oxford vs stanford

[sefago]

<p>

Even the crudest of admission statistics would be more credible than your unsolicited opinions.

</p>

<p>Dionysus- I have the ultimate freedom to express my opinions. Agree or not with them. Learn that this is a universal right. The decision to justify my opinions is my own when I see fit. Even if i proffer admission statistics- I can bet someone is going to say that Cambridge is self-selective (not a fact but everyone of course accepts it lol because they agree with it)</p>

[BioE25]

<p>Oxford is in a whole different league:</p>

<p>[Times</a> Higher Education - Forget Harvard, Oxford is a match for Minnesota](<a href=“Forget Harvard, Oxford is a match for Minnesota | Times Higher Education (THE)”>Forget Harvard, Oxford is a match for Minnesota | Times Higher Education (THE)) -> one for research</p>

<p><a href=“http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/peterfoster/100050574/why-british-universities-dont-attract-chinas-best/[/url]”>http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/peterfoster/100050574/why-british-universities-dont-attract-chinas-best/&lt;/a&gt; -> one for undergrad</p>

[sefago]

<p>Interesting, he basically said exactly the same thing I have been saying. </p>

<p>

Although Oxford is strong in the arts and humanities, Dr Charlton notes that these are culture-specific and harder to measure objectively.</p>

<p>“Since a university can only prove its superiority in science, science is what is used to measure status,” he said. “And in terms of science, Oxford is no longer especially distinguished - neither in volume nor in quality.”

</p>

<p>I said this in a previous thread:
<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/95914-stanford-v-oxford-prestige-6.html#post1065744849[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/95914-stanford-v-oxford-prestige-6.html#post1065744849&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>

First of all, I was pointing out that humanities does not give a clear cut idea of quality across board because of its subjectivity and biases. So more appropriate ways of considering universities would be focused on their research prowess in science and engineering. I know enough about humanities, having read lots of humanities publications to form my own opinions about it (a very generalised opinion I know). Nevertheless, Politics is different everywhere, literature is different everywhere, sociology is different everywhere. For example how would you compare Stanford law (American law) with Oxford law (British common law).

</p>

<p>Dionysus accused me of reinforcing anti-european (LOL) perceptions. I was not criticising the body of humanities but pointing to cultural issues based on research in humanities. Why should European history as taught in Europe or American history as taught at Any US school place precedence over the history of other nations. </p>

<p>I said once that British schools lagged even compared to their other european counterparts in research.** Most people would point at “international league tables” but if you cut the international league tables and isolate data that only account for research quality such as publication quantity (which is very very inaccurate) and citation impacts a lot of schools dont match up to their reputation **. </p>

<p>Research citation is the crudest but best parameter for research excellence. Cambridge is the highest ranked british school at (36) citation per faculty. Oxford gasps for air at (52). While some people ignorantly claim that world class research is not going on at Dartmouth and Brown, these schools outperform Oxbridge on citation per faculty as opposed to total citations which is based on university size.</p>

<p>[QS</a> World University Rankings 2010 - Citations per Faculty (Index) | Top Universities](<a href=“http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2010/indicator-rankings/citations-per-faculty]QS”>http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2010/indicator-rankings/citations-per-faculty) </p>

<p>Even Rice University rates higher than Oxford/Cambridge in all research citations. This is not surprising- a large majority of ignorant people on CC talk a lot about Rice being low not knowing that its quality of research is just a notch below HYP. Talk to every Ivy league professor and you will be shocked how many did post-docs or have research links at Rice.</p>

<p>[Top</a> 200 - The Times Higher Education World University Rankings 2010-2011](<a href=“http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/2010-2011/top-200.html]Top”>World University Rankings 2010-11 | Times Higher Education (THE))</p>

[sefago]

<p>Some schools should stop riding on their past reputations. If Rice performs high quality research, there is no reason why it should not be considered at par with Oxbridge. But people have their preconceptions and want to keep that preconception. So the arguments of others must be “baseless.”</p>

[RML]

<p>The argument was whether or not it is easy to get into Oxford postgrad. I’d say it’s not. You need to have stellar grades and stats to get into Oxford postgrad. And, you’d be fooling yourself if you sincerely believe that there are far more people who’d be interested to get into Rice than Oxford for postgrad.</p>

[sefago]

<p>

You need to have stellar grades and stats to get into Oxford postgrad.

