Reasons to NOT apply/go to Oxbridge?

[Nicholas92]

Hello all, I decided to start this thread after a little disagreement (well, quite a big disagreement) I had with my parents over my decision to not apply to Oxbridge when the time comes around.

First, let me say that this is in NO WAY a thread to bash Oxbridge or cast it as a bad university choice - this is just to give a balanced view on selecting universities, especially because I know lots of people apply solely based on brand names and prestige, which although not entirely wrong, certainly do not take into account many other factors. Oxford and Cambridge are still, I'm sure, great places to study and learn, but I suppose the line I'm taking here is that...it's not for everyone.

Anyway, I have some ideas or reasons why people (myself included) may not want to study at Oxbridge (let's just disregard getting an offer from either place, for the sake of discussion) but they are more assumptions than anything particularly concrete, because I haven't had much opportunity to meet people going to these places and I've obviously never visited them myself. So if anyone could validate/invalidate these reasons I have, or add more, feel free :)

Location?
I suppose this is a big difference, especially compared to universities in cities like London. Based on what I know, Oxford/Cambridge are basically relatively self-contained towns, so when talking about basic necessities, there shouldn't be any problems. But I suppose what's most important is personal preference - would students prefer a more (correct me if I'm wrong) calm kind of atmosphere versus a more vibrant city life? Also if you're not a fan of the whole formality/history that comes with studying in centuries-old buildings, you may prefer studying somewhere with more modern architecture...

Also, specific to Law, I believe that the proximity of places like the Courts will appeal to some students, though I don't know to what extent this is really useful, or a deal-breaker...

Job opportunities?
I was debating with myself quite a bit on this one. Are job opportunities a little harder to find at Oxbridge? And I don't mean getting jobs after uni, I mean part-time work alongside studies. Especially, say, for students studying Law who are looking to get involved in attachments or internships of some sort with law firms, or even just the average student looking to make a bit more money. Is the location of Oxford/Cambridge something of an impediment to that sort of things, especially compared to a city? I'd really appreciate if anyone could relate their experience on this.

EDIT: It seems that Oxbridge (or rather, their colleges) have specific rules regarding part-time work. That plus the demanding schedule of study there really does seem to limit job opportunities)

Academic pressure?
From what I've found (some anecdotal evidence) Oxbridge really does have a certain level of competition or pressure. I'm not saying that students are over-competitive or anything, just that the workloads really are heavy and a lot of emphasis is given to the work. It also appears they have shorter academic terms compared to many other universities, which could mean that the workload is compressed into a somewhat shorter period of time. This is actually quite a big factor for me - two years in Singapore and I'm not quite looking to find it necessary to study to the point where I can't enjoy the outside as much as I'd like. Of course I understand this is different for everyone, but can we really say that there is a different level of academic rigour demanded of Oxbridge?

Networking?
Maybe the most iffy point, and the one that applies least to Oxbridge specifically. I have this perception that, for Malaysians at least, the networking's better in London. I don't quite know, but everything seems to be there - Malaysian student associations, political groups, etc. Now this I really have no real information of, so any clarification would be great. If I'm interested in networking with politically-inclined Malaysians, if I'm interested in gatherings and such, would it be fair to say that London's the place to be compared to further away in Oxbridge?

.
.
.

Some people may also say the community at Oxbridge may not be good. I don't really believe in this sort of stereotyping because it's really quite hard to know unless you've been there, and also because it's likely untrue. Just saying.

[frostbyte13]

Hi Nicholas. Just wondering, on notion of just, why wouldn't you apply to Oxbridge ? I mean, I have a friend (we're both currently in our A-levels) who really really intends to study in the US, but he is also applying to Oxford. I asked him why, he said there's no harm in getting offers. All the more it would make your CV much more striking. I mean, I'm quite sure you are going to be studying in the US right ? (If memory serves me well) Besides, he did say that UK is sorta like his backup in case his application to US universities fail.

IMO, I'm sure many people aim for US education mainly because of three major reasons. One is an opportunity to take up a Liberal Arts college, where the students can try out two or more of their desired field of study that may be totally unrelated and then only decide in the following year.

The second reason being that all the hype we hear that the US educational environment isn't one that is so focused on academics and internships (namely industrial training). Heard stories of people just getting places in the likes of the Ivies, top ranking public universities,etc just using SAT results and the commonapp essays. In the interviews, they felt that the interviewers from the institutions were more keen on seeing their passion and personality rather than dig up more academic background info.

The last reason I got from friends were that US universities were more need concerned and understand financial backgrounds of their applicants. Heard plenty of Malaysians who get in without scholarship request that they are waived of many fees in particular. Scholarship opportunities are seemingly much easier to get from the university rather than UK universities who don't offer much more than just a waiver of application fees.

Anyway, both the US and UK are promising places to study I'm sure. I only know the reason why I would rather go to UK is that the UCAS system makes applying to universities makes the job so easy. :)

[joan2468]

I mean, I'm quite sure you are going to be studying in the US right ? (If memory serves me well)

He mentioned studying law, so I doubt he'd be going for the US, unless he intends to go and immediately never come back, because the US practices a different legal system compared to the ones in UK and Malaysia.

Anyway, I'm afraid I can't help you with these questions, although you have brought up some interesting points - but I'm sure others will be able to help answer your queries.

[Nicholas92]

To frostbyte:

He mentioned studying law, so I doubt he'd be going for the US, unless he intends to go and immediately never come back, because the US practices a different legal system compared to the ones in UK and Malaysia.

Anyway, I'm afraid I can't help you with these questions, although you have brought up some interesting points - but I'm sure others will be able to help answer your queries.

So nope, I'm not going to study in the US, though the points you brought up about that were pretty correct, I think. And yeah, if I studied law in the US then I'm pretty much just stuck in the US, haha.

Anyway, so while I agree that yes, if it's just to keep options open (the merits of having many options notwithstanding) then there isn't much harm in applying. But personally I just don't feel like it's much of a fit for me. And at this stage now, to put together an Oxbridge application means potentially compromising my applications for the other universities I'm applying to (because of the earlier deadline). That plus all the reasons I stated in the above post.

[strategist]

you don't choose Oxbridge. They choose you. I believe by the time they decide what to do with your application (accept/reject) they would have already made the decision for you.

[Nicholas92]

you don't choose Oxbridge. They choose you. I believe by the time they decide what to do with your application (accept/reject) they would have already made the decision for you.

EDIT: Made an unfair response, and I apologise, strategist. Though I do maintain that it doesn't really answer the question. Still, I recognise; no ill intent on your part, and so I shouldn't have any on mine. Sorry.

[youngyew]

you don't choose Oxbridge. They choose you. I believe by the time they decide what to do with your application (accept/reject) they would have already made the decision for you.
Unfortunately, this kind of rhetorical response is pretty useless in the context of this thread.

Obviously, I'm not saying that just anyone who may want to go to Oxbridge can get in just like that. I'm talking about an individual's personal decision on applying in the first place. For the sake of this discussion, we're not talking about whether it's possible to get in - just whether people would want to (or not want to) go, depending on certain factors. If you have nothing to add but pointing out something I already said we would disregard (which means you didn't read my post through, and it's near the beginning too) then I suppose you shouldn't waste your energy. Thanks.
I thought that was quite a hostile response nicholas92. I believe strategist's post was just a response to quite an atypical question you asked there, as most people ask "would oxbridge want me", not "would I want Oxbridge". It's true that his/her response is not the most helpful, but neither is your crude rebuttal.

[Nicholas92]

I thought that was quite a hostile response nicholas92. I believe strategist's post was just a response to quite an atypical question you asked there, as most people ask "would oxbridge want me", not "would I want Oxbridge". It's true that his/her response is not the most helpful, but neither is your crude rebuttal.

Reading it again...yes, it was pretty unfair. I didn't mean to sound so hostile, so it was quite ...piercing, when I read it again. I've removed it. Thanks for prompting me.

[frostbyte13]

Oh, Law. Now that calls for UK indefinitely, unless you want to expand the idea of studying Law in Australia. Why not try the UOL subsidiary colleges for Law ? Like King's, Imperial, etc. I mean, just because you want the best, does not necessarily mean UOL standards are that below Oxbridge's. Hope that helps Nicholas.

While I'm at it. Anyone wanna help with a question? I had earlier set myself to study Economics in UK. That is provided I can get a scholarship later. Mum and dad disagree because they want to visit me while studying. They insist UK is far, even though the standard of studies in UK should be better than that of Australia's. To make matters worse, it's actually cheaper to apply for 5 universities in UK than it is in Australia :huh

So, is distance really a matter when it comes to studying ? Plenty of my friends who eventually go to US and UK don't mind not coming back for the next 3 years or so. Some return only during long breaks.

Thanks.

[Nicholas92]

Oh, Law. Now that calls for UK indefinitely, unless you want to expand the idea of studying Law in Australia. Why not try the UOL subsidiary colleges for Law ? Like King's, Imperial, etc. I mean, just because you want the best, does not necessarily mean UOL standards are that below Oxbridge's. Hope that helps Nicholas.

While I'm at it. Anyone wanna help with a question? I had earlier set myself to study Economics in UK. That is provided I can get a scholarship later. Mum and dad disagree because they want to visit me while studying. They insist UK is far, even though the standard of studies in UK should be better than that of Australia's. To make matters worse, it's actually cheaper to apply for 5 universities in UK than it is in Australia :huh

So, is distance really a matter when it comes to studying ? Plenty of my friends who eventually go to US and UK don't mind not coming back for the next 3 years or so. Some return only during long breaks.

Thanks.

