Why are there more places for classics than computer science at Oxford?

[delicatedonkey]

Came across this quote from Rachel Reeves in today’s Times, “There are many more places at Oxbridge to study classics than there are to study computer science, and the number of children applying for computer science [means] it’s very hard to get in. Whereas if you apply for classics, there’s a much higher chance. We should be expanding the courses that businesses say that they need people to have the skills in.” Why in the 21st Century, with technology and AI becoming increasingly important, is this the case? It is absolutely imperative that a breadth of humanities subjects should continue to be taught but there does appear to be a real imbalance here in terms of places available and offer rates.

I'd want to see the statistics on that.

We should be expanding the courses that businesses say that they need people to have the skills in

Is she saying Oxbridge should expand their courses, or is she extrapolating to the whole UK HE sector?

Given the disproportionate number of MPs who went to Oxbridge, is she also complaining that non-Oxbridge universities should expand the courses that political parties need people to have skills in?

https://www.statista.com/forecasts/1361665/mps-who-attended-oxbridge-by-party-uk

Oxford & Cambridge have a pretty fixed number of places and can't expand because of the college system.

lots of other places can and have massively expanded places for computer science.

but it is very hard to find the professors to teach it - google and amazon etc will offer them 10x the salary so they quit the university for that.

My ds friend said computer science dept at Oxford is antiquated

It'll also be a physical bums on seats issue - you can cram people into a lecture theatre or tutorial but not into a computer or science lab.

Oxford or 'Oxbridge'? Cambridge has about 50% more doing CS than classics.

www.undergraduate.study.cam.ac.uk/apply/statistics

The data I could find for Oxford is a bit unclear because they have so many joint honours courses, not sure what's being included as 'Classics'. I'm not sure that the 'many more places' is an accurate representation.

www.ox.ac.uk/about/facts-and-figures/student-numbers

Applicant numbers for sure are quite different.

However... why focus just on oxbridge? The numbers of CS students across all unis must be vastly more than classics. An infinitel higher proportion at imperial for a start!

So while the application rates for CS may be much higher at oxbridge than for classics, it's offset by the applicants then having many other excellent options available for their other 4 ucas slots.

Cambridge Computer Science, BA (Hons) and MEng
(Number 1 in the UK for Computer Science (The Complete University Guide 2024))

Applicant numbers 2023 cycle:
Applications per place: 13
Accepted: 122
https://www.undergraduate.study.cam.ac.uk/courses/computer-science-ba-hons-meng

Cambridge Classics, BA (Hons)

Applicant numbers* *2023 cycle:
Applications per place: 3
Accepted: 50
https://www.undergraduate.study.cam.ac.uk/courses/classics-ba-hons

Oxford Department of Computer Science

"Application statistics: In 2022 a total of 1584 UCAS applications were received across the three undergraduate Computer Science degrees ...
348 applicants were shortlisted, and 135 were offered places for entry in 2023 or deferred entry in 2024."

https://www.cs.ox.ac.uk/admissions/undergraduate/admissions_statistics/public_report2022.html#:~:text=Application%20statistics,or%20deferred%20entry%20in%202024.

Oxford Classics

Admissions statistics (3-year average 2021-23)
Interviewed: 95%
Successful: 37%
Intake: 103

"Oxford has the largest Classics Faculty in the world"
https://www.ox.ac.uk/admissions/undergraduate/courses/course-listing/classics

It is a lot easier and cheaper to teach classics to large groups than computer science, it is also easier to find teaching staff.

It is okay for different universities to focus on different things. Classics is a what Oxford is known for, it will have all the people who want to study classics knowing it's the place to go. Computer science is taught everywhere. If, as a country, we find a balance, then I think that's fine. There are a lot of degrees that fit less well into the graduate job market than a classics degree from Oxford - maybe start there.

The thing is that the Oxford Computer Sciences course isn't what needs to expand. While it's certainly popular the Oxford course isn't generally training up the future workers of the IT industry. It's training up the future academic professors of Computer Science. Its size is reflective of the needs of academia for the next generation of academics.

