To think that Oxbridge is overrated?

[colouredcrayons]

And we should encourage our children to focus on more than just two top universities. They don’t even give you better careet prospects these days either.

It taught me how to think

This. The real benefit of an Oxbridge education is the tutorial system. No other university has the resources to offer 1:1 or 1:2 teaching throughout your degree.

My sister runs a very successful business and (rightly or wrongly) only really employs oxbridge graduates. The roles receive many applications so she uses oxbridge as one of the tools to narrow the entrants down.

That is pretty lazy screening and an own goal. The 'success' of her business must be in spite of rather than because of her hiring techniques.

I have worked in various City institutions that receive far more applications than vacancies. They somehow manage and even look to recruit from a much wider pool of candidates than Oxbridge. Once through the door, there isn't much difference. In fact, some of the worst recruits were from Oxbridge, hence no guarantee of success in the workplace.

Maybe Oxbridge graduates have been taught to 'think' in a certain way (as some posters suggest), but that way is not necessarily the most helpful in real life.

I work in an office where probably half, if not more, of those who grew up in Britain went to Oxbridge. It has been a massive advantage to them, particularly while in the early stages of their career.

First off, it tells employees that they are smart. That gets them an interview.

Potentially more importantly, Oxbridge grads are used to defending their ideas because of the tutorial system etc. This is probably one of the biggest differences I’ve noticed between Oxbridge and other graduates. The Oxbridge grads I’ve worked with are far more confident presenting and defending their ideas than those from other unis at a young age. With time and experience, other grads develop this but those from Oxbridge seem to start their career with this. It gives them a massive head start.

I’ve watched very bright non-Oxbridge grads under the age of 30 become flustered when challenged by management, even when their ideas were good. In contrast, this doesn’t seem to happen to young Oxbridge colleagues - and in turn management tend to trust them more, enabling them to rise up the career ladder faster.

(I did my undergrad in my home country and masters at an RG university).

Could someone inform me as to what makes Oxbridge's tutorial system so amazing? I am intrigued by the multiples claims that they teach you to think.

I think that the 1-1 tutorial system just pins down the student so they can't coast?

Ha not over rated at all. My sister and brother both attended Cambridge. Both have continued to excel in their chosen careers. My sister is an academic, in the early years publishing papers was undoubtedly easier for her than those from other Unis.

It's simple, the best uni's attract the top academics to teach their courses. If I wanted to teach and had an option of Oxbridge or an old poly I know what I would choose.

But the best academics at research and publishing aren't necessarily the best teachers. And a lot of teaching is done by PhD students / casual staff on zero hour contracts.

I went to Oxford.

Chose the wrong subject, found it unutterably boring. I should've done a different subject at a different university. I was young and naive and didn't know what I wanted to do.

Law? Everyone I know who did law hated it.

Music! So dry. Hope the course has improved in the intervening years.

For some courses oxbridge is probably not the best place academically. However like it or not it still carries kudos and great networking opportunities. I didn't go there. I wouldn't pressurize my children to go there but if the course was good and they wanted to I wouldn't stop them.
In my industry the other big hitter is Imperial. Especially with international people from outside Uk. They rate it as the number 1 UK uni.

I went to RG uni but visited a friend who was at an all girl college at cambridge. My weekend made me very glad I hadn't gone there. The girls were very academic and sweet but not at all worldly and it felt more like the 1890s than the 1990s...

Unlikely, I'd say, given the inertia, casualisation and lack of incentives to improve teaching in academic careers... Where I now teach the first-year material hasn't changed since I first taught undergraduates in 2001, and god knows how long it was in use before that. I'm trying to update teaching methodologies in my own department and have experienced serious pushback.

^^that was to MutantDisco.

Given the demographic of who goes to oxford and Cambridge, this thread is really depressing for social mobility.

@PurpleDaisies my best friend at Oxford was from a single-parent family in the north of England, we both attended state school.

The only people encouraged to apply to Oxbridge at my daughter's school were the ones capable enough.

She was encouraged but decided she didn't want to apply because it wasn't what she wanted. Her best friends are, one at Oxford and one at Cambridge. I think she's possibly starting to regret her choice.

Given the demographic of who goes to oxford and Cambridge, this thread is really depressing for social mobility.