Yeah, that was my thinking actually, because based on everything I've seen or found out, in terms of education I'm definitely not losing out if I apply to King's, for example. Those are already very good places to study, and also not the easiest to get into :) My belief is that when you reach that level of education, it's not really going to doom you just because you graduated from say the 5th-ranked uni in the world rather than the 1st-ranked one.
(Oh yeah, and I'm not studying Law in Australia, because I've always really wanted to go to the UK...haha)

But as for your situation...well my primary consideration would I guess be the quality of education. I definitely want to see my family, but if I can only see them during long breaks, meaning just once or twice a year, then I'd just have to live with that because hey, I'm getting a good education. So unless your parents really cannot stand to not see you once every few months, I'd say...go for UK, if it really is better.

If you are concerned about cost though, then the considerations may change a little...I do not know what the difference in cost might be, total, for studying in the UK vs. Australia (accommodation, fees, travel etc.) so you may wanna try and get estimates before considering, too.

[Nicholasng925]

Anyway, I have some ideas or reasons why people (myself included) may not want to study at Oxbridge (let's just disregard getting an offer from either place, for the sake of discussion) but they are more assumptions than anything particularly concrete, because I haven't had much opportunity to meet people going to these places and I've obviously never visited them myself. So if anyone could validate/invalidate these reasons I have, or add more, feel free :)

I have a lot of friends (at least 10, including seniors) studying at Cambridge, so I think I might be the right person to comment on this. Getting an offer itself is hard since you have to attend interviews as well as early application deadline. I don't think it shall be brought up to discussion since you mentioned it, although it is supposedly the MAIN thing that you have to consider.

Location?
I suppose this is a big difference, especially compared to universities in cities like London. Based on what I know, Oxford/Cambridge are basically relatively self-contained towns, so when talking about basic necessities, there shouldn't be any problems. But I suppose what's most important is personal preference - would students prefer a more (correct me if I'm wrong) calm kind of atmosphere versus a more vibrant city life? Also if you're not a fan of the whole formality/history that comes with studying in centuries-old buildings, you may prefer studying somewhere with more modern architecture...

Also, specific to Law, I believe that the proximity of places like the Courts will appeal to some students, though I don't know to what extent this is really useful, or a deal-breaker...

Since Oxbridge are universities based on collegiate system, I suppose that you should know every student would be assigned a college, and most of the activities would be carried out within the college except lectures. It's entirely boils down to personal preference I suppose, like you said. If you prefer vibrant city life, you should opt for London's universities instead.

Networking?
Maybe the most iffy point, and the one that applies least to Oxbridge specifically. I have this perception that, for Malaysians at least, the networking's better in London. I don't quite know, but everything seems to be there - Malaysian student associations, political groups, etc. Now this I really have no real information of, so any clarification would be great. If I'm interested in networking with politically-inclined Malaysians, if I'm interested in gatherings and such, would it be fair to say that London's the place to be compared to further away in Oxbridge?

I think you should consider the number of universities in the London itself compared to Oxbridge, when it comes to networking. Network in London would obviously be larger than Oxbridge for Malaysians, although I'm not quite sure myself on the information regarding student associations and political groups.


Anyway, so while I agree that yes, if it's just to keep options open (the merits of having many options notwithstanding) then there isn't much harm in applying. But personally I just don't feel like it's much of a fit for me. And at this stage now, to put together an Oxbridge application means potentially compromising my applications for the other universities I'm applying to (because of the earlier deadline). That plus all the reasons I stated in the above post.

If you don't think you could compromise your application to other universities for the sake of applying to Oxbridge, just don't apply for it then. A lot of people just apply to Oxbridge for the sake of applying, cause if you didn't apply for it, you stand zero chance of getting in; but if you applied for it, you might stand a tiny chance of getting in.

you don't choose Oxbridge. They choose you. I believe by the time they decide what to do with your application (accept/reject) they would have already made the decision for you.

True.


While I'm at it. Anyone wanna help with a question? I had earlier set myself to study Economics in UK. That is provided I can get a scholarship later. Mum and dad disagree because they want to visit me while studying. They insist UK is far, even though the standard of studies in UK should be better than that of Australia's. To make matters worse, it's actually cheaper to apply for 5 universities in UK than it is in Australia :huh

So, is distance really a matter when it comes to studying ? Plenty of my friends who eventually go to US and UK don't mind not coming back for the next 3 years or so. Some return only during long breaks.

Thanks.

Application to 5 UK universities via UCAS actually cost 22 pound, and I believe that it's cheaper than application to Australian universities (unless you're applying for Cambridge, which might cost you 25 pound for COPA application form and another sum for interview).

Is distance really matter when it comes to studying? Yes it is, again depends on your personal preference. If you are the kind of person who want to come back to Malaysia whenever there's a academic break, you shouldn't really opt for UK universities but Australian universities instead (unless you're rich, willing to spend hefty sum for plane's tickets and travelling for around 25+ hours per trip). Australia is so much nearer to Malaysia as compared to UK, although you should take into consideration the cost of living and the tuition fees which might seems very much more expensive than that in UK.

[Nicholas92]

I have a lot of friends (at least 10, including seniors) studying at Cambridge, so I think I might be the right person to comment on this. Getting an offer itself is hard since you have to attend interviews as well as early application deadline. I don't think it shall be brought up to discussion since you mentioned it, although it is supposedly the MAIN thing that you have to consider.

If you don't think you could compromise your application to other universities for the sake of applying to Oxbridge, just don't apply for it then. A lot of people just apply to Oxbridge for the sake of applying, cause if you didn't apply for it, you stand zero chance of getting in; but if you applied for it, you might stand a tiny chance of getting in.

I think you should consider the number of universities in the London itself compared to Oxbridge, when it comes to networking. Network in London would obviously be larger than Oxbridge for Malaysians, although I'm not quite sure myself on the information regarding student associations and political groups.


Yes, I realise that assessing one's own chances of getting in is of course a big factor when deciding whether or not to apply. But I actually started this discussion not to discuss that particular aspect, simply because there isn't really much to discuss - if you're doing something really competitive like medicine, then think harder because the 5 options are really quite little. If you're doing most any other course, no real harm in just applying for Oxbridge because 4 other options are pretty OK.

The main question I'm trying to get addressed are the other practical considerations when applying to Oxbridge, which is why I said disregard the part about getting a place or not. Also mainly because when people choose to apply to universities, things like considering their chances of getting an offer aren't usually areas of contention - some decide it's OK to use one of their options on the off-chance Oxbridge may offer them something, some decide not to.

Which is why I wanted to see what people thought of other reasons why people may decide not to apply, other than their own chances of getting in.

As for your last point, true, very true. I lack info there though.

[Nicholasng925]

Yes, I realise that assessing one's own chances of getting in is of course a big factor when deciding whether or not to apply. But I actually started this discussion not to discuss that particular aspect, simply because there isn't really much to discuss - if you're doing something really competitive like medicine, then think harder because the 5 options are really quite little. If you're doing most any other course, no real harm in just applying for Oxbridge because 4 other options are pretty OK.

The main question I'm trying to get addressed are the other practical considerations when applying to Oxbridge, which is why I said disregard the part about getting a place or not. Also mainly because when people choose to apply to universities, things like considering their chances of getting an offer aren't usually areas of contention - some decide it's OK to use one of their options on the off-chance Oxbridge may offer them something, some decide not to.

Which is why I wanted to see what people thought of other reasons why people may decide not to apply, other than their own chances of getting in.

As for your last point, true, very true. I lack info there though.

Well, I don't really see reasons for not applying to Oxbridge other than the chances of them getting the offer. I don't know much about Medicine so I couldn't comment much on that. As from the aspect of financial mean, I would say don't worry too much cause if you could get the offer from either of Oxbridge universities, corporate companies or any sponsorship institutions would be more than willing to offer you a scholarship should you apply for them.

Only people who are living at Cambridge or Oxford would not consider to apply for the university near their living place. Other than that, I don't really see there's any reason why you should not opt for it, cause most of the reasons you stated for not applying to Oxbridge can be disputed.

[adele123]

So, is distance really a matter when it comes to studying ? Plenty of my friends who eventually go to US and UK don't mind not coming back for the next 3 years or so. Some return only during long breaks.
Thanks.

i study in aus, can't help much, but i believe distance does not matter. the cost does matter but in my case, i dont feel like going back because i just want to stay and explore.

gah, i have friends studying in HK but dont want to go back, but friends who study in australia who goes back twice a year.

[frostbyte13]

Now I see why I confused Nicholas earlier for studying Law haha (reference to OP) Nicholasng925 is going to study Actuarial Science yes ? I've been observing some of the regular members, so I know some here and there. Thanks both of you for the informative replies.

True, distance may matter (more for my parents than me). But it's too soon to judge maybe. Because, I haven't tried living independently for months without my parents. I thought of it once that it'd be fun. Then again, I suddenly recall that I don't know how to do half the house chores that needs to be normally done around the house :notrust My parents are just concerned, even when I told them I have friends who don't intend to come back for holidays. Their reply was simply that your friends do have old folks who want to see them badly. OK, whatever happened to Skype ? :huh

adele123 and Nicholasng925, thanks for making a good point on cost of living. I've told them that the cost of living in UK now isn't as severe as it was back then. Besides, I mentioned already that AUS$ exchange rate is appreciating slowly but steadily. They said exchange rate may depreciate in the future. Highly unlikely from an Economics student's view :huh Appreciation stimulates optimistic investments by the business community, more capital, more demand for the currency, shoots up again. That shooting up will only stop once it becomes like a big fat balloon and pops, just like how property's sky high prices can fall overnight. Made my point but sadly, they still think the cost of living in UK is higher. FYI, I only applied to one UK university in London, Royal Holloway. That rest are in other parts of UK. Final question, do you guys really think that UK has a higher cost of living ? Please share and thanks :)

Nicholas, I think you should just try applying to other UK institutions, OxBridge itself just means more and more work to do, just to have a chance at getting in. Besides, do you honestly want to be interviewed when you can just submit applications to other universities and still get offers? Just apply to a UOL college and be done with it. Networking in London should be better in terms of finding internship. LLB in Law doesn't need to be from OxBridge to look that prestigious. Any other prestigious UK universities issuing your degree would be just as empowering to your CV. All the best :)

[strategist]

EDIT: Made an unfair response, and I apologise, strategist. Though I do maintain that it doesn't really answer the question. Still, I recognise; no ill intent on your part, and so I shouldn't have any on mine. Sorry.

