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

kelloggs36

And it comes down to the fact that headline income doesn't equate to ability to contribute, so said student has to work and/or apply for hardship grant to get by.

durhampoker99

The_One_Who wrote: »

I'm still waiting to know why Oxbridge will let in a Teeside graduate onto a postgraduate course if it is so bad. Getting a first from a not brilliant university is an achievement. The number of firsts awarded are few and the contact time with lecturers probably even less. Obviously getting one-to-one tutorials with leading professors is going to help!

DP99 unfortunately seems to be playing up to the stereotype of Oxbridge undergrads.

Of course you can get onto a post-grad course from anywhere, they take the people who have performed best at uni and outside of it...doesn't change the fact that if you get a first from Oxford you are nigh-on guarenteed a post-graduate place, not the same being at Teeside.

The only opinions I've expressed as to other unis' work are those that I have heard first-hand from them. You're living in a different world if you think most students put the amount of effort in Kellogg seems to is normal. Of course you CAN work hard anywhere you go, but at Oxford you HAVE to. I know this from my friends elsewhere and what they are able to get away with. Maybe I have a bad attitude to work...but then so do most students. In order to get by at Oxford I have to work 40 hours a week, that's simply not the case elsewhere.

If you think Oxbridge is biased, then help encourage more state school students to give it a go!

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!

How do I win?!

This whole thing is getting fairly ridiculous. I don't really understand why you're quite so hostile with me and my Oxford education. Maybe you're bitter, you think you deserve it more than me? Just out of interest...why didn't you apply?

kelloggs36

durhampoker99 wrote: »

Of course you can get onto a post-grad course from anywhere, they take the people who have performed best at uni and outside of it...doesn't change the fact that if you get a first from Oxford you are nigh-on guarenteed a post-graduate place, not the same being at Teeside.

The only opinions I've expressed as to other unis' work are those that I have heard first-hand from them. You're living in a different world if you think most students put the amount of effort in Kellogg seems to is normal. Of course you CAN work hard anywhere you go, but at Oxford you HAVE to. I know this from my friends elsewhere and what they are able to get away with. Maybe I have a bad attitude to work...but then so do most students. In order to get by at Oxford I have to work 40 hours a week, that's simply not the case elsewhere.

Working 40 hours per week AND going to uni 4 days per week is totally unfeasible.



[/color]

How do I win?!

This whole thing is getting fairly ridiculous. I don't really understand why you're quite so hostile with me and my Oxford education. Maybe you're bitter, you think you deserve it more than me? Just out of interest...why didn't you apply?
[/color]

Who are you aiming this question at? You are contradicting yourself. On one hand anybody could go to Oxbridge, but on the other, in order to survive the expense, you have to work 40 hours per week. That would burn somebody out in a very short space of time and is totally unrealistic. Maybe knowing the cost puts people off, as well as the stereotype image (which you doing a good job of upholding), and for us mature students (do they cater for them I wonder - I genuinely don't know) it is not practical.

durhampoker99

kelloggs36 wrote: »

Who are you aiming this question at? You are contradicting yourself. On one hand anybody could go to Oxbridge, but on the other, in order to survive the expense, you have to work 40 hours per week. That would burn somebody out in a very short space of time and is totally unrealistic. Maybe knowing the cost puts people off, as well as the stereotype image (which you doing a good job of upholding), and for us mature students (do they cater for them I wonder - I genuinely don't know) it is not practical.

I meant work at university...as in study. Apologies for the lack of clarity.

The costs are the same as at any other university (actually cheaper. The university is rich and so can afford to give out a lot of help to the poor - see my 4k bursary - including book grants, bursaries and scholarships, there is also cheaper rent than elsewhere as it's subsidized). Seems to me those who think it "costs more" have done little to no research into it.

Mature students - of course it does. Why wouldn't it?

"Stereotype image". Come on...if people base their university choice on the kind of people they MIGHT encounter on the basis of stereotypes they don't deserve to be at Oxford. It's like me saying I wouldn't go to Leeds because I might encounter classless, uncivilised people. It might be true that I would see them but it's a shocking reason for not going not to mention it being based on a stereotype.