</p>

<p>Yes from a state school lol. And these stellar grades are not that hard to get</p>

<p>Ivies+top schools you get a significant cut.</p>

<p>The argument is not if its “easy”- but “relatively easy”. We have not yet set the standard. Harvard/Wash U/Hopkins Med? Definitely Not in the same class. Stanford and Yale law? Yeah right. </p>

<p>Columbia or Penn cash cow MAs----Match</p>

<p>Dionysus made the outlandish claim that Oxford med might be as selective as the ivies lol. All the perfect 3.9+ Kids I know with multiple science publications and volunteer research experience ending up at schools ranked in the 30s would be insulted.</p>

<p>Another issue- two people I know who went to Oxford graduate school were significantly weaker than the premed schools who ended up at subpar state schools- I can tell because I took classes with some of them.</p>

[masterpiecealex]

<p>Good point sefago.From what I’ve heard,you make sense.</p>

[IvyPBear]

<p>“While some people ignorantly claim that world class research is not going on at Dartmouth and Brown, these schools outperform Oxbridge on citation per faculty as opposed to total citations which is based on university size.”</p>

<p>Which illustrates their lack of knowledge. Cutting edge research is going on at schools like Dartmouth and Rice (even at Williams and Swarthmore); however, the small sizes and lack of graduate students at those schools make total research outputs relatively low. Those people make error of division without even realizing the absurdity, like arguing people in India are richer than people in Switzerland.</p>

<p>“Dionysus made the outlandish claim that Oxford med might be as selective as the ivies lol.”</p>

<p>Some people here really don’t know what they are talking about.</p>

[masterpiecealex]

<p>Ivy,your knowledge of colleges and lots of stuff that pertain to them is awesome,and probably unparalleled by anyone who’s replied to this post.However,you sound like a typical Oxford discriminator.Could you have something you’ve bottled up in you that Oxford is responsible for?If so,share it.I will be attending either Oxford or Cambridge pretty soon,and if they have negativities that are hidden behind their superficial image,it would do the likes of us lots of good.Keep up your intensity though!</p>

[tk21769]

<p>

Most of the top students (in almost all fields) ended up at top PE firms, hedge funds, investment banks, consulting firms

</p>

<p>Times sure have changed. When I was in school, many top students at the most selective universities would be expected to go into academia, the arts, publishing, and public service, in addition to medicine and law. I’ve read that in recent years, as many as 40% of Harvard graduates go into IB and consulting. Nothing against those lines of work, but something is not working anymore if these schools can’t motivate more of their best students to look past the bottom line in choosing careers. </p>

<p>So what’s the situation at Oxford and Cambridge? Are more and more graduates choosing to become bankers and business consultants? Forget about who is cranking out more research paper citations, let alone who is getting jobs with Bain and McKinsey. Who is educating more scientists, scholars, and public intellectuals?</p>

[sefago]

<p>

Who is educating more scientists, scholars, and public intellectuals?

</p>

<p>I would wager on LACs. In college, by the time you are in junior year, all you hear about is IB and consulting. You kind of feel left out if you are at least not applying for internships in these areas. I think you should make this a topic though since its very interesting but it would be seen by overzealous posters as off-topic.</p>

[Pizzagirl]

<p>

Times sure have changed. When I was in school, many top students at the most selective universities would be expected to go into academia, the arts, publishing, and public service, in addition to medicine and law. I’ve read that in recent years, as many as 40% of Harvard graduates go into IB and consulting. Nothing against those lines of work, but something is not working anymore if these schools can’t motivate more of their best students to look past the bottom line in choosing careers.

\

In college, by the time you are in junior year, all you hear about is IB and consulting. You kind of feel left out if you are at least not applying for internships in these areas.

</p>

<p>It’s not only sad that top schools are becoming mere training-grounds for IB and consulting and little else, it’s sad that there’s apparently so much pressure that a student not taking those paths feels “left out.” Actually, it’s not sad. It’s pathetic.</p>

[dwaynealexander]

<p>I do not think that any university will make you multigifted.Universities only serve as expanders of whatever qualities you have worked hard to acquire.I think the better question would be,which university will use your qualities to mold you into a firstclass individual.Oxford for me,though I admire stanford alot.</p>