how do you live off student loans if it all goes on rent

kelloggs36

But that bars those who didn't even apply to go. I mean, I just got a First, does that not make me equally as good to work for such a company?

silvercar

durhampoker99 wrote: »

Obviously I don't work the exact same number of hours every week, nor do I properly record those hours which I do work...but roughly:

Reading: 25 hours
Writing essays: 7-8 hours
Seminars: 2 hours
Tutorials: 2 hours

So you only actually have to be seen to be in college for 4 hours a week.

melancholly

4 hours!! pah - i had about 30 hours a week timetabled, then essays to do around that. and anyway, even though that seems a lot, it's not all that much compared to people who work in real jobs!! i still found plenty of time for sport, socialising, watching tv etc

ronan1981

kelloggs36 wrote: »

Kellogg...I accept that I do benefit from a sort of self-perpetuating advantage deriving from my Oxford education. Top jobs are historically awarded to those from Oxbridge, who in turn decide who to give the next top jobs to etc.



And that is where society is all wrong - it is still jobs for the boys it seems!!

No offence but what fantasy world do you live in, the days of the top jobs just being handed out to Oxford/Cambridge students are longggggggg gone ... maybe this is the case in London? I'm not sure but I havent heard of this practice ever being carried out.

Northern_girl_2

I have two friends who have graduated this year: One from Baliol, Oxford with a 2.1 and the other from Manchester with a 2.1. The Manchester grad has just moved to London to start his career in consultancy; the Oxford grad has just moved back in with his parents and is claiming JSA. The difference was their attitude to the job market, gaining relevant work experience and the amount of extra curicular 'stuff' they did.

Of course, it could have been the other way round but my point being that there are no certainties no matter which university you choose or get into.

I got a nice first from Newcastle five years ago and am now doing rather better than a number of my friends who went to Oxford or the better London universities.

durhampoker99

silvercar wrote: »

So you only actually have to be seen to be in college for 4 hours a week.

Yup...but it would become obvious within about 5 minutes of any tutorial/seminar if I hadn't done the work. Science subjects are obviously vastly different with lectures they actually need to attend and labs on which they're examined. They follow a much more 9 to 5 routine than us arts subjects. For all the money I (but mostly the government) pay Oxford in tuition fees each year I get the libraries and 4 hours a week, worth every penny though.

Agreed with melancholy, there's still loads of time to throw yourself into anything else you want to do (I'm college ball president, college law society president, rugby captain and play Blues cricket - and I still have time to do OK in work). I'm not saying we have it incredibly hard, I just never seem to have the time people of other unis have to sit around all day and watch Hollyoaks.

Newcastle_Girl, it's definitely true what you say. A first from anywhere will always be seen as at least equal to or better than a 2.1 from Oxford (excluding any old boys bias/network - which, trust me, still exists. Examples can be provided...) and extra-curriculars are massively important - hence why I've loaded up on them!

Aliiyn

As (another!) recent graduate of Oxford, I thought I would just quickly post and share my thoughts on some of the issues brought up on this thread.

1) The admissions systems at Oxford and Cambridge are some of the fairest (if not the fairest) in the UK. Tutors don't give a monkeys about where their students are from-all they care is that the student has the grades, does well in the interview and isn't a complete muppet they will dread teaching. The reason why private schools seem to be over-represented stems from the fact that private schools get a lot more students to apply than state schools! If people constantly whine about how unfair Oxbridge is and how it's filled with toffs then somone from a less privileged background is less likely to apply, and if they don't apply, then they cannot get an offer!

One of my best friends works in admissions and access and he battles constantly against ill-conceived notions of what Oxbridge is like. The best one was when he tried to encourage an extremely bright boy with a very poor background and difficult family situation to apply. When he phoned the school a week before applications closed to find out how he was getting on he was told by the boy's teacher, "Oh we've had a chat and I've helped him realise that Oxford isn't suitable for people like us, so he won't be bothering after all". :mad: If you think Oxbridge is biased, then help encourage more state school students to give it a go!

