chosen discipline you will experience a much more rigorous and 'deep' education at oxford than at harvard. Why? It's not becuase one is 'better' than the other, but simply becuase you only study one thing for 3 years, as appose to numerous subjects for 4 years. Similarly, you would be crazy to argue that you will get a broader education at oxford, you won't.</p>
<p>Arguing over this is futile; I have criticisms of both systems, and fundamentally see them as such different educations stystems that it is hardly worth brushing them both with the same title of 'university'. There are a number of people who will vehemently support one or the other of the universities, most of whom will not have attended either, and will almost certainly have not attended both.</p>