Did I miss out something? Anyway, I didn't mean to inflict any offence. I am really sorry if I had made a repulsive comment.


Cheers. :)

[Nicholas92]

Well, I don't really see reasons for not applying to Oxbridge other than the chances of them getting the offer. I don't know much about Medicine so I couldn't comment much on that. As from the aspect of financial mean, I would say don't worry too much cause if you could get the offer from either of Oxbridge universities, corporate companies or any sponsorship institutions would be more than willing to offer you a scholarship should you apply for them.

Only people who are living at Cambridge or Oxford would not consider to apply for the university near their living place. Other than that, I don't really see there's any reason why you should not opt for it, cause most of the reasons you stated for not applying to Oxbridge can be disputed.

Well yeah, that's why I wanted to see where this discussion would go. Because the factor of one's own personal chances is already an established one, and because the others that I named are debatable - so I wanted to see what others thought. I get your reasoning (and its not the finances or anything that I'm thinking of, really). It's actually less personal advice I'm asking for ('cause I've already made my decision) and more trying to feel out what others have to say/think on the matter.

You bring up an interesting point about people living in Cambridge or Oxford...I actually have come across threads in forums where people mention how growing up there they just wanted an experience outside their usual scene.

Now I see why I confused Nicholas earlier for studying Law haha (reference to OP) Nicholasng925 is going to study Actuarial Science yes ? I've been observing some of the regular members, so I know some here and there. Thanks both of you for the informative replies.

True, distance may matter (more for my parents than me). But it's too soon to judge maybe. Because, I haven't tried living independently for months without my parents. I thought of it once that it'd be fun. Then again, I suddenly recall that I don't know how to do half the house chores that needs to be normally done around the house :notrust My parents are just concerned, even when I told them I have friends who don't intend to come back for holidays. Their reply was simply that your friends do have old folks who want to see them badly. OK, whatever happened to Skype ? :huh

adele123 and Nicholasng925, thanks for making a good point on cost of living. I've told them that the cost of living in UK now isn't as severe as it was back then. Besides, I mentioned already that AUS$ exchange rate is appreciating slowly but steadily. They said exchange rate may depreciate in the future. Highly unlikely from an Economics student's view :huh Appreciation stimulates optimistic investments by the business community, more capital, more demand for the currency, shoots up again. That shooting up will only stop once it becomes like a big fat balloon and pops, just like how property's sky high prices can fall overnight. Made my point but sadly, they still think the cost of living in UK is higher. FYI, I only applied to one UK university in London, Royal Holloway. That rest are in other parts of UK. Final question, do you guys really think that UK has a higher cost of living ? Please share and thanks :)

Nicholas, I think you should just try applying to other UK institutions, OxBridge itself just means more and more work to do, just to have a chance at getting in. Besides, do you honestly want to be interviewed when you can just submit applications to other universities and still get offers? Just apply to a UOL college and be done with it. Networking in London should be better in terms of finding internship. LLB in Law doesn't need to be from OxBridge to look that prestigious. Any other prestigious UK universities issuing your degree would be just as empowering to your CV. All the best :)

Well, if your parents are simply concerned with how you'd handle yourself on your own...well to me the difference between checking in on you personally once a year compared to say three times a year isn't particularly significant if it's to give you support in staying independent there. If they're that worried they should move with you lol. And yeah, Skype is pretty good - I don't always like using it, but it's as good a way as any. I think your parents will just be missing you a lot, seeing you go off is probably as hard for them as it is for you. But I mean, you gotta go sometime, right?

And I'm already pretty clear on where I'm applying to, probably, so there's no problems there - for the reasons you mentioned, and others. I don't see the harm in applying, just that I don't think its a necessity, among other things. Hahaha.

Did I miss out something? Anyway, I didn't mean to inflict any offence. I am really sorry if I had made a repulsive comment.


Cheers. :)

No, you did nothing wrong at all, man, I just responded inappropriately. And I'm really sorry for that man (even if you didn't see it) so don't think you said something wrong because you didn't. I wasn't even feeling cranky or anything that day, who knows why I was like that...so all good I hope? :)

[Nicholasng925]

Now I see why I confused Nicholas earlier for studying Law haha (reference to OP) Nicholasng925 is going to study Actuarial Science yes ? I've been observing some of the regular members, so I know some here and there. Thanks both of you for the informative replies.

True, distance may matter (more for my parents than me). But it's too soon to judge maybe. Because, I haven't tried living independently for months without my parents. I thought of it once that it'd be fun. Then again, I suddenly recall that I don't know how to do half the house chores that needs to be normally done around the house :notrust My parents are just concerned, even when I told them I have friends who don't intend to come back for holidays. Their reply was simply that your friends do have old folks who want to see them badly. OK, whatever happened to Skype ? :huh

adele123 and Nicholasng925, thanks for making a good point on cost of living. I've told them that the cost of living in UK now isn't as severe as it was back then. Besides, I mentioned already that AUS$ exchange rate is appreciating slowly but steadily. They said exchange rate may depreciate in the future. Highly unlikely from an Economics student's view :huh Appreciation stimulates optimistic investments by the business community, more capital, more demand for the currency, shoots up again. That shooting up will only stop once it becomes like a big fat balloon and pops, just like how property's sky high prices can fall overnight. Made my point but sadly, they still think the cost of living in UK is higher. FYI, I only applied to one UK university in London, Royal Holloway. That rest are in other parts of UK. Final question, do you guys really think that UK has a higher cost of living ? Please share and thanks :)

Yes I'm going to study Actuarial Science, but I somewhat prefer MMORSE (Maths, Operational Research, Statistics and Economics) at University of Warwick and specialise in Actuarial Science in my third and forth year, due to several reasons.

Skype is another good way of talking to your parents face-to-face too. Technology made it possible again to solve any possibly questions arose. Why did you apply only to one university that costs 11 pound, instead of 5 universities that costs 22 pound? UK has higher cost of living? Without any statistics used as proofs, I couldn't make any further comment but based on what I've read thus far from various sources, Australia does has higher living cost as compared to that in UK (based on the large cities).

Well yeah, that's why I wanted to see where this discussion would go. Because the factor of one's own personal chances is already an established one, and because the others that I named are debatable - so I wanted to see what others thought. I get your reasoning (and its not the finances or anything that I'm thinking of, really). It's actually less personal advice I'm asking for ('cause I've already made my decision) and more trying to feel out what others have to say/think on the matter.

You bring up an interesting point about people living in Cambridge or Oxford...I actually have come across threads in forums where people mention how growing up there they just wanted an experience outside their usual scene.


Ah I see. Well since you've already made your decision, good luck in every decision made then! :amuse Hope that this thread would be further developed with more interesting thoughts from others! :)

[Jagermeister]

Nicholas,

I think you'll make a wiser choice of choosing to study at a university that specializes or its core competency is the course that you would like rather than attending an A-list university which the course that you want is not their strenght.

I'll give you an example, back in 1996, my roomate who was studying Computer Science applied to several universties in the US, for CS...the 'Ivy League' school are the likes of Carnegie Mellon. But for the sake of applying, he also applied to the real Ivy League like Hardvard and Princeton. So, he applied for 5, CMU, Caltech, GATECH, Harvard and Princeton.

Well, he did not get the offer letter from CMU or Caltech, instead...Hardvard, Princeton,Gatech and Case Western Reserve University. The choice is obvious, he rejected both Harvard and Princeton, and had to choose between Gatech and CWRU. While the real ivy league may look good in his CV, but for skill and knowledge wise, it will be disadvantage for him. He dreaded not getting into CMU, because that's where technologies are being born, that's where tech companies like Motorola, Microsoft, IBM do their IP Patent/technology shopping spree. Harvard and Princeton may have the name and 1st choice for those studying law, business etc...but not technology.

So, my advice, just apply at least if you do get an offer, you know you're Oxbridge material, but if you want to invest in knowledge and skill, then Warwick is where you should be going.

[Cactus]

I applied to a part of the Oxbridge complex because I really like its scenery and archaic buildings and traditions.

And of course, for the name.

Haha.

[Jagermeister]

me on the other hand prefer a college in the city or nearby the city not in some kampung. While in the US, I visited some of my friends school, all the way to Purdue...a kampung...then to Michigan...where Sunway College sends its student...the place reminds me of Pekan Kuala Pilah...no building higher than 3 stories, people hang out at gas station burger joints and 1 strip bar for the entire place. I however enjoyed visit to Northwestern ... downtown Chicago, UCLA...USC downtown LA...Case etc. Same goes for Australia...coolest Uni are the one in downtown Melbourne CBD like RMIT...schools in downtown Sydney...unlike dead-town ANU in Canberra.

[acgerlok7]

i think applying to a uni that we can meet its requirements and will be assure to study comfortably for another 3-4 years is the utmost important criteria..I've seen people applying to Oxbridge just for the sake of applying, cos' of the brand name it bears, that its kinda senseless....For me, I think if one has passion, sure he will succeed in any field? correct me if im wrong...haha....

[Nicholasng925]

So, my advice, just apply at least if you do get an offer, you know you're Oxbridge material, but if you want to invest in knowledge and skill, then Warwick is where you should be going.

Any particular advice on why Warwick instead of other universities like Imperial, UCL, LSE etc? :)

[joan2468]

Being a city kid, I've lived my whole life in a concrete jungle so I wouldn't mind a university somewhere further out, like in a town instead of a big city - change of scenery and seeing more greenery would be great.

I intend to apply for Oxford Law if I can score the necessary A-level grades - a small part of it is the prestige, although I'm not sure exactly why I'm drawn to the place, although I did pick Oxford over Cambridge because Oxford's law course is (to my understanding) geared more towards jurisprudence, which interests me most.