2) The myth of the "Oxbridge type" is just that; a myth. Yes, there are a few people like Durhambloke but they are very much the minority and get duly laughed at by everyone else. The one thing that Oxbridge people have in common is that they are clever/good at exams/hardworking. That's it!!!

3) People go into all sorts of jobs after getting an Oxbridge degree. What job they go into rarely has anything to do with their parents income or background. Yes, getting a position in the City is a very popular choice, but it is a choice open to everyone, INCLUDING THOSE FROM OTHER UNIS. No one stands at the door of firm presentations or open days or vacation schemes and says "Oh your father isn't a partner of x firm and you don't have OXON or CANTAB after you're name so I'm afraid we can't let you in." Contacts ARE important but anyone can make these by getting off their backside and visiting careers fairs or getting involved in relevant socities.

4) Oxbridge is a very good university. So too is Exeter, Durham, Bristol, Edinburgh, UCL, Imperial etc. It all depends on the course and what you want out of it. For instance, if I wanted to be an Investment Banker then I probably would need something more than a degree in Outdoor Sports Science Management from Bucks Chiltern University College just as if I wanted to go and work for Outwards Bound a degree from Oxbridge wouldn't necessarily get me past the door.

The only caveat I would make here is that it IS harder to get onto a Masters/Dphil at Oxbridge having gone to another instituation, but that is because tutors tend to prioritise the applications of students they already know. This is the standard for many universities and doesn't indicate that a person from x wouldn't be good enough to get on the course in the first place.

I'm sorry if this has gone off topic, but nothing annoys me more than people making stupid statements about what it's like to be at Oxbridge/the type of people who go there and so on. Bottom line: University is what you make it. So what if someone goes to a less "prestigious" university? If they work hard and get involved in societies/ internships /interesting research projects etc they have just as much chance to do well (if not better) than someone who went to Oxbridge and spent all their time sitting in their room getting off on how important and clever they are. Equally, if a person has gone to Oxford, done well, taken part in lots of socities and got a job in the City it doesn't mean that Mummy and Daddy are somewhere in the wings pulling the strings and cashing in favours.

bestpud

durhampoker99 wrote: »

Obviously I don't work the exact same number of hours every week, nor do I properly record those hours which I do work...but roughly:

Reading: 25 hours
Writing essays: 7-8 hours
Seminars: 2 hours
Tutorials: 2 hours

So about 40, it may well be less than many here worked. It's just about enough to get by though.

We do four modules per semester and we are expected to put in 10 hours per module per week, including contact time. The contact time is 2/3 hours per module - so between 8 and 12 hours a week. This is an Arts subject btw!

Kellogg...I accept that I do benefit from a sort of self-perpetuating advantage deriving from my Oxford education. Top jobs are historically awarded to those from Oxbridge, who in turn decide who to give the next top jobs to etc.

As much as you say I have no "understanding of poverty" - probably fair - neither does the man that we are almost certain to elect as our next Prime Minister, nor does the man who has recently been elected Mayor of London. If such a lack of understanding isn't a bar to a career in politics (and it doesn't seem to be) then why should I need one to conduct my own career in my own interests.

I've played the pantomime villain slightly since this discussion shifted away from where it was originally (I assume because I was making too much sense for some people to handle). Personally, I don't really care about how you want to label me. If it makes you feel good to point your finger at me and say "that's what's wrong with Oxbridge", then feel free to do so. It's probably fair, there are a lot of people to whom I'd do the same. What this does show is the instant prejudice Oxbridge students experience, melancholy may or may not agree. It doesn't take much for me to be labeled (not just by you) as arrogant and "typical", others would get away with a lot more. If that's the price I have to pay for my privileged position so be it, it's one I'd pay three or four times over.

Background about me that might surprise you (but will no doubt be greeted with significant cynicism) is that since joining Oxford I've volunteered probably in excess of 30 of hours of free time to go to 10 or so impoverished north-eastern schools (from where I hail) promoting the Oxford access scheme and on top of that personally helping out many students who expressed an interest in applying but who's schools completely failed in preparing them. At a guess I'd say about 100 hours I've put in and I have 5 or 6 thank you cards sitting fairly proudly in my bedroom. I'm immensely proud of them and I'll continue to invest my time in the project for as long as I have it.

