<p>
</p>
<p>As a PhD student at Cambridge I’d say that Oxford and Cambridge both compare very favorably to the schools you mention.</p>
<p>Perhaps I’m biased, but I think the tutorial/supervision systems and the famous Oxbridge exams constitute the most rigorous method of instruction and evaluation in the world. This rigor partly explains why both Oxford and Cambridge remain globally competitive despite their relative financial disadvantage to U.S. institutions of similar stature.</p>
<p>Before someone says, “wait…aren’t tutorials just done at the undergraduate level,” let me offer that the tutorial and exams are actually just part of a tradition of scholarship of a certain kind - one that isn’t confined to the manner in which undergraduates are taught. The “tutorial” culture pervades the way graduate students are taught too.</p>
<p>Remember that education, particularly in graduate school, is an apprenticeship - operating according to traditions of institutional craftsmanship. Such traditions are particularly strong in Oxford and Cambridge.</p>
<p>Anecdotally, several people in my master’s degree course had already completed master’s degrees at the schools you mentioned and had compared favorably the manner of instruction we were taught in Cambridge. I remember one very smart American student (now doing a PhD at Cambridge) saying that the critical thinking and research skills taught at Cambridge was several orders of magnitude more intense than his experience as a master’s student at Yale. Again though, you can’t read too much into such a small and non-random sample.</p>
<p>I’m still convinced that a very rigorous education can be had at any decent school. One doesn’t have to attend the Ivy League or Oxbridge school to receive an excellent education.</p>