Maybe it's the appeal of studying at an institution that's existed for over a thousand years, maybe it's the fact that some of the world's greatest minds have walked its hallways and slept in its bedrooms, maybe it's the thought of the amazing collection of books that the library has, or the tutoring system and being in the company of other bright youngsters, most likely it's a combination of all of the above. Overall it just seems like a great place to learn and I'd make full usage of my time if I were to miraculously make it in.

[ayjiahui]

digressing: this whole thread has diverted from the author's original intent of why asking people who don't want to apply to oxbridge to why people would still choose oxbridge. i mean the reasons to apply to oxbridge are pretty clear. in fact, it's slightly redundant for people to rehash why they would still pick oxbridge.

just saying. =__=

[henry_yew]

me on the other hand prefer a college in the city or nearby the city not in some kampung. While in the US, I visited some of my friends school, all the way to Purdue...a kampung...then to Michigan...where Sunway College sends its student...the place reminds me of Pekan Kuala Pilah...no building higher than 3 stories, people hang out at gas station burger joints and 1 strip bar for the entire place. I however enjoyed visit to Northwestern ... downtown Chicago, UCLA...USC downtown LA...Case etc. Same goes for Australia...coolest Uni are the one in downtown Melbourne CBD like RMIT...schools in downtown Sydney...unlike dead-town ANU in Canberra.

It's really a matter of choice, when it comes to universities. Some people like city life (with a bustling night life). But big mega-cities could also have higher crime rates - an issue worth considering.

However, it's really a matter of personal convictions. Some people would argue that quality of education trumps over the high crime rate nonsense, while some may say, "Hold on. If I go to another university which is not as highly ranked as, say, UC Berkeley, and yet I get the same type of education and the same degree and that my chances of landing myself in a job are just as good, why should I opt for a place notorious for high crime rates?"

Personally, I would prefer a place where the city isn't too big so that I may remain focused on my academic pursuits. Texas Tech University, in Lubbock, suits me well. It's close enough to downtown that I may get my daily needs, yet the people are nice, friendly, and the surrounding is relatively safe.

Of course, if I were to be offered a placement in, say, Stanford or UC Berkeley, I would take up the offer. Hehe... :laugh

But, yeah, on the issue of Oxbridge, I believe many people feel that they are prestigious universities to pursue your studies, and certainly are known to be some of the best universities in the world, especially in Law school. As I said, it's not so much about the location to some people, but the education that you can get. There are many caveats involved in order to go for Oxbridge, definitely, but if you can get past those caveats, then I don't see why you shouldn't go for Oxbridge, if it means so much to you.

[Nicholas92]

digressing: this whole thread has diverted from the author's original intent of why asking people who don't want to apply to oxbridge to why people would still choose oxbridge. i mean the reasons to apply to oxbridge are pretty clear. in fact, it's slightly redundant for people to rehash why they would still pick oxbridge.

just saying. =__=


THANK YOU. Lol.

Yeah, guys, to make this clear in case it hasn't already been made clear, I didn't open this thread to ask for advice on whether or not I should apply to Oxbridge, or where I should apply instead. It's just that recently, I made the decision to not apply there (in and of itself not really a decision, but long story, OK) and I wondered whether my reasons, among others, were reasons with any merit - so I started this thread to see if anyone was like-minded, if anyone disagreed, and why if so, as well as to get new ideas I didn't think of before.

As ayjiahui so correctly pointed out, it's pretty redundant to state why you WANT to study there, because 1) it's exactly counter to the point of this thread, and 2) those reasons have been made clear everywhere else time and again and has always been in the mainstream. This thread was made precisely to discuss an alternative view (that there may be reasons NOT to apply to Oxbridge)

Hope this clears things up.


But, yeah, on the issue of Oxbridge, I believe many people feel that they are prestigious universities to pursue your studies, and certainly are known to be some of the best universities in the world, especially in Law school. As I said, it's not so much about the location to some people, but the education that you can get. There are many caveats involved in order to go for Oxbridge, definitely, but if you can get past those caveats, then I don't see why you shouldn't go for Oxbridge, if it means so much to you.

Exactly, exactly - I'm talking about those caveats. Certainly, if all the general factors place Oxbridge favourably (education level, prestige, location, etc.) then there's no harm applying.

Ahh it's getting hard to frame my arguments here - OK, I suppose it'd be easier if we thought of it in terms of deal-breakers. Applies to all unis, right? So maybe if a uni is just somewhere you don't want to be (specific state or country or something) then it's ruled out, even if it's good. Maybe the uni doesn't offer the course you want to study - deal-breaker.

I suppose what I'm saying is; are there such things for Oxbridge? Are there other factors that people do not normally consider that may make them decide to not apply at all? I certainly believe there are (and I've already talked about some of them) so I wonder what others think...

Nicholas,

I think you'll make a wiser choice of choosing to study at a university that specializes or its core competency is the course that you would like rather than attending an A-list university which the course that you want is not their strenght.

I'll give you an example, back in 1996, my roomate who was studying Computer Science applied to several universties in the US, for CS...the 'Ivy League' school are the likes of Carnegie Mellon. But for the sake of applying, he also applied to the real Ivy League like Hardvard and Princeton. So, he applied for 5, CMU, Caltech, GATECH, Harvard and Princeton.

Well, he did not get the offer letter from CMU or Caltech, instead...Hardvard, Princeton,Gatech and Case Western Reserve University. The choice is obvious, he rejected both Harvard and Princeton, and had to choose between Gatech and CWRU. While the real ivy league may look good in his CV, but for skill and knowledge wise, it will be disadvantage for him. He dreaded not getting into CMU, because that's where technologies are being born, that's where tech companies like Motorola, Microsoft, IBM do their IP Patent/technology shopping spree. Harvard and Princeton may have the name and 1st choice for those studying law, business etc...but not technology.

So, my advice, just apply at least if you do get an offer, you know you're Oxbridge material, but if you want to invest in knowledge and skill, then Warwick is where you should be going.

Ah yes - applying for the name alone is definitely a No. Though, in the US it's not as great a problem (no limits on applying) in the UK it'd be a big problem if all people did was pick out the top 5 unis and make those their choices. The name alone should not be enough of a factor, though it can be a limiting factor if necessary.

But I'm also curious, I don't really understand your last paragraph...are you talking about Law, or just in general, or what? Care to elaborate how Warwick means an 'investment in knowledge and skill'? Lol

[henry_yew]

I suppose what I'm saying is; are there such things for Oxbridge? Are there other factors that people do not normally consider that may make them decide to not apply at all? I certainly believe there are (and I've already talked about some of them) so I wonder what others think...


Well, I never considered Oxford or Cambridge for my engineering studies. In fact, I considered Imperial College and Nottingham University. It's quite a lot about the strength of the university and the types of research that they're going into. That's what I think will affect my choices mostly. I also look into the structure of their courses and how they assess their students. Eventually, I concluded that the UK education is not what I want after all, hence my decision to go to the US instead.

[frostbyte13]

Nicholasng925, I am going to apply to 5 institutions, I merely stated that only one of them is a UOL subsidiary, that is Royal Holloway. I applied to Manchester, Southampton, Warwick (contemplating between this and Bristol) and Sheffield. All for BSc Economics (too far to think ahead)

Thanks for the advice though.

And to Nicholas the thread starter, I still think that it's just a matter of personal choice that you don't want to apply to Oxbridge. If you really want to be honest about it to your parents, just say the name does not interest me or I have better things to focus on e.g. my current applications that are ALREADY MADE. That is if you have not prepared anything for Oxbridge prior to this and have already prepped for somewhere else. Maybe you just need to focus your time on one matter at a time instead of dividing your attention to all sorts of places of study. The perfect comprimise I could think of would be just send in an application just to please your parents and you forget about it after. That way, you would rid yourself of any feelings of regret not applying (should they arise later), clear your own conscience and your parents'. If you make to interview, only then you could put a little more seriousness about throwing away Oxford for something else. All the best.

[ayjiahui]

And to Nicholas the thread starter, I still think that it's just a matter of personal choice that you don't want to apply to Oxbridge. If you really want to be honest about it to your parents, just say the name does not interest me or I have better things to focus on e.g. my current applications that are ALREADY MADE. That is if you have not prepared anything for Oxbridge prior to this and have already prepped for somewhere else. Maybe you just need to focus your time on one matter at a time instead of dividing your attention to all sorts of places of study. The perfect comprimise I could think of would be just send in an application just to please your parents and you forget about it after. That way, you would rid yourself of any feelings of regret not applying (should they arise later), clear your own conscience and your parents'. If you make to interview, only then you could put a little more seriousness about throwing away Oxford for something else. All the best.

I don't think Nicholas92 started this thread to find advise to please his parents. @<hidden>@<hidden>@<hidden>@<hidden>@<hidden>@<hidden>@<hidden>@<hidden>@<hidden>

[Nicholas92]

Yeah, I didn't start the thread to look for advice, I started it after I went through all the arguing and the debating and stuff. OK right, basically after my whole discussion with my parents, I wondered if my own reasons for not wanting to go (and therefore not applying) were justifiable reasons, or if there were reasons other than mine.

It's getting quite funny actually.

[Nicholasng925]

Nicholasng925, I am going to apply to 5 institutions, I merely stated that only one of them is a UOL subsidiary, that is Royal Holloway. I applied to Manchester, Southampton, Warwick (contemplating between this and Bristol) and Sheffield. All for BSc Economics (too far to think ahead)

Thanks for the advice though.


