HYP and Oxbridge: Are students taught differently?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Not for STEM. Also, Cambridge still requires 5 5s on APs. But these all AP and test score requirements are pretty low for the UK. A low floor, indeed. My kid's high school didn't offer APs, which is pretty typical for privates now, and about a third of the class sits for APs anyway to maybe get credit or placement - in a "can't hurt" kind of way - and most end up with 5-9 5s. (The whole AP thing is a bit of a racket, right? It's only in back half of senior year that you know if any of these scores are useful or not.) |
Anonymous
Yes, definitely for STEM; if you take into account how HYPS does account for major (without admitting it), STEM at Cambridge (though a very difficult admit, to be sure) is a far easier admit than a STEM kid at Stanford… Look at it this way: 1/13 Computer Science applicants at Cambridge are admitted (8%). What do you think the admissions rate is for CS at HYPSM? Is it even 2%? Natural sciences? Please. 1/4 applicants at Cambridge are admitted. What’s worse is that the curriculum at Cambridge is set in stone. An American CS whiz will learn nothing the entire first year, taking the equivalent of remedial courses (for them). The philosophy is everyone in the same boat from the start and all will be good eventually. It is a very European — and non- American — attitude. |
Anonymous
There are no restrictions in the US on who can apply to Harvard. There are plenty of restrictions in the UK on who can apply to Ox or Cambs. The school has to give permission and its normally a very small handful of candidates each year. So its a self selecting group already of highly qualified students. Your numbers are meaningless when you don't have this information. |
Anonymous
+1. Oxbridge is too self (and system) selecting to be compared by numbers to the US system. Anyone who says otherwise doesnt know what the are talking about. And, yes, I'm in a position to personally compare the Harvard and Oxford application system and success rate |
Anonymous
|
Harvard uses the Harvard comma.
Oxford uses the Oxford comma. |
Anonymous
And US students have to waste 1/4 of their courses in Gen Ed / distribution requirements. |
Anonymous
No- they just call it year 13. They call kindergarten year 1. |
Anonymous
|
Anonymous
No. Oxford is a tougher admit according to Crimson Education: 'According to these acceptance numbers, Cambridge appears to be the easier to get accepted. However, you still need to be at the top of your class and prove that you have mastered the subject in which you wish to get a degree. If you come from the US, your test scores need to be incredible.May 23, 2023" |
Anonymous
| you don't have to do anything "according to Crimson Education". these schools publish their stats by major. I wish US schools did. |
Anonymous
Wrong. In the US kids start K aged 5 (sometimes close to 6) and in England they ALL start school aged 4, if the kid turns 4 in January, that is when they start school, January. They are all reading by the end of the year, having started at 4. Its a vastly superior education from start to finish. |
Anonymous
There are no school restrictions, anywhere, on Oxbridge apps, other than an applicant meeting the minimum requirements. And the percentage of UK kids with the requisite A-levels is very high. Anyhow, love to see a cite about these mysterious “gatekeeper” restrictions you are referring to instead of this gobbledygook. Anyhow, 1/3 of Oxbridge apps aren’t even from the UK. To say the least, it is far easier for a UK kid to get into Oxbridge (or even a Chinese, Indian, or American kid) than it is for any of those groups to get into Harvard. By such an order of magnitude in terms of raw numbers (4-20x easier, in fact), than even a 2-3x adjustment in your favor gets you nowhere where. It is not even close. But go ahead, believe Oxbridge is as selective as HYPS. Or even Emory. The admissions stats are there to see, at Oxford and Cambridge, for every course of study. Numbers are stubborn things. |
Anonymous
Those distribution requirements (because we had lots of leeway in the kinds of courses that checked the box) significantly enhanced and enriched my HYP undergraduate experience. It's only a "waste" for those who lack the curiosity or love of learning outside their area(s) of focus. |
Anonymous
Nobody is saying it is a straight comparison. But if you don’t think Harvard is a far easier admit, the extent of your strangely-professed Harvard “affiliation,” on an anonymous message board no less, is that you have been to Harvard Square. As for the “self-selecting” argument, top UK students are far more likely to apply to Oxbridge than a top student in America is to apply to HYPS as an SCEA not even close. Why? SCEA schools are so hard to get in, a top student is better off applying ED to, say, Dartmouth. Almost every top UK student applies to either Oxford or Cambridge as one of their 5 UCAS choices. In other words, Harvard is, by definition, more self-selecting than is Oxford. |
Anonymous
|
There's a trade-off between breadth and depth, obviously. Here's an interesting article comparing Yale and Oxford:
https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2010/04/23/whats-better-oxfords-depth-or-yales-breadth/ |