People feel it OK to discriminate and stereotype against those who went to public school and are at Oxbridge, the other way round is unacceptable. From a personal perspective the reverse snobbery I'm seeing here is FAR more common ("I went to a state school and achieved, you got it handed to you"), there's no way our friendship group (dominated by public schoolers) would ever discriminate against anyone on the basis of their background - untrue for a number of state schoolers who wouldn't dream of socialising with us.

melancholly

i'm sorry, what makes you think only one person is hostile towards your posts?! i am, and i am a cambridge scholar?! you are doing more damage than good when talking about the place, and portraying a clear snobbish stereotype that is very offputting for potential students. if you can't even see that, then i hope in 5/10 years time you can look back on this and see how silly you sound.

Oldernotwiser

durhampoker99 wrote: »

there's no way our friendship group (dominated by public schoolers) would ever discriminate against anyone on the basis of their background - untrue for a number of state schoolers who wouldn't dream of socialising with us.

That says it all so much better than I ever could! How can you not see this?

The_One_Who

durhampoker99 wrote: »

Of course you can get onto a post-grad course from anywhere, they take the people who have performed best at uni and outside of it...doesn't change the fact that if you get a first from Oxford you are nigh-on guarenteed a post-graduate place, not the same being at Teeside.

This whole thing is getting fairly ridiculous. I don't really understand why you're quite so hostile with me and my Oxford education. Maybe you're bitter, you think you deserve it more than me? Just out of interest...why didn't you apply?

So if Teeside is absolutely terrible then the students from there shouldn't really be getting onto an Oxbridge Masters course alongside those from Oxbridge. Do you not see why I'm confused? Both students are expected to be able to do exactly the same thing.

Personally, I am not hostile towards your education, more your attitude. I didn't apply to Oxbridge because I didn't want to. I'm quite happy at Glasgow and knew that I wanted to be taught by some of the best geographers in the country.

durhampoker99

The_One_Who wrote: »

So if Teeside is absolutely terrible then the students from there shouldn't really be getting onto an Oxbridge Masters course alongside those from Oxbridge. Do you not see why I'm confused? Both students are expected to be able to do exactly the same thing.

Personally, I am not hostile towards your education, more your attitude. I didn't apply to Oxbridge because I didn't want to. I'm quite happy at Glasgow and knew that I wanted to be taught by some of the best geographers in the country.

Awesome, I'm happy for you.

Yeah...and if an Oxford prof thinks that they can work to the same level then there's no reason that that person from Teeside university shouldn't be there. It doesn't make the education that they get any better. Why should Oxford care where you did your undergraduate degree so long as they think you're able to perform at a Masters level.

I don't really see your point? If you went to Teeside you can get onto an Oxford masters course...yes, you can. What is that supposed to prove? Don't tell me you're really arguing that all universities are the same. For someone going to Teeside to get onto a Masters course they'd (I'd imagine) have had to really excel both in university and outside of it.

Try to phrase it a little better and I might be able to give you a better answer.

durhampoker99

The_One_Who wrote: »

So if Teeside is absolutely terrible then the students from there shouldn't really be getting onto an Oxbridge Masters course alongside those from Oxbridge. Do you not see why I'm confused? Both students are expected to be able to do exactly the same thing.

Personally, I am not hostile towards your education, more your attitude. I didn't apply to Oxbridge because I didn't want to. I'm quite happy at Glasgow and knew that I wanted to be taught by some of the best geographers in the country.

Just re-read your post...

True...and that's probably the reason there virtually are none. There aren't that great a variety of reasons as to why one might go to Teeside if you were capable of getting a great degree from that uni and then getting onto an Oxford Masters degree:

1) Personal reasons (family, kids etc) - circumstances probably still exist when it came to finishing their degree.
2) Financial issues - don't prevent many from getting an Oxbridge undergad degree
3) Loves Teeside - come on.

Probably the reason that there are (I predict) zero people doing Masters courses at Oxford having come from Teeside. Of course it's possible...just not in many circumstances I can see.

The_One_Who

durhampoker99 wrote: »

Why should Oxford care where you did your undergraduate degree so long as they think you're able to perform at a Masters level.

Why should an employer care where you got your undergrad as long as they think you're able to perform at a satisfactory level?

For someone going to Teeside to get onto a Masters course they'd (I'd imagine) have had to really excel both in university and outside of it.

They have as much chance as the next person as long as they have reached the required grade and have a good personal statement, proposal and references. Work experience is good but that really depends on the course.

Your point seems to be that their education isn't as good. I'm sure they will learn more than just academic skills that can help the students. I personally know someone who went from Brookes to Oxford so it can be done.