Oxford University rejects applicant based on his financial situation.

[Hibbosculturedrightboot]

Yeh Wolverhampton is a bit extreme, Oxford v Manchester is a better comparison.

Not sure what you are getting at? Are you comparing Manchester to Dunlops? Should I have gone Wolverhapton = LA Cal? I can see how that may work better...

 

[Hibbosculturedrightboot]

Yeh Wolverhampton is a bit extreme, Oxford v Manchester is a better comparison.

On a serious note, no. Because the point I was trying to illustrate is that certain universities focus upon research above hands on teaching. Manchester are one of the 'elite' Russell group of universities which are Research intensive. I have friends who attended there who suggest they were short changed in terms of teaching due to academics focus upon research. Wolverhampton conversely focuses upon teaching and this is what it sells itself on. As a result of how league tables are rated, they come bottom. Thus, how are we judging the quality of a uni? By what it focuses on providing? Probably not? By an ill fitting universally applied criteria? Arguably yes.

Rant over. I need a herring and a lie down.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

On a serious note, no. Because the point I was trying to illustrate is that certain universities focus upon research above hands on teaching. Manchester are one of the 'elite' Russell group of universities which are Research intensive. I have friends who attended there who suggest they were short changed in terms of teaching due to academics focus upon research. Wolverhampton conversely focuses upon teaching and this is what it sells itself on. As a result of how league tables are rated, they come bottom. Thus, how are we judging the quality of a uni? By what it focuses on providing? Probably not? By an ill fitting universally applied criteria? Arguably yes.

Rant over. I need a herring and a lie down.

Universities aren't valued because of the knowledge you gain from being there. They're valuable for the reputation they bestow upon you in later life, they're valuable for the criteria they set to let you in, and they're valuable for the contacts you make whilst you're there.

So yeah, Oxford will always be better than Wolverhampton because 9/10 a recruiter will look at a CV with an Oxford grad on it and think they're pretty smart, whereas with a Wolverhampton grad that probably isn't the case.

We can argue that this is wrong, but in this case perception is reality. It'd be pretty sad if by the time you're 30 you're still using things you learnt as a 21 year old, so most folks will learn way more in adult life than they will at uni, yet the school you went to is still important for recruiters, and it's not because of the knowledge you gained whilst there but more the indication that you can learn things.

I mean these days you can go on Coursera or somewhere and learn an awful lot for nothing at all, yet still people spend thousands for a degree. Uni isn't about knowing stuff, it's about proving to strangers you know stuff.

 

[bluejock]

Distance learning lad, distance learning. You could live in Cannock and do your masters from Wolves.... Better, no?

The deer on Cannock Chase are brilliant.

 

[EFCNIK]

Did you know that even Leeds Met looks down on the uni of Liverpool?

 

[evilwebby]

Lolz, the Oxbridge application process have always been one of extreme discrimination - you can't apply to both Universities, you must apply earlier than other universities, unconditional offers ("EE") for students they really like vs conditional AAAA offers for others etc etc (at least that's how it was when I was looking at uni application 17 years ago).

 

[evilwebby]

The most successful have traditionally trodden their own path..
Steve Jobs and Bill Gates were both uni dropouts, so there's hope for all of us.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

The most successful have traditionally trodden their own path..
Steve Jobs and Bill Gates were both uni dropouts, so there's hope for all of us.

And yet despite not finishing, guys like Gates and Page/Brin were still smart enough to be accepted into Ivy League schools. That's probably more important than actually finishing isn't it?

 

[evilwebby]

And yet despite not finishing, guys like Gates and Page/Brin were still smart enough to be accepted into Ivy League schools. That's probably more important than actually finishing isn't it?

I'm not suggesting that you don't need ability. I'm inferring that college doesn't make you bright/successful. It may well be that the regimented structure of college is antagonistic to nurturing the innate entrepreneural abilities of the best wealth creators.
The likes of Gates/Jobs could probably have slept through college and graduated with honours and had very cushty career and still been very well off, but they were more interested in something high-risk, but potentially infinitely more rewarding too.

 

[steken1]

£13K for accomodation? You'd want breakfast in bed for that FFS!

But yeah, I agree. Snobs.

I'd want the cleaner to suck me off every morning for that!!!

and some naked pics of his wife!

 

[steken1]

Surely if you pay your tutor fees you can be homeless for all they care?

On a side note, my cousin's going to Oxford in September. I fully expect to hate her and her posh Southern ways within a year.

While simultaneously trying every trick in the book to knob her posh talking mates whenever they come up.

 

[Hibbosculturedrightboot]

Universities aren't valued because of the knowledge you gain from being there. They're valuable for the reputation they bestow upon you in later life, they're valuable for the criteria they set to let you in, and they're valuable for the contacts you make whilst you're there.

So yeah, Oxford will always be better than Wolverhampton because 9/10 a recruiter will look at a CV with an Oxford grad on it and think they're pretty smart, whereas with a Wolverhampton grad that probably isn't the case.

We can argue that this is wrong, but in this case perception is reality. It'd be pretty sad if by the time you're 30 you're still using things you learnt as a 21 year old, so most folks will learn way more in adult life than they will at uni, yet the school you went to is still important for recruiters, and it's not because of the knowledge you gained whilst there but more the indication that you can learn things.

I mean these days you can go on Coursera or somewhere and learn an awful lot for nothing at all, yet still people spend thousands for a degree. Uni isn't about knowing stuff, it's about proving to strangers you know stuff.

Indeed, networking, making contacts, getting in with the right sorts (or keeping the opportunities within existing networks in the case of oxbridge). But going back to the original story, I think the lad would meet some interesting and useful contacts at Wolves Uni. If anyone messed with him I suspect he would easily arrange for them to be found buried neck deep in a remote part of Cannock Chase. That is a life skill in anyones book.

 

[Hibbosculturedrightboot]

The deer on Cannock Chase are brilliant.

That is because they graze on the bodies of people who have wronged alumni of Wolves uni (see my previous post). It makes them healthy, strong and smart.

 

[Rook]

You tuition rates for schools are still dirt cheap compared to the States. State funded schools (which the state chips in the funding if you live in said state) cost anywhere from $12-20000/yr for just tuition (only about 10 years ago state schools were 1/2 that price).

Any ****e private school (private school doesn't mean good school either) now runs anywhere from $32-55K/year.