Talk:Oxbridge rivalry
|
|
| Contents |
LSE references
Do the strong London School of Economics references strike anyone else as slightly odd? I thought I might consolodate them a little unless anyone objects strongly --NeilRickards 22:09, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
- I think someone at the LSE made those edits. There wasn't even any mention of other universities in this article a few weeks ago.
Relative age a factor?
I'm a little unsure about the line in the second paragraph:
- "Oxford is the older of the two (and some equate this with more prestigious)"
People have different opinions on Oxford and Cambridge, but im not sure many would consider Oxford's greater age as a major factor...
I'd be interested to hear opinions on this.
- Age is normally (although not always) linked to prestige. One of Oxford and Cambridge's main boasts is that they are two of the oldest universities in the world, and I suppose Oxford has the slight edge in that it can say it is the oldest in the English-speaking world (having to claim you're second at anything isn't so desirable).
- I live in England, so maybe I'm not too objective, but I've always had the impression that people from other countries see England as a place obsessed with tradition, so they assume our oldest university would naturally be the best.
- Ok, fair point but... I'm also in England, and don't feel that too many lay-people actually can make a distinction between them...I don't believe the main Oxbridge boast is their age (although this is significant). If age were the main thing then people would probably consider the ancient Scottish universities in approximately the same category (as they are all over 500 years old) but this is not so - many newer universities are considered superior. Both universities (Oxbridge) have made huge contributions to academic development and this is what makes them prestigious. The mass of good work on both sides I think cancells the extra 80 years or so that Oxford has.
- Thanks
- The first medical school in Europe was at Aberdeen Uni so there.
- Well, you're certainly right that age isn't the only factor that contributes to prestige. I'll admit I have a Cambridge bias in any case. Most laypeople probably don't distinguish between the two universities.
- I'm afriad I am similarly biased (as you've probably realised), which is why I didn't simply edit the article...anyway, its nice article all in all.
- Heh...thanks. I thought we were pretty subtle about which side we were on.
"Linguistic differences"
Speaking of ... is it true that they're quite insistent on their respective Latin pronunciations esp of the u/v? ie one is adamant on veenee veedee veechee and the other weenie weedy weechy? =) I forget which bit of Britcom I got that from ... 142.177.15.145 03:06, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC)
"Greater literary heritage"
Is it really fair to say that "Oxford has a greater literary heritage" considering that Cambridge alumni include Milton, Byron, Woolf, Plath, Hughes, Wordsworth, Marlowe, Coleridge, Dryden and Salman Rushdie amongst many more? It has always appeared to me that Oxford in fact has the lesser literary heritage. Magicalsausage
- Not to mention Tennyson, Herrick, George Herbert, Marvell... Harry R 00:37, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)
I don't agree with Oxford having the greater literary heritage either, but I have heard many people make the Oxford/Cambridge humanities/science distinction, inaccurate though it may be.
- I dare say Harry R is completely right: the stuff about Oxford having the greater literary heritage is both misleading (no-one really distinguishes them as "the science one" and "the literary one") and entirely wrong. I may just rewrite that bit.
Oxford as a beta of Cambridge
- "Cantabrigians, who insist that Oxford was a beta test for their own university"
I have never heard anyone here at Cambridge mention that. I've also heard people use "the dark side" far more often than "the other place", so good work picking up on that. If you're really trying to keep up with this cutting-edge sociopolitical issue ;-) why not add that the Cambridge equivalent of the Oxford "tab" seems to be "Oxford scum"? I have genuinely heard it used several times and I'm sure someone could fashion something slightly witty out of it perhaps...?
- I've always heard Oxford jokingly referred to as "the other place" (as opposed to "the dark side") for what it's worth. Though the anti-Cambridge sentiment in Oxford seems more pronounced than vice-versa. --NeilRickards 22:09, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
State School Pupils
Is the number of state school pupils disproportionately low? I'm sure I've seen statistics showing that ~50% of students getting wholey 'A' grades are from private schools, and a similar proportion of students at Oxford are from state schools... --NeilTarrant 10:17, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Define "disproportionately" - in relation to what? Pure numbers? Yes. Results? No, if anything it's disproportionately high. Something else - Non-whiteness, richness, living-south-of-Watford-ness? ...
- James F. (talk) 12:45, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Nicknames
"Oxford students nickname their Cambridge counterparts "Tabs", short for Cantabrigians...although the term is meant to be derogatory, it is unclear how this is implied by the word. In turn, Cantabrigians sometimes refer to Oxford as being 'a complete dump'."
Another great passage from the Wiki Wonder Web :-)
State school section
I just removed the part of this paragraph in bold:
- Oxford and Cambridge are both seen by many in Britain as socially elitist, and this reputation has discouraged able students from applying. The two universities have worked together on public relations exercises to dispel their reputation as bastions of snobbery, with the aim of increasing the number of state school-educated students. The results of these efforts is mixed. While the overall numbers of state school pupils has remained roughly constant at about 50%, the number of schools sending pupils to the two universities has increased. Defenders of the two universities would argue that this situation is more of a reflection on, firstly, the failings of the state education system, and secondly, prejudice against applying to Oxbridge on the part of some potential students and their parents and teachers, which is created largely by the very people who decry its alleged exclusivity, than on any lack of effort to recruit students from all backgrounds on their own part. Students from state schools almost never report any problems with elitism once they are at Oxbridge.
First, it's not clear what "this situation" refers to, as the previous sentence says that more schools are sending students to Oxbridge. Secondly, it sounds very personal. Can references be provided for any of it? SlimVirgin 05:24, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)
Oxbridge relationship to Ivy League and reputation in US
It seems to me that there's far too much discussion on which university is more significant in American culture in the opening of the article. The discussion comprises three lines, as much as the rest of the introduction put together; it is debatable whether that much contemplation is merited in the article at any point. I shan't edit it yet in case someone has something important to say about this, but will do something if there is no comment. Hardwick 15:48, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I moved the section lower. I'm not sure do we need it at all, but it's not like it's doing any damage. I guess. Hardwick 10:55, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
- I agree that American perception of Oxbridge has no use in the lead of this article: these are British schools after all. However, the use of the term to describe a certain person connected with these universities has do to with reputation, prestige and educational excellence, and a direct comparison with European or American terms might be useful. Ivy League or Ivy Leaguer, though a loose association, probably is a similar term in U.S. For 250,000,000 Americans, the 60,000 (?) undergraduates at Harvard and Dartmouth and Princeton and Yale etc are part of a reputational elite not matched worldwide except by those from Oxbridge and other high-status colleges on each continent. Further, if this thread is continued, a structural comparison of the universities might be useful: Princeton, for example, is very uniform and has a single, medium sized undergraduate "college", whereas Oxford is a holding company for dozens of unique undergraduate "colleges". In that sense, the two "holding pen universities" of Oxbridge probably bear more than a little comparison to the "loose association of colleges" known as the Ivy League (Ivy Leaguer, Ivy League graduate). True, some Ivies (Princeton, Dartmouth, Yale) are more famous for undergraduate educations than others whereas the same is true for Oxbridges constituent colleges; mostly, however, the Ivy and Oxbridge comparison holds and is useful to our readers. I for one would like a European or Asian to help me "qualify and quantify" educational excellence and prestige for those continents. - Anonymous Kramned Americanus, May 2005