Ah I see. I've applied to 5 institutions as well namely, Cambridge (Maths), Warwick (MMORSE), and Actuarial Science at City (Cass), LSE and Heriot-Watt. Why are you contemplating between Warwick and Bristol? I thought Warwick is one of the top 3 for Economics degree ranking in the UK? :huh

[Glassylicious]

Location?
I suppose this is a big difference, especially compared to universities in cities like London. Based on what I know, Oxford/Cambridge are basically relatively self-contained towns, so when talking about basic necessities, there shouldn't be any problems. But I suppose what's most important is personal preference - would students prefer a more (correct me if I'm wrong) calm kind of atmosphere versus a more vibrant city life? Also if you're not a fan of the whole formality/history that comes with studying in centuries-old buildings, you may prefer studying somewhere with more modern architecture...

Also, specific to Law, I believe that the proximity of places like the Courts will appeal to some students, though I don't know to what extent this is really useful, or a deal-breaker...

Job opportunities?
I was debating with myself quite a bit on this one. Are job opportunities a little harder to find at Oxbridge? And I don't mean getting jobs after uni, I mean part-time work alongside studies. Especially, say, for students studying Law who are looking to get involved in attachments or internships of some sort with law firms, or even just the average student looking to make a bit more money. Is the location of Oxford/Cambridge something of an impediment to that sort of things, especially compared to a city? I'd really appreciate if anyone could relate their experience on this.

EDIT: It seems that Oxbridge (or rather, their colleges) have specific rules regarding part-time work. That plus the demanding schedule of study there really does seem to limit job opportunities)

Academic pressure?
From what I've found (some anecdotal evidence) Oxbridge really does have a certain level of competition or pressure. I'm not saying that students are over-competitive or anything, just that the workloads really are heavy and a lot of emphasis is given to the work. It also appears they have shorter academic terms compared to many other universities, which could mean that the workload is compressed into a somewhat shorter period of time. This is actually quite a big factor for me - two years in Singapore and I'm not quite looking to find it necessary to study to the point where I can't enjoy the outside as much as I'd like. Of course I understand this is different for everyone, but can we really say that there is a different level of academic rigour demanded of Oxbridge?

Networking?
Maybe the most iffy point, and the one that applies least to Oxbridge specifically. I have this perception that, for Malaysians at least, the networking's better in London. I don't quite know, but everything seems to be there - Malaysian student associations, political groups, etc. Now this I really have no real information of, so any clarification would be great. If I'm interested in networking with politically-inclined Malaysians, if I'm interested in gatherings and such, would it be fair to say that London's the place to be compared to further away in Oxbridge?

.
.
.

Some people may also say the community at Oxbridge may not be good. I don't really believe in this sort of stereotyping because it's really quite hard to know unless you've been there, and also because it's likely untrue. Just saying.

I'll try to answer this the best I can. This is all based off from personal experience, so let's hear it from the horse's mouth! :))

1. Location
Agreed. If you want to go to university in a big, metropolitan city, go to London instead. The point about proximity to Courts is irrelevant though -- a law degree is highly academic and at no point in your degree will you need access to a court, unless you feel like taking a field trip.

2. Part-time work
Uh, no. Magic circle law firms LOVE Oxbridge students. This is exhibited by the amount of money they lavish upon recruitment events/drinks receptions/dinners in Oxbridge.

But YES, with all the workload in Oxbridge, it can be difficult to work part-time. In fact, I wouldn't recommend it at all. Most internships are only held during vacation periods anyway. Also, many Oxbridge interns find accommodation in London, or if they're from Oxford, they commute back and forth.

3. Academic pressure
There are no two ways about it. It IS tough.

4. Networking
Yes, it's true that lots of stuff happen in London, but I know many Oxford students who travel to London often [it's only about one and a half hours by train/coach] for these events. Also, because of Oxford's relative proximity to London, many a time we have politicians dropping by in Oxford after their stop in London. E.g. Najib.

The Oxford University Malaysia Club also typically has ties with corporate firms/organisations so recruitment events are sometimes held in Oxford, too.

Often, you don't have to go to them. THEY come to you.

Do not underestimate the pull the Oxford name can have. :)

[henry_yew]

Often, you don't have to go to them. THEY come to you.

Do not underestimate the pull the Oxford name can have. :)

<digression> Just like UTP, right? </digression> :P

[frankchong]

If the main criteria in choosing a university is the location, you are afriad of academic pressure, if you need tender loving care, not very self motivated then the top universities (Oxbridge and others) are not a good fit for you. Your are not their target student and they will not change because of you.
However, if you want to be the best in a field and hope to find the best professors (or masters in their field), strong student body with bright students of similar interest to learn from/together, flexibility to pursue areas not traditionally established then the top universities are the right choice.
I can understand that engineering students may choose Imperial over Oxbridge, or go to strong engineering universities like UC Berkeley. However, you may be surprised to find out the numbers of professors in places like UC Berkely EE/CS or CS department have their roots from places like Harvard. (Please note the enginering/CS department in places like Harvard or Caltech is relatively small, e.g. NUS/UC Berkeley outnumbers most of the universities in engineering enrollment, so you see a lot more engineering graduates from them)
Jagermeister is misinformed, he is probably right about his roomate's choice but the reasoning is flawed. You would be surprised to find out the numbers of recruites places like Microsoft, Google, Facebook get from places like Harvard, Stanford. Just look at the founders and their founding members ... CMU is relatively good in CS, but if CMU does not exist, the field will move forward without much damage. However, some universities are really hard to replace.
To be noted is that if you get into Harvard and Caltech and want to do circuit design, logic simulations or structural design in civil engineering versus those in the traditional engineering schools, then it is the wrong place. They expect you to be able to pick those skills up yourself. However, if you want to have a very strong background in basic sciences/math to build up the foundation for original work later, then it is the right place. They make life a lot harder for you than is necessary, if you just want to be called an engineer. As a graduate from one of these places said before she left for her MDPhD, XXX is one of the few places in the world that requires you to take quantum mechanics courses for biology majors.

[ayjiahui]

If the main criteria in choosing a university is the location, you are afriad of academic pressure, if you need tender loving care, not very self motivated then the top universities (Oxbridge and others) are not a good fit for you. Your are not their target student and they will not change because of you.

That's just very sarcastic and mean. Also, that's just really not the point of this whole thread. No one is shying away from competition.

Like seriously, I think it's fair if people want a relatively [note that I say relatively and not completely] slack atmosphere because they want to maximise other aspects of life. I mean, pursuit of academic yes but really, at what extent must it be at? We all know that academic success does not equate success in the work force so in a sense, wanting to develop other aspects of your character... BESIDES academic prowess is fine.

Seriously. That was totally uncalled for.

[frankchong]

"That's just very sarcastic and mean. Also, that's just really not the point of this whole thread. No one is shying away from competition."

This is not meant to be sarcastic and mean. I have seen how some of the very well known professors treat some of the students. Not only the students, also his own son. When we compare ourself to the best, we need to know where we stand and have the chance to win. This is not about afraid of competition, it is about how we position ourselve so that we have better chance of success.
I have spent most of my careers in MNCs (Multinational cooperations), if our products are not the best or close to the best, we get wipe out. It is harsh, but it is the reality. However, the winner will end up controlling the market and profit.

[ayjiahui]

"That's just very sarcastic and mean. Also, that's just really not the point of this whole thread. No one is shying away from competition."

This is not meant to be sarcastic and mean. I have seen how some of the very well known professors treat some of the students. Not only the students, also his own son. When we compare ourself to the best, we need to know where we stand and have the chance to win. This is not about afraid of competition, it is about how we position ourselve so that we have better chance of success.
I have spent most of my careers in MNCs (Multinational cooperations), if our products are not the best or close to the best, we get wipe out. It is harsh, but it is the reality. However, the winner will end up controlling the market and profit.

Be competitive. Fine. BUT you seem to equate academic success with success in the workforce. I reiterate my stance: a product of a 'lesser school' doesn't mean he is inferior to an Oxbridge graduate. Prowess in academia does not translate to prowess in the workforce. Pursue academics, yes. But if you can develop other aspects of your character, outside academia I think that is a bonus. Like the ability to communicate with people, the ability to lead, the ability to follow... all these are not covered in academia but are such essential things in the workforce unless, of course you're pursuing a professional course (even then it is debatable whether such skills are unnecessary).

And like I said, no one is shying away from the competition. You must have misunderstood the premise of discussion.

[frostbyte13]

The answer is just to find a balance of both. Like ayjiahui mentioned, I don't think it's impossible to enter a top-ranking university without just taking the occasional slack time to just relax and to take your mind of studies for possibly just a few days tops. I don't think even the most kiasu of kiasu people, the Singaporeans (at least I've heard from friends, no offence to any Singapore buddies here :) ) are not THAT absorbed into their studies until there is no time for anything else and even basic necessities like socializing. Even if we do have, that person should have a little mental check to see if everything up there is in tick-tock shape.

Neither do I think that entering a university like that means you have to be prepared to sacrifice all your time for studying only and no time/extremely limited time for extracurricular and soft skills. Success in life is measured in academia, soft skill prowess and most importantly passion. Lack even just one and exceeding another doesn't put that equation into a balanced state.

Not sure if this is true, but just felt like sharing it. If this is too much, moderators, please remove :) Hope it lets you guys understand a necessity for balance in life, even at the cost of the best alternative of education.

To those of you under JPA overseas sponsorship for undergraduate in the Medicinal field, I'm sure you are aware or have attended the crash-course on the life of a doctor at your respective hospitals right? I asked my friend why was there even the urgency for JPA to do something like this (besides the very OBVIOUS reasons). He asked their guide that day and mentioned this program was started sometime ago, rumored that is, because of a little accident JPA had with one of their sponsor students. This girl went to study Medicine and I believed they had not yet started this sort of program yet. Good grades, deserving student to get the sponsorship. Upon just few months studying and undertaking a few exams, it was reported that she had to be sent to a mental hospital and cancelled of her sponsorship. Rumor has it she collapsed mentally, and possibly the intense studying with the neglect of the basic human necessities was the cause. I think there should have been real physical damage to the brain too with that kind of severity. The parents of course, had no money to repay the bond, but JPA had secretly let it slide because due to the unprecedented circumstances.