There are computer science courses at every single other UK University - there's an enormous supply of Computer Science places and an enormous number of graduates - computer science graduates have relatively poor Employability statistics as the market is saturated, but if industry did need more then each university increasing their places by a few percent would create more places than Oxford doubling theitlr places.

Meanwhile, whilst it's true there's no immediate demand for classics graduates from industry, there are a lot of careers where the exact degree doesn't matter as any subject that demonstrates the ability to absorb and process large volumes of information will be fine, so students aiming for those careers can choose a subject they love. There are many fewer universities offering classics degrees - really only a handful, so those that there are will be sized to meet the demand.

I've heard tech companies don't like computer science degrees as they are not specific enough and are way out of date by the time the person graduates. So apparently it's consisted a bit 'mickey mouse' in the very sector it's meant to be feeding into.

You've undercounted for Cambridge classics, @zzplex , I think that 50 is just the 3 year course, there's another 30 ish for the 4 year a priori. (Oxford and Cambridge added these to broaden access). It's still a significantly smaller number than their CS.

It's disappointing someone as numerate as Reeves should be is making claims which can easily be refuted ... maybe she did the wrong subject at Oxford.

Here's the times interview. I've not been able to find it in the app, I don't know how to do sharetoken links from the website

www.thetimes.com/magazines/the-times-magazine/article/rachel-reeves-interview-labour-chancellor-election-lvkk7v07j

I wonder if Reeves has done the sums on the cost to provide places on stem courses v classics etc and will come to the conclusion that government subsidies may be needed for some of the former?

Am slightly defensive on this subject as the parent of a classics offer holder and came here all fully armed for battle, so just wanted to say thank you to PPs for the unblinkered, sensible comments.

exactly.
what a really terrible example RR used. she needs to drop this silly comparison, plus we need to move away from acting like
universities are there to provide fodder for employers. there is a balance between skills and employment needed of course -but the primary thing needed in undergraduate degrees is people who can think in different ways and collaborate with people of different strengths to build big picture solutions to current and future challenges we will face as a country and a society.

exactly

@parietal but it is very hard to find the professors to teach it - google and amazon etc will offer them 10x the salary so they quit the university for that

Any evidence for this ?

I'd hate to live in a culture that didn't have some really good classicists in it.

My experience (30 years in "tech" across Consultancy, Banking, Manufacturing, Software, and Fintech) is that those companies with small training budgets prefer to hire graduates with CS or Software Engineering degrees, whilst those with larger training budgets prefer Maths or Engineering degrees.

For hiring into positions requiring experience, e.g. 2+ years, educational qualifications largely becomes irrelevant

Most people I know who read classics at Oxford went on to very successful careers - that had nothing to do with classics! It has always been viewed as a degree that demonstrates good skills that are adaptable across a wide range of careers.
I read history and one of my friends on the same course ended up a senior manager at GCHQ in one of their highly technical, computer based departments.
Rachel Reeves is just trying to put across the idea of "fuddy, duddy, elitist Oxbridge should know better". She's wrong of course, but when did that ever stop a politician!

obviously, universities take far more students choosing courses that are cheaper to run.

If you look at the table for Oxford I linked to, the expensive stem and clinical courses are most of the big numbers. And Cambridge is generally reckoned to be more stem biased.

Honestly, a computer science degree from a 'good' university will not stop you getting a job in tech.

But maths etc degrees will also be good as long as you have a proven interest in tech.

I worked in a tech company and we didn't need grads to have a comp sci degree - physics, maths were good degrees we also had someone with a philosophy degree but importantly he had taught himself to code etc to a decent level.

I think personally if you have a comp sci degree and most importantly can communicate you will do well.

You chart shows offers v acceptances, not total applicants vs offers.

You chart shows offers v acceptances, not total applicants vs offers.

Yes, I know, that's what I wanted to show. The number of places - whether she meant offered or eventually doing the course. (It's easy to get the applicants using that link if you want.)

It's odd really because when I did a Classics GCSE we were told it would teach morality and ethics as well as philosophy. I'd say Boris technically learnt nothing of this, curiously.