You helped the 'little people' - have a brownie point! :rolleyes:

The lecturer I was talking about did all sorts to help the little person too but only later realised how patronising and, frankly, ignorant he was at the time!

If you think I'm a "typical privileged public school boy at Oxford" then I'd urge you to come and spend a day at one of the colleges. You'd be shocked. The stereotype exists, for sure, just not in me.

Have a read back through your posts...

bestpud

durhampoker99 wrote: »

Well...

It seems in the 12 hours or so after my last post I've been barraged with abuse over my background and university choice. Maybe I'm wrong and all my friends at other (very good) universities have been flat out lying to me when they've told me how little work they get away with doing and quite how easy what they do is. Maybe...but I doubt it.

I actually think the truth lies here...that whereas at Oxford/Cambridge there is no way of getting around doing the levels of work I do (trust me - I would have found them otherwise) at other unis there are. Not turning up to lectures and even contact time, according to my friends, are not huge deals.

Why do you have to be coerced into studying?

Whilst it is encouraging to hear bestpud talk of face-to-face contact with his lecturer even he makes it out as though that's a rarity (probably caused by his tutor having experienced the benefits of Oxford tutorials) and is only possible because of his own initiative. Is that a fair assumption?

Erm, no. As I said, it is encouraged by every lecturer. Stressed that it is on offer in fact!

I do take the intiative and use what is on offer, yes. Many of us do.

At my uni we are encouraged to be independent learners and take responsibility for our success.

On the other hand we HAVE to turn up to 2 tutorials a week and discuss our reading one-on-one for an hour at a time.

I don't need to be forced into tutorials! I went to uni to study and enjoy talking to lecturers. I take it you see this as a chore?

However, we have an attendance policy in place for seminars and students who fail to turn up without good reason fail the module. So, one could argue we HAVE to attend for 8 hours a week at least! The above mentioned tutorials are in addition to this. Our semesters are 13 weeks long too, I might add!

Please don't tell me this is anything like comparable to what you get elsewhere, otherwise the entire Oxbridge ethos has been recreated at a fraction of a price at other places and I should have gone there.

Well, if people only attend them because they have to, I'd say it is questionable how good a system it is actually!

If that attitude has come across it's unintentional. Maybe I have it without knowing. Either way, I'm not sure I care. If you really think a "snotty attitude" is a restrictive factor in city careers then you really are still living in ivory-towered cuckoo land. Anyway, it's not been a bar to Booze Allen offering me a full time place to start in 2010 (I'm not attempting to boast, I don't need to prove myself to you lot, I'm just pointing out how wrong you are either on this "attitude" I apparently have or whether it practically impacts on careers).

Believe me, you come across badly! If it isn't intentional, this is maybe something you need to work on? We are encouraged to be reflexive at my uni too!

None of us have time to do everything we want to - no matter where we go!

Some of us, however, juggle HE with family, voluntary and paid work, and still manage to turn up without being forced - because we like what we do and feel it is a worthwhile investment.

We go to local unis as we don't have the option of moving away and we give up any social life as we simply don't have enough hours in the day. Many of us spend a good portion of the day traveling too.

We work hard and we graduate with a degree PLUS lots of life experience and many skills you have not even begun to think of yet!

Perhaps that is an alien concept to you but believe me, there is lots like me out there. One day you may realise being an Oxbridge grad is but one accomplishment in life!

Thankfully, I believe the people on here who assure us you are in the minority!

bestpud

durhampoker99 wrote: »

Yup...but it would become obvious within about 5 minutes of any tutorial/seminar if I hadn't done the work. Hmm, that is the case on my course too... :rolleyes:

I'm not saying we have it incredibly hard, I just never seem to have the time people of other unis have to sit around all day and watch Hollyoaks.

If that attitude has come across it's unintentional. Maybe I have it without knowing. Either way, I'm not sure I care.

Do you need me to explain further...?