<p>Harvard is great... for grad school. Oxford is great... for undergrad. Best of two worlds would be: Oxford first, Harvard second. This is my conclusion after a year of research into US/UK colleges. Anyone agree?</p>
<p>I disagree, I think Harvard is also great for undergrad. I wonder, are you basing your judgements on the old rumor that Harvard ignores undergrads and focuses on grad students? From what I hear, that really is just a rumor, it has no truth to it at all.</p>
<p>I agree onemoreparent. Obviously what is beneficial to one student is not always the best for another, but overall I'd say that the personal attention you get as an undergrad in the UK is more conducive to learning than large lectures. On the other hand we're not talking about large State U vs. Oxford here...Harvard's staff to student ratio is pretty good and a Harvard undergrad education is arguably as good as Oxford. I guess it really comes down to the individual. If you want to learn more in depth info in your field and like 1 on 1 or 1 on 2 attention from a tutor then go to Oxford. If you like the breadth of knowledge you receive from the US collegiate system and can learn in a group setting then go Harvard.</p>
<p>I'll admit that my extent of knowledge of the UK collegiate system is based on what has been said in this thread, but it makes me still favor Harvard for undergrad and Oxford for grad.</p>
<p>Undergrad at Harvard would give you the chance to explore the liberal arts while still getting a top-notch education in the field you fall into. Grad at Oxford would then allow you to really focus your graduate work in that one particular subject. That seems to be the progression with any college student, a broad undergrad education and narrow but deep graduate schooling, no?</p>
<p>But like I said, I'm pretty na</p>
<p>^ actually most of my peers and I share the opposite view</p>
<p>that is the undergrad focus and 1 to 1 teaching at Cambridge (who gives a toot about the other place) makes it the best place for college, whereas the Harvard's emphasis on research and its huge funding gives it an unsurmountable edge at Grad level</p>
<p>I think you hit it on the nose longbowmen. 1) you're right about "the other place"...it shouldn't even be in the discussion :) and 2) I don't know which university has the better resources since I haven't started at Cambridge yet and I haven't been to Harvard, but I do know that it is MUCH easier to get funding at Harvard. I don't think that most people realize that Oxbridge are public universities. While they have large endowments in comparison to other UK universities...they pale in comparison to Harvard and other top US privates.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>large is an understatement, i read somewhere that oxbridge together has 70% of the ENTIRE UK university endowments, ivy in comparison has 13%.</p>
<p>well actually funding isnt as scarce as it seems, oxbridge being public unis receive substantial amts of funding from the british govt....Camb's operating budget for 05/06 was US 1bil, same as Princeton's, or about half that of Yale's which has an endowment 5.5x of Camb</p>
<p>and yeah the other place stinks, theres a reason y the best schools are found in Cambridge MA/UK =)</p>
<p>
[quote]
large is an understatement, i read somewhere that oxbridge together has 70% of the ENTIRE UK university endowments, ivy in comparison has 13%.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>If you mean, 13% of US endowment, then.... well, wherever you read that, the writer did some bad math. It's sort of a like a "well, duh" statement, because the UK has 126 unis, and in the states there are more than 3000. A little comparison comparison... 2/126 have 70%, 8/3000+ have 13%... It makes sense that Oxbridge's percentage of the UK endowments would be larger. You really can't compare the two figures at all.</p>
<p>These "Harvard vs Oxbridge" threads pop up occasionally and I never quite see the point of debating something which really can't be debated. Harvard and Oxbridge (Oxford and Cambridge) are two totally different types of institutions so it's like comparing apples and oranges. </p>
<p>Oxbridge is more than twice as old has Harvard. Harvard has twice as many grads as undergrads whereas Cambridge is the opposite with twice as many undergrads as grads. Oxbridge has a total traditional college system whereas Harvard has a residential 'house' system. Oxbridge runs undergraduate education strictly on the ancient tutorial system and Harvard follows the American classroom model. Harvard (and most US) undergrad degrees focus on the broad liberal arts model with a lot of 'general education' courses whereas Oxbridge (and most UK) undergrad degrees strictly focuses on the subject of the degree. </p>
<p>They're different for sure, but it's impossible to argue that one is somehow "better" than the other. </p>
<p>As for endowments (something that always comes up for why Harvard is "obviously just so much better than everyone else"), Cambridge has an endowment of almost $10 billion so although it's not as big as Harvard's it's nothing to sneeze at either. Another thing to take into consideration is the fact that both Oxford and Cambridge, whilst private institutions, receive significant subsidies from the government to fund education. A large part of Harvard's endowment goes to paying for their financial aid packages whereby much of that is provided by the government in the UK. Considering that with most endowments it takes about $20 of endowment to fund $1 of annual funding then you need a massive endowment to provide large tuition subsidies... hence why Harvard needed a $30+ billion endowment before it could start offering tuition subsidies that start approaching what most UK students have always received for Oxbridge. </p>
<p>As for prestige, worldwide (and I'm basing this on my own travels around the world) I'd say Oxbridge edges out Harvard, although not by much. Besides, it's not like anyones ever going to say "oh, you only went to Harvard" or "oh, you only went to Oxbridge." Also, overall bickering about "prestige" is largely irrelevant as what really matters is how a school fits in with ones particular educational needs and desires. </p>
<p>There's no question they're all world class schools so I'd just leave it at that.</p>
<p>Well said rocketman...I agree that you really can't compare the two, but people will always try (hey..even I tried).</p>
<p>as an oxford undergrad- i'd say there's a definite focus on undergrad education much more than postgrad. Oxford's definitely not a bad grad school, but it's undergrad education is what sets it apart from the rest of the world, in terms of the tutorial system (in case people get the wrong idea- you do get lectures as well- probably only two or three tutorials a week). Whoever said US colleges will give you more individual attention hasn't a clue what they're on about.</p>
<p>To clarify, oxford and cambridge, and indeed almost all british universities, are public institutions, which is their main problem in terms of income (fees determined annually by the government- oxford and cambridge currently make a small loss on every uk/eu undergrad they admit).</p>
<p>harvard>oxford harvard=cambridge
thats how i see it.</p>
<p>Sent from my GT-I9300 using CC</p>
<p>Please use old threads for information only, don’t repost and resurrect them.</p>
<p>If you want to discuss a subject, please use the New Thread button.</p>