[henry_yew]

Personally, I think that it's erroneous to say that you will not have a social life if you go to a top university. Sure, some universities may have relatively higher workload (or what appears to be higher workload), but that alone shouldn't stop you from taking a day off from the week to go and hang out with friends, to party and have some fun (e.g. hiking, go on a sea expedition, etc.)

University life is more than just studying. Going to a top university like Oxbridge did not stop Glassy to be a very sociable individual, and I'm sure she took time to see places, etc. etc.

Of course, student life may be quite hectic, and getting a part-time job may not be what you want to do. For example, I have only 9 hours of lectures a week (my Tuesdays and Thursdays are empty), but I'd rather not take up a part-time employment yet because I find that I need the extra time to go to the library and get materials so that I can complete my assignments and projects.

However, that should not stop me (or you for that matter) to go out and build networks with other people. Networking is, I think, irrelevant to the location of the university. You want to build networks, then you've got to go out and just start to mix around with people. It doesn't have to be your peers - you can always build networks with your professors (it can be very helpful in the future). Join societies (it's definitely a good start to join societies that are related to your majors first) and other organizations. Join events once in a while.

Therefore, I don't think networking would be a point of consideration to decide whether to go for Oxbridge (or any other universities) or not. You'd probably want to consider other factors, i.e. the emphasis on what types of research, their education structure, the fees (major factor), their faculty strength, etc.

Don't go to a university on the pretext that you'd be living a life of a hermit - go on the pretext that you will learn something, and top of that, build friendships and have fun!

[frankchong]

I want to point out a few things that I believe is not right:
1. There are too many students and parents want to go to top university for branding, not from the view point of learning. Seeing having a degree from these universities as the end goal.
2. There is a group of people who thinks that it does not matter what one studies and which university one goes to, becomes defensive and over sold their points.
3. In a country/society, we need both generalist and specialist. If we do not have the culture that we value these skills and nurture them, we will not have them.
4. Choosing a university/field is a matching problem, we need to match students with the right university. Frostbyte13 uses the example of a student broke down taking medicine, you can find a number of examples of student suicide at MIT. Caltech rejects good students that do not fit in its culture. There is also a group of very unhappy Harvard students too. These are examples of university/student mismatch. However, for every failure, there are many more success stories, just, these places are not for everyone.
5. I have not said students from lesser known universities are lesser beings, however, we need to acknowledge that these places do have something special and if we have students who can benefit from their ecosystem, we need to encourage them. Malaysia and most countries do not have problem producing the quantity of graduates, but we need a group of experts that knows the business/field to be leaders to teach in universities or consultant to government institutions or leader in the industry. Take the example of nuclear power plant, rare earth processing, how does one weigh the benefits and risks in these decisions. The consultants one gets out there mostly have vested interest, which may not be consistant with Malaysia's needs. Do we have experts we can trust? Whom should we listen to?
6. Ayjiahui, one can measure success in many different ways, one does not need to go to university to be successful. I can name a number of contractors in Malaysia making millions without even a secondary school education. Academic pursuit and trying to be masters in a field is a very painful process, it does not pay as much as a lot of other work. However, if we do not have them how do we teach future generations those skills? You can make money much easier by being well connected, without having to go through all these pain with very little financial reword.
7. Using Singapore as an example, the average student quality from the Singapore system is very good, but to develop industrial, academic or spots leaders, they are way behind. That is the reason for Singapore's MOE to sent officers to look at the top US secondary schools a few years ago, and the subsequent establishment of the NUS High School of Science and Math. In USA, China there are parents and special schools that caters to special needs of very talented and motivated students.
8. There is nothing to be ashame of admitting one is not good in something, if you want me to take up spots for fun and health reasons, fine. However, if you want a top sportsman to win competitions, I am the wrong choice. I will encourage you to pick someone else. You can say the same for me in music ...
9. As I have said, some universities, especially those in engineering offer courses in engineering not found in liberal arts colleges. If I want a circuit designer, a logic designer ... I have to recruit them from universities strong in these fields. Oxbridge and Harvard are strong in engineering science, but not in these traditional engineering disciplines. The same applies to most of the other liberal arts colleges. This is way it makes sense for Henry Yew to go to a university strong in engineering to pursue structural dynamics.
10. Using structural dynamics as an example, it is a core skill in aircraft design, large windmill design (1000 ton structures with continuously changing wind load), earthquake safety in large buildings ... These skills are highly prized and not commonly found. If one thinks that he/she can just go any where and pick up this skills is just kiding oneself. There are many more examples.
So, try to match your need with what the university can offer. Be realistic, there are skills that are hard to acquire, few needs special talent and exceptional commitment. If you are the right one, go for it and we will be happy for you, but do not pretend. The truth will show up and it will be painful if you are not the right one. You have to be honest to yourself.

Best regards,
Frank

[Glassylicious]

We get worked like hell but this means we develop skills to do work efficiently, so we find time to party hard anyway. Work hard, play hard.

Plenty of time for sleep when you're dead! :D

[Young]

1. There are too many students and parents want to go to top university for branding, not from the view point of learning. Seeing having a degree from these universities as the end goal.
2. There is a group of people who thinks that it does not matter what one studies and which university one goes to, becomes defensive and over sold their points.
4. Choosing a university/field is a matching problem, we need to match students with the right university. Frostbyte13 uses the example of a student broke down taking medicine, you can find a number of examples of student suicide at MIT. Caltech rejects good students that do not fit in its culture. There is also a group of very unhappy Harvard students too. These are examples of university/student mismatch. However, for every failure, there are many more success stories, just, these places are not for everyone.
5. I have not said students from lesser known universities are lesser beings, however, we need to acknowledge that these places do have something special and if we have students who can benefit from their ecosystem, we need to encourage them. Malaysia and most countries do not have problem producing the quantity of graduates, but we need a group of experts that knows the business/field to be leaders to teach in universities or consultant to government institutions or leader in the industry.

You're contradicting yourself. You mentioned that esteemed institutions have something special and I do agree, in terms of culture and prestige and tradition. However, I highly doubt the existence of an institution that specializes to such an extreme level where knowledge attained there becomes non-transferrable. You seem to imply that individuals who graduate from top institutions suddenly go on to become 'experts' in their field; I think this is erroneous (at least at the undergraduate level).

You will never hear a university say 'come to our university because you will learn this skill that you'll never learn anywhere else!' because that simply does not exist. I believe that it really doesn't matter which university you go to because identical courses from different universities will cover very identical material and given the fact that we barely utilize a quarter of the knowledge gained in university, it is immaterial to judge a university based on non-transferrable knowledge.

Also, these university 'strengths' you're talking about refers to their research output and has got nothing to do with their teaching standards. That being said, I am sure you'll agree that research strength does not necessarily equate to teaching quality. I have personal experience and anecdotal evidence to back that up but I shall omit that because I'm in a hurry.

I believe that you're an expert in the field you are dealing with, but if an esteemed individual such as yourself has a tendency to equate university prestige with expertise, then can you really blame students for pursuing a brand education for the sake of it? It's a vicious cycle of prestige-whoring; experts think experts come from top universities so students go to top universities to become 'experts', rinse and repeat.

Your points on non-transferrable knowledge are only valid at the post-doctorate level but at that level, the most important factor in employment is less of the institution and more of the type of research done so really, the points you have raised are invalid.

(sorry if I'm not coherent; I speed-typed this in 10 minutes. Will be back in 5 hours to clear things up)

[henry_yew]

To extend on what frankchong and Young have said, I think it's only fair to say that lesser known universities have their own strengths as well, and that these universities have something that students can benefit, too. Perhaps that's what frankchong was trying to say in point no. 5.

Once that point is cleared up, then points no. 1 and 2 would make sense. I personally believe that many people go for these very well known universities due to the branding and the impression that people who graduate from these universities are excellent graduates, which is not necessarily true indeed. I believe that if you are going for undergraduate studies, it doesn't really matter where you do it, be it in Malaysia, Australia, the UK, the US, Singapore, Hong Kong, etc. etc. because the degree is the same.

Perhaps the factors that make each country different are the environment, the way classes are conducted, assessments, the people, the culture, etc. But aside from those, if, for example, you are taking a course in medicine or engineering, a graduate from Malaysia would not be less knowledgeable than a graduate from the US, in terms of technical competency. This is especially true for engineering graduates, because the Washington Accord requires universities to meet certain criteria before their graduates are recognized internationally (actually between the signatories of the Washington Accord).

So, I don't believe that a Universiti Malaya medical graduate is less competent than a Johns Hopkins University medical graduate. Likewise, I don't think that a Universiti Teknologi Malaysia engineering graduate is less competent than an MIT engineering graduate.

However, the scenario is very different if you speak of postgraduate studies. In many ways, I believe that all these university rankings are reflective of their big and extensive postgraduate community. But it must not be forgotten that endowments and federal funding to universities play a major role in research, especially at the postgraduate level.

Even so, rankings are not always important for postgraduate studies. Take Texas Tech University (where I'm studying now) as an example. I don't think that Texas Tech is in the top 100 universities in the world, but it's got the best wind engineering facilities and the Wind Science & Engineering Research Center which is renowned throughout the US. The faculty in Texas Tech are especially strong in research on wind engineering, and I'm interested in that field. Therefore, even though it may not be the best engineering school in the US, I still choose it because of its strength in wind engineering research. But even if I don't end up doing wind engineering research and do something else, does it mean that I'm not as good as an MIT Master's graduate? Not necessarily!

Frankchong's point no. 4 is an interesting one. I don't really know if a student who is unhappy in Harvard will feel happier in, say, University of Pennsylvania, or whether a student in Texas A&M will feel happier in say, MIT. But if you limit this discussion to the Bachelor's degree only, there's always the option to transfer to another university, unless the branding of the university prevents you from deciding to do so, or unless you're sponsored by some big companies. Therefore, I doubt that all this about being suicidal or unhappy is the fault of the university.