I think you raise an important issue, but I don't think you are being entirely fair. I think these universities are painfully aware of the stats about how many of their places go to pupils from fee-paying schools, and have put in many changes to address that, which has helped to improve those stats. I believe most Oxbridge academics genuinely want the pupils with the greatest aptitude and love for their subject, and have sought to overcome any inherent bias in the process (particularly against pupils from deprived areas where the awareness / preparation for Oxbridge might be lacking).

I think just as big an issue is the demographic of who applies to Oxbridge. It's here that maybe Oxbridge's reputation works against it, as some pupils think "it's not for the likes of me...".

I don’t have direct experience, but a point made by my DS’s school, which does like to send people to Oxbridge, is that it’s not for every bright student.

There is often the supposition that if you're intelligent enough then of course you ought to try. But I think character features come into play too when deciding if it's a suitable choice. If you are confident and prepared to engage with adults, the tutorial system can be beneficial but for those who are more reticent, or are maturing at a slower rate, it might not work. The pace doesn't suit every bright student either. Some people just need more downtime for mooching!

Ambition, a strong work ethic, and being both emotionally and physically robust, might see you thrive at Oxbridge. But I don’t find it hard to imagine very clever students without these attributes who might do better elsewhere.

Oxbridge isn't the best place for certain subject areas anyway, from what I remember. My DB was turned down by one Cambridge college, was offered a place by another after a clean sweep of all A's at A-level (no stars back then) and turned it down in favour of Imperial. His field is electronics.

My DD is looking at geography with a bias towards physical geography (so mostly the BSc rather than the BA) and she tells me that Cambridge doesn't cover that aspect of the subject in anything like the depth she wants. (TBH I was relieved about this as while she is a very capable student, her grades are more respectable than stellar, and she might struggle with the preparation).

The academic experience is stellar. However, I’ve known many people go through the system and it’s toil on mental health can be huge.

My brother had a breakdown there which thankfully he recovered from. I’ve known lots of female students who had to take a year out due to burn out. I’m not sure it’s something I’d want for my DCs.

There are lots of good unis, both in the UK and internationally. The businesses mentioned upthread that only hires oxbridge grads is rare, because most business leaders are smarter than that and realise that diversity in training and approach is incredibly valuable in the workplace.

I think oxbridge are well known and appear in literature and TV shows, they have the boat race. Posh, rich people go there. Everyone worldwide knows their reputations.

When DS chose imperial I had never heard of it, people I talk to have never heard of it.

I turned down Cambridge for a RG (for the course). Slightly regret it now. 20 years later, career in technology, barely give it a second thought and hardly ever get asked about where I went to university. However, last job I went for, the HR guy mentioned that my masters at LSE made him want to interview me because "you must be clever to have gone there". He was in his late sixties though. I find younger people dont really care, though they are still looking for "a good degree" i.e from a fairly prestigious university. I really dont think it has to be Oxbridge anynore, although certain professions are looking for that plus a few others eg being a City analyst probably still requires a Math degree from Oxbridge, Warick and maybe a few others. But thats one thing to do with your life out of millions!

I do find the secondary schools are a bit obsessed with it, mainly because its part of the marketing blurb now isnt it, GCSE stats, A levels stats and Oxbridge admissions number. I find that annoying and pointless as its only ever going to apply to the top 5% of nerdy types (I was one before you attack!) who are happy to spend their teenage years studying, and would probably get there, if they wanted to, from most schools. Also there's the medics and lawyers cohort in a similar bracket who dont seem bothered about Oxbridge?

I also know a few parents who have been telling me since Reception that their, admitedly bright, children are destined for Oxbridge (never one or the other, like they're exactly the same) which I find slightly contemptible as its all about them and the showing off potential, not the child.Usually from parents who didnt go to university themeselves, who also tell me its essential to have an Oxbridge degree to work in the City or in Finance, which is absolute bollocks of course. I have far more admiration for the children whose mother's tell me post-GCSE that they're thinking about it and then get in. Good for them I say. But its not essential for a successful and happy life.

My children aren't in that bracket so we will have the whole range of further education choices to look at. As someone who has been academically successful and professionally pretty successful, but who suffers from anxiety and stress, I am actually quite pleased about that.

The pace doesn't suit every bright student either. Some people just need more downtime for mooching!

I have never mooched so much in my entire life as I did at Cambridge ... Not everyone spends 23 and a half hours a day racing from one strenuous CV building activity to the next. It's perfectly possible to be yourself.

Mooching is very important when it comes to creativity in just about every domain so it's good to hear that you personally were able to engage in it!