BF2S Forums Which University?

Poseidon wrote:

I just don't care to read yours because if ANYONE of both of us is predictable, it's you. Which is ironic considering you're the one who claims I'm the predictable one, but if there's one thing anyone can predict from a post from you - it's a long ass post that nobody reads and is usually full of complete bullshit anyways.

The Sheriff wrote:

Poseidon wrote:

I just don't care to read yours because if ANYONE of both of us is predictable, it's you. Which is ironic considering you're the one who claims I'm the predictable one, but if there's one thing anyone can predict from a post from you - it's a long ass post that nobody reads and is usually full of complete bullshit anyways.

Yes people do care, Uzique makes very good points and puts them forward eloquently, you however just tell anyone that points out flaws in your arguments that they have their panties in a bunch. It's a bit ironic saying he bullshits, especially coming from you.

Last edited by Poseidon (2008-08-17 17:19:30)

Zimmer wrote:

Oh, about the interview... I am not commenting on that aspect. The interview normally shakes out the people who aren't good enough for Oxbridge. It's always been a great asset to them and it will continue to be. The interview is great and is how Oxbridge can separate brilliance from everything else. I do not deny that it is a great way of choosing students. However, my comments in the latest posts haven't really been directed at Oxbridge. They have been overall comments on the system.

Also, Uzique... Where does he not come across as ignorant? He tells me I am wrong about the IB and how it is piss easy and blah blah blah, when he doesn't even know what it is. The IB is a collection of subjects, you can't just take one subject. You can't just choose any subject either, there are certain courses to be taken. It's the IB, not IB's plural. He compared subjects when you can't do that in the IB, it's a collective study. What's the point in coming up with such a comment when he clearly just wants to argue for the sake of it.

Statistics and percentages? Where have I ever relied on them? I see no comment of mine which relates to statistics. The comments I have made on the A-levels and UCAS ratings are pure fact. I also see no percentages. His comment was directed at me BEFORE I posted the evidence.

Also, if you went back a few pages, you would have seen that I praise the British educational system, and that it is one of the best in the world. I am just commenting on parts of it which could use a bit of "rethinking".

..teddy..jimmy wrote:

Uzique wrote:

Honestly, you haven't been as successful as some A-Level students in your exams and your opportunities; build yourself a bridge and get the fuck over it.

I'd say all in all I've been more successful tbh. Doing twice as much work in the same time period while gaining a pretty damn good score is quite an achievement. No offense dude but judging by your posts I don't think you really know much about IB. I've been through both the English and IB education systems so I guess I can compare!


My twin brother got 40+ points...he got rejected by 4/5 universities he applied to..he didn't get any interviews..his personal statement was actually quite good...so what the fuck did they not like about him?

Zimmer wrote:

..teddy..jimmy wrote:

Uzique wrote:

Honestly, you haven't been as successful as some A-Level students in your exams and your opportunities; build yourself a bridge and get the fuck over it.

I'd say all in all I've been more successful tbh. Doing twice as much work in the same time period while gaining a pretty damn good score is quite an achievement. No offense dude but judging by your posts I don't think you really know much about IB. I've been through both the English and IB education systems so I guess I can compare!


My twin brother got 40+ points...he got rejected by 4/5 universities he applied to..he didn't get any interviews..his personal statement was actually quite good...so what the fuck did they not like about him?

Phone the Unis up and ask them to give you a reason. You are allowed to do that.

Zimmer wrote:

Wow, wait, he applied to Edinburgh? What did he apply to do?

What the fuck. There is no competition for Edinburgh.

Which one did he get accepted into?

Zimmer wrote:

..teddy..jimmy wrote:

Zimmer wrote:

Wow, wait, he applied to Edinburgh? What did he apply to do?

What the fuck. There is no competition for Edinburgh.

Which one did he get accepted into?

The only one he got into was Birmingham!

He did technically get into Warwick but they couldn't offer what he wanted to study..Politics and Philosophy.

Dude, that makes no sense.
Edinburh requires you to have 4Bs at Scottish Higher level..... that's an absolute joke of entry requirements. I can't understand why he didn't get in... 34 points for the IB... There should be no competition at all for Politics and Philosophy.

Zimmer wrote:

Uzique wrote:

m3thod wrote:

I'm sure it does! but hes not going there to booze....well i hope he isn't.

Remember newbies the choice of university is just as important as what you did and what you got.  I know of one or two organisations that explicitly state oxbridge only.

And to be fair they're probably fools for subscribing to an old-fashioned and outdated view of the British higher-education system. All of the Russell Group Universities are just as good as Oxbridge in my opinion in certain areas or aspects of student-life, and it's a shame that some graduate employment schemes still use such an outdated form of classism and snobbery. They miss out though- I'm sure you can vouch for the high quality of other 'rival' Universities such as Durham, Warwick, Imperial College / LSE (depending on the specific sciences / economics etc.) They don't bring the prestige and the reputation but they still bring the same calibre of graduate in my honest opinion.

The opinion is slightly flawed though. It has been shown that sutdents learn much better if taught in small groups - which is technically unique in oxbridge, unless you take a subject which nobody else took.

I also thought the same; how Edinburgh, Warwick, Imperial were just as good if not better in some aspects; and for a "real life" experience, I guess they are, but just look at the McLaren F1 team of engineers ( this may be outdated, but I am sure it's not too old ) ALL of them graduated at Cambridge. Now take a look at how they have developed their cars... It's not because they came out of Cambridge that they were picked, they were picked because they were the best.

Although your comment about "prestige and reputation" is a bit wrong. You graduate from Imperial or Durham and, as the saying goes, the whole world is your oyster. There are the two top : Cambridge and Oxford, closely followed by Belfast, Durham, Imperial and Warwick, then followed by Glasgow, Edinburgh and the rest. I guess it's a narrow view I have, and maybe it's not totally right, but the way you are tought in those "superior" Unis is far better compared to the average one.

Still, the best Unis in the world are still Harvard and the great ones in the US ( according to educational reports ). Still, I wouldn't want to pay $40,000 a year.