We certainly have digressed from the main topic, but I think that the extension is worth the lengthy discussion.

[frankchong]

Hi Young,
What you have said is true for most universities, but not some of the universities I refer to here. There is no standard curriculum if you really want/need to be different, you can design your our major. You see there are few first year student taking advanced undergraduates courses upon entry. For the record, I have hired graduates from these institutions and I have also not hired graduates from these institutions. It is not about branding, it is about substance.
Let's take some specific cases, if you are really good in math and decided to go to Harvard, there are multiple level of courses for the freshman, including Math 55. You can see what is covered in Math 55 here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Math_55

In Caltech, the professor to student ratio is 1:3, there is plenty of opportunity to take part in undergraduate research during summer and through out the year in campus or JPL. You are working directly with the professors and graduate students and have a section of the project to yourself. You see how the masters work, brain storm with them, after some time you may find that some of your ideas are not that stupid after all, those well known professors make mistakes too, but they have a way to sort out some of those pretty fast. They also have exceptional ability to stick to their ideas and follow them through. Eventhough you may be an undergraduate, you are treated as an equal partner when they brain storm ideas. In the first year semiconductor lab let you make trasistors, LEDs ... from wafers up using basic fab equipment. JPL gives you the chance to work on robotics, space exploration in real life. There is no match anywhere else in this area so accessible to the students. Hopefully through these one picks up good work ethic, see all the experts work very very hard too.

Even in these universities, only a small percentage of the students can fully capitalise on these opportunities. However, if we are not pushed to the limit, we do not know where are our limits.

It is true that a lot of graduates make use of a small fraction of what is learned in universities, however, that is not true in a number of these cases where specialised skills are required.

As an example, we used to hire EE/CS graduates from Berkeley/Stanford to do circuit design. These engineering students are well grounded in circuits. If I want someone to do crytography, I will have better chance to get a matching graduate from Harvard with strong back ground in abstrate algebra. If I want someone in operations, I better of getter an all rounder from some where else.
Hiring is about matching job requirements and candidate skills and work ethics. There are good candidates from lesser known universities too, but if I look for engineers to design integrated circuits and coding problems, the choices are really limitted. The hiring yield from the better colleges are higher and when we have limitted amount of time, we tend to go after schools where we can get higher hiring yields.

Best regards,
Frank

[ayjiahui]

We certainly have digressed from the main topic, but I think that the extension is worth the lengthy discussion.

You know the problem with people on ReCom, that I have noticed, and often which causes diversions from the main topic is that people rarely read the context of things and start spewing irrelevant things. So no... not this time. Not when the main issue has not even been addressed in the first place. I don't think this particular thread is worthy of this 'extended discussion'.

Frankly has descended into something rather stupid because
1) we were talking about Oxbridge and Oxbridge ALONE [we're not interested in Harvard or MIT or Caltech or Berkeley or Stanford EVEN if they are good schools]

2) we aren't looking at anecdotal, one-off examples but rather at trends to extrapolate on [which means you shouldn't just focus on the engineering/technical perspective]

3) this WHOLE time we were looking at needs and fit of a person -- which is why this thread even started in the first place

4) no one is disputing the quality of education in other "lesser" [note that i gave lesser the quotation marks because i don't actually mean that they are any less good. i only use that only because i have no better alternative. so don't extrapolate this and start attacking the quality of kids that come out of those] schools -- so why is it things have descended to that?

=__________________=

[Nicholas92]

In the vein of many Hollywood movies now, I think we should 'reboot' this thread. While there were a few relevant points buried here and there, on the whole this thread just flew way off target. So let me redefine exactly the issue we're discussing here.

Firstly, some notes:
1. We are NOT disputing the merits/standards of Oxford or Cambridge, and we are also NOT saying that all other universities are 'lesser'.

2. The context of discussion, basically, is that Oxbridge is considered such a prestigious, excellent name that in many (not all) cases it's considered a no-brainer to just throw in an application.

3. Some real-life contexts, I suppose, would be the way prospective students blindly apply to either university without much consideration. While this is definitely not always a bad thing, after all (as brand name is not too irrational a factor), we are asking 'is there more to consider?'

4. What we are discussing, then, is whether there are actual reasons why one MIGHT NOT want to apply/should not apply to Oxbridge.

5. Examples might be simpler things like 'they don't offer the course I want to take' or 'I prefer life in a different type of location'. The thread title is not implying that Oxbridge is in fact a declining institution with horrible education, because it obviously is not.

What to NOT mention:

1. US Universities. While I recognise the parallels in some of the arguments put forward previously (i.e. top elite schools vs. so-called 'lesser' schools) the concern here should be limited to Oxbridge (and hence UK universities) simply because the process of applying to either university is vastly different and has special circumstances attached to it, and I think this may factor into the discussion.

2. Quality of education - because it's a given, firstly, that Oxbridge is great for education, and also, because we're not discussing the merits of going to a 'top education' school vs a supposedly 'lesser' one. (And anyway quality of education is the first thing that occurs to people when applying anyway - I believe the other factors are more worthy of discussion because they may tread ground people don't always cover themselves)

That's all I got for now. Can we get back on track? Thanks :)

[Young]

It is not about branding, it is about substance.
Let's take some specific cases, if you are really good in math and decided to go to Harvard, there are multiple level of courses for the freshman, including Math 55.

That's not Harvard-exclusive. In most universities, if you're adept enough you and if you can prove it, you're more than free to skip introductory classes. I have a handful of friends skipping many core requirements during the first year of medical school because they've demonstrated their aptitude, and they went on to take other higher level/breadth subjects.

In Caltech, the professor to student ratio is 1:3, there is plenty of opportunity to take part in undergraduate research during summer and through out the year in campus or JPL. You are working directly with the professors and graduate students and have a section of the project to yourself. You see how the masters work, brain storm with them, after some time you may find that some of your ideas are not that stupid after all, those well known professors make mistakes too, but they have a way to sort out some of those pretty fast. They also have exceptional ability to stick to their ideas and follow them through. Eventhough you may be an undergraduate, you are treated as an equal partner when they brain storm ideas.Again, this is not elite-institution exclusive. Any mid tier university or higher will provide these opportunities. I spent a considerable length of time prowling around USM's engineering campus (my mom lectured there for 15 years) and I can assure you the same opportunities are present; the local students work in tandem with their professors and collaborate on projects at the undergraduate level. The same goes with any decent university.

There are good candidates from lesser known universities too, but if I look for engineers to design integrated circuits and coding problems, the choices are really limited. I disagree. A great engineer is a great engineer, regardless of which institution he/she graduated from. If I am not mistaken, unless you're looking for highly technical and specialised graduates (in which case you might as well hunt for graduate/PhD students in the first place), I think there is a stronger correlation between performance in university than the actual university attended. Case in point, Intel Malaysia hires a very diverse brood of graduates who performed well university instead of nitpicking graduates from select institutions, and you don't see Intel faffing around in terms of output and productivity.

Besides, why are we even arguing from a purely engineering perspective anyway? Isn't that kind of... myopic?

Also, we should REALLY get back on topic. Sorry about the massive digression.

[frankchong]

Hi Young,
I am glad to learn that you get much more flexibility in many universities now than what used to be. I also had experience with some lecturers/professors that were not really experts in their field, making a complicated subject more complicated than it already was. Sometimes, an expert working in the field can explain a phenomena in very simple terms, where you can find papers on the same subject with complicated derivations that most people get lost/give up on the subject matter.
Even I had experience in Singapore, that was a long time ago, most of my career are in R&D and product/Technology development, in these areas we often have to solve problems people encounter for the first time (especially in leading technology products), the number of engineers working in a project can range from one part time to a few thousand. In some of these large projects, we ofter have a few problems that most people can not solve. This is where we need rare talent. It is also why in technology companies like IBM, Apple ... have fellows or equivalent job titles. These are people just below the CEO in rank, but usually do not have administrative responsibility, so that they can concentrate on technical issues. Some of them are given budget to do whatever the see fit.
In hiring, besides academics, we look at the candidates' interest and aspiration, there are many cases (especially in Silicon Valley) of people having limitted formal education performing better than graduate from top universities. So, hiring is not all about paper qualification, it is much more. I personally had to go through piles of resume to fish out those candidates, but it was time consuming. But, I want to say this, those of you have the chance to have good formal education, more is given to you and more is expected.
What I am having a lot of pain over in seeing what is happening in Malaysia, knowing more or less what is happening in Singapore, have direct esperience in USA, I see the feeding system working in USA, Singapore and China working, but it is poorly done in Malaysia. We have a lot talent wasted (not fully developed), only the brightest/most motivated, lucky figure out how to do well inspite of the system. If we properly nurture them, how much better we could be?
I am fortunate enough to have chance to meet or have dinner together with some presidents and professor of some of these universities to share some of the thought and problems/opportunities. Hope sharing some of these thought can be useful for someone out there too.

regards,
Frank

[henry_yew]

Frankly, I think we have covered quite a bit of issues on why you wouldn't want to go to Oxbridge, although the reasons are quite general (i.e. money matters, family, location, etc.) instead of specific ones against Oxbridge (i.e. what's in Oxbridge that you specifically don't like and that you can avoid experiencing that in other universities). True, I concede that the latter type of reasons are far from even being touched, and unless students experience themselves what it is like to be in Oxford or Cambridge, it's difficult for them to identify with certainty on the specific factors that would turn them away from Oxbridge.

Clearly, the mention of US universities have irked many who are reading this. I admit I have freely used lots of US institutions as my examples. Let me include a disclaimer: they're just general examples. You can replace all the names (but one) of the US institutions with those of the UK if you wish, e.g. University of Edinburgh, Imperial College London, University of Nottingham, Aberystwyth University, etc. etc. I'm just trying to say that my explanations are just on general terms. I'm not taking any sides with any party, but some of the points have been of interest to me.

