> On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 12:36:17 +0000 (UTC), Uncle Davey wrote:
> [SNIP]
> > The Masters degree is given for graduates of Oxbridge to reflect the
> > superiority of the study for a normal BA at Oxbridge over the BA at any
> > other University.
>
> I think that graduates of a number of other Universities, eg Durham etc.
> would disagree. Some Scottish 4 year degrees also give an MA, by the way,
> but they get that when they graduate instead of a BA, unlike the situation
> at Oxford and Cambridge where they have to wait.
>
> It may well be that there are courses at Oxford and Cambridge that are the
> best in the UK. I am equally sure that there are subjects in which there
> are better places to go than Oxford or Cambridge. I think you are
> generalising too much.
>
> In addition, you're wrong about the reason for giving the MA to Oxford and
> Cambridge graduates. Its primary purpose is to make them full members of
> the University. During a discussion a few years ago about abolishing
them,
> the president of Magdalen College referred to them as simply an
> 'organisational tool'. They are required for voting in convocation, which
> is why in the past they were also sometimes given to Oxbridge staff.
>
> You
>
All I can say about that is the reasons given to me.
I don't deny that some schools can be better than Oxbridge.
If you want to learn Bantu, don't go to Oxford or Cambridge, go to SOAS.
If you want to do a degree in accountancy, forget about Oxbridge. Go to any
redbrick, or even polyversity.
If you want an MBA, apparently Cambridge has a really good one now. It was
my old tutor, Jeff Warren, who came in from industry and set it up.
But if I were gonna do an MBA, I would be really tempted to do Ashridge.
I could be at me Mam and Dad's for dinner every day. *smacking lips*
Uncle Davey
|
|