And, OK, great to see that there's a popular call for the return towards the main issue at hand. So, what are the specific reasons that you wouldn't want to go for Oxbridge (and I would presume that because of such reasons you would opt for other universities, in the UK if you like)?

I disagree. A great engineer is a great engineer, regardless of which institution he/she graduated from.

Besides, why are we even arguing from a purely engineering perspective anyway? Isn't that kind of... myopic?


Yes, a great engineer is a great engineer regardless of the institution that they graduated from.

And yes, myopic indeed, but even I can't say much about things from a doctor's perspective - I'm just not in your shoes.

And we're returning to "the UK".

[Nicholas92]

Frankly, I think we have covered quite a bit of issues on why you wouldn't want to go to Oxbridge, although the reasons are quite general (i.e. money matters, family, location, etc.) instead of specific ones against Oxbridge (i.e. what's in Oxbridge that you specifically don't like and that you can avoid experiencing that in other universities). True, I concede that the latter type of reasons are far from even being touched, and unless students experience themselves what it is like to be in Oxford or Cambridge, it's difficult for them to identify with certainty on the specific factors that would turn them away from Oxbridge.

Clearly, the mention of US universities have irked many who are reading this. I admit I have freely used lots of US institutions as my examples. Let me include a disclaimer: they're just general examples. You can replace all the names (but one) of the US institutions with those of the UK if you wish, e.g. University of Edinburgh, Imperial College London, University of Nottingham, Aberystwyth University, etc. etc. I'm just trying to say that my explanations are just on general terms. I'm not taking any sides with any party, but some of the points have been of interest to me.

And, OK, great to see that there's a popular call for the return towards the main issue at hand. So, what are the specific reasons that you wouldn't want to go for Oxbridge (and I would presume that because of such reasons you would opt for other universities, in the UK if you like)?


Actually, I didn't really mind the US examples too much because I could see the points you were trying to make, and on the whole it was pretty relevant actually. But I figured it'd be better to try and limit it so the discussion doesn't devolve to debating specific US universities and their individual peculiarities. So we need not necessarily forget mentioning the US, but...just can't let it get out of hand I suppose.

My reasons? For one, I was less inclined to apply because my own personal assessment of myself tells me that I don't have a particularly high chance of getting in. Though, I believe that that in itself is not necessarily a problem, and that you don't necessarily lose anything by just applying anyway (barring certain other conditions of course, such as people applying for medicine where more consideration is needed).

Other than that, when I think about location...I actually really like the town-style locations of Oxford and Cambridge - less city and a bit more countryside also sit well with me. But when I think about it...I came to the conclusion that city life, as hectic as it may be, might just appeal a bit more to me in the end - not knowing for sure as I've never lived in a place like Oxford for an extended period of time, my best guess is while I like the place, I may not fancy spending most of the year there. Living in Singapore the past 2 years has also shown me that contrary to what I initially thought, living in the city (or nearby) isn't really bad - it's nice to have most things around and stuff to do as well. I guess KL has always made something of a bad impression on me :P

Lastly it's just that I'm not crazy about the academic rigour of Oxbridge (don't judge me! Haha). After doing 2 years in Singapore, I'm not exactly keen on trying to compete with students even better than the average Singaporean...yes I admit it's a little chicken, but I'm just choosing to recognise that it's just not my style of learning and excelling, and I don't think anything's wrong with that. To relate this to me current situation, Singapore has lots of nice things to do and places to go, but I never quite made full use of this because I was pretty bogged down by studies. And while people do have lives at Oxbridge, these are people who probably will handle the work better than I do.

[henry_yew]

My reasons? For one, I was less inclined to apply because my own personal assessment of myself tells me that I don't have a particularly high chance of getting in. Though, I believe that that in itself is not necessarily a problem, and that you don't necessarily lose anything by just applying anyway (barring certain other conditions of course, such as people applying for medicine where more consideration is needed).

Other than that, when I think about location...I actually really like the town-style locations of Oxford and Cambridge - less city and a bit more countryside also sit well with me. But when I think about it...I came to the conclusion that city life, as hectic as it may be, might just appeal a bit more to me in the end - not knowing for sure as I've never lived in a place like Oxford for an extended period of time, my best guess is while I like the place, I may not fancy spending most of the year there. Living in Singapore the past 2 years has also shown me that contrary to what I initially thought, living in the city (or nearby) isn't really bad - it's nice to have most things around and stuff to do as well. I guess KL has always made something of a bad impression on me :P

Lastly it's just that I'm not crazy about the academic rigour of Oxbridge (don't judge me! Haha). After doing 2 years in Singapore, I'm not exactly keen on trying to compete with students even better than the average Singaporean...yes I admit it's a little chicken, but I'm just choosing to recognise that it's just not my style of learning and excelling, and I don't think anything's wrong with that. To relate this to me current situation, Singapore has lots of nice things to do and places to go, but I never quite made full use of this because I was pretty bogged down by studies. And while people do have lives at Oxbridge, these are people who probably will handle the work better than I do.

Well, it may be true that chances are that you may not be offered a placement in Oxbridge, but chances are also that you might be what they want, too. If one feels that he wants to apply for Oxbridge, by all means they could do so - I see no harm in doing that. But if and when an offer of admissions is given to you, it's time to rejoice and to decide whether to go for it. In a way, I think it's easier for one to say, "Nah, I'm not going to apply to Oxbridge because of this reason and that," than, "Nah, even though I've been given an offer of admissions, I've decided against going for Oxbridge." When the opportunity comes knocking at your door, you will be quite torn apart between "go" or "don't go".

Generally, quite a lot of people love to be in the city because that's where the so-called "civilization" is. But smaller towns may have their own attractions and events that make them unique, and after a while of travelling from Oxford/Cambridge to London, you may not want to go there anymore (personal experience in Malaysia - LOL - but of course not necessarily applicable to all).

I'm not aware about whether being an Oxbridge student means working twice or thrice as hard as any other university student in the UK, but what I do know is that no matter in what university you are enrolled in, you still have to work hard to get a degree with first or second class honours. I believe that to claim otherwise is a lie.

[Nicholas92]

Well, it may be true that chances are that you may not be offered a placement in Oxbridge, but chances are also that you might be what they want, too. If one feels that he wants to apply for Oxbridge, by all means they could do so - I see no harm in doing that. But if and when an offer of admissions is given to you, it's time to rejoice and to decide whether to go for it. In a way, I think it's easier for one to say, "Nah, I'm not going to apply to Oxbridge because of this reason and that," than, "Nah, even though I've been given an offer of admissions, I've decided against going for Oxbridge." When the opportunity comes knocking at your door, you will be quite torn apart between "go" or "don't go".

Generally, quite a lot of people love to be in the city because that's where the so-called "civilization" is. But smaller towns may have their own attractions and events that make them unique, and after a while of travelling from Oxford/Cambridge to London, you may not want to go there anymore (personal experience in Malaysia - LOL - but of course not necessarily applicable to all).

I'm not aware about whether being an Oxbridge student means working twice or thrice as hard as any other university student in the UK, but what I do know is that no matter in what university you are enrolled in, you still have to work hard to get a degree with first or second class honours. I believe that to claim otherwise is a lie.

That's part of it as well, actually - if I did get an offer, it'd be a more difficult decision at that stage (and what parent is going to let you pass on Oxbridge once you've got an offer...lol)

Oh don't get me wrong, I'm not afraid of working hard, and I definitely recognise that just about anywhere else I'll go, an undergraduate degree is going to mean work. (Esp if I'm aiming for first class, like you said) So I'm not holding out for an easier life, just one that suits what I perceive to be my threshold of work better - as for whether Oxbridge really is harder, from what people have said I believe it is, in certain respects at the very least.

[henry_yew]

Oh don't get me wrong, I'm not afraid of working hard, and I definitely recognise that just about anywhere else I'll go, an undergraduate degree is going to mean work. (Esp if I'm aiming for first class, like you said) So I'm not holding out for an easier life, just one that suits what I perceive to be my threshold of work better - as for whether Oxbridge really is harder, from what people have said I believe it is, in certain respects at the very least.

I'm curious - in what respects?

Well, just because you're going for a university which you perceive to be "easier" does not really mean that you're opting for an easier life. We recognize that different people have different capacity or capabilities when it comes to the amount of work that can be handled. So, fair enough, if one believes that the kind of life in Oxbridge is too difficult for that student, then they would want to opt out of Oxbridge.

Then again, don't they have stuff like transferring to another university? If you find, after a semester or so, that Oxbridge life is too taxing or difficult for you, isn't transfer an option?

[Nicholas92]

I'm curious - in what respects?

Well, just because you're going for a university which you perceive to be "easier" does not really mean that you're opting for an easier life. We recognize that different people have different capacity or capabilities when it comes to the amount of work that can be handled. So, fair enough, if one believes that the kind of life in Oxbridge is too difficult for that student, then they would want to opt out of Oxbridge.

Then again, don't they have stuff like transferring to another university? If you find, after a semester or so, that Oxbridge life is too taxing or difficult for you, isn't transfer an option?

As to that, admittedly I have little to no knowledge about how the process of transferring occurs. In any case it's something I'd rather avoid, and whether right or not, it'll definitely become a sticky point of argument with my parents. Save myself the trouble by going elsewhere, and besides, I think I'd be happier if I could study in London anyway :)

[Sillyboy]

As to that, admittedly I have little to no knowledge about how the process of transferring occurs. In any case it's something I'd rather avoid, and whether right or not, it'll definitely become a sticky point of argument with my parents. Save myself the trouble by going elsewhere, and besides, I think I'd be happier if I could study in London anyway :)

Unfortunately transferring to another university just after a term is not at all a common practice. Either you leave the course or switch to another one come the next academic year. The system is quite rigid I am afraid!