NationStates Jolt Archive

TBC has a dilemma;

Essentially, I applied to Oxford for history this academic year, and, due simply to my AS level reults being a little low, namely AABBB, I was rejected at interview. Incidentally, this is certain, given my having asked for feedback. Thus, I am currently likely to read history at York next year.However, having recieved my January examination results today, I have been placed in somewhat of a dilemma. My results were, by anybody's standards, fan-fucking-tastic, overall UMS being 590/630 between 6 papers, and thus I have been advised to consider reapplying to Oxford next year, given that my AS levels now read AAAAA. However, I remain convinced that York, socially, would be more to my tastes, and that I could read history as an MA at Oxford postgrad. Thus, what should do I?

I suppose joining the French Foreign Legion is out of the question? (Scene: a desert outpost ... two legionaires stare over the wall at the blankness of the dune ... 1st Legionaire (in a cheesy french accent): "So, recruit, what hideous crime did you commit that forced you to flee to this God-forsaken place?" 2nd Legionaire (Chris): "Well, see, I flunked my first interview at Oxford because my AS results were only AABBB but then I took the tests again and scored AAAAA, so then I couldn't decide whether to reapply or just got to York and ..." There is a sudden sharp report as the 1st Legionaire blows his own brains out.)

That's a tough one. My first inclination is York, then Oxford, but then why not reapply, just for laughs, unless the social aspect is really important (I know it ended up important to me, back in the day, though it wasn't a consideration in deciding where to go). Ack. Maybe I'll join the Foreign Legion!

Become a teen-rebel filmstar icon! Buy an overpowered sportscar! Die in a car-crash in your early twenties!

And don't forget the sex, drugs and rock'n'roll!

Live fast, die young! That's the way to do it, baby :cool:

TBC has a dilemma;

Essentially, I applied to Oxford for history this academic year, and, due simply to my AS level reults being a little low, namely AABBB, I was rejected at interview. Incidentally, this is certain, given my having asked for feedback. Thus, I am currently likely to read history at York next year.However, having recieved my January examination results today, I have been placed in somewhat of a dilemma. My results were, by anybody's standards, fan-fucking-tastic, overall UMS being 590/630 between 6 papers, and thus I have been advised to consider reapplying to Oxford next year, given that my AS levels now read AAAAA. However, I remain convinced that York, socially, would be more to my tastes, and that I could read history as an MA at Oxford postgrad. Thus, what should do I?
Well, both are excellent universities. I had to spend a good part of a year deciding between Oxbridge and York as my first choice anyway.

The real question in my mind is if you choose not to start your course, what would you do next year? Do you have any ideas for a gap year, such as charity work, travelling and/or writing?

Well, both are excellent universities. I had to spend a good part of a year deciding between Oxbridge and York as my first choice anyway.

The real question in my mind is if you choose not to start your course, what would you do next year? Do you have any ideas for a gap year, such as charity work, travelling and/or writing?

Not really. I'd probably end up sharing my time between work, and work experiance.

all the people i know who went to oxford were boring and anal. i know nothing of york university but i've heard the city is a wonderful place. people i know who went to cambridge were generally more sociable and fun loving. durham is boring as hell although newcastleis nearby and is a good night out. bristol has a great nightlife. st andrews is quiet and homely. edinburgh is brilliant but lacking a decent music scene (and the history department is atrocious unless you want to do scottish history). Manchester and London are places you'll ether love or hate depending on what you go looking for and what you find. Those were the top university places when i applied, the rankings may have changed along with their other relative merits by now though.

Try Cambridge it has competent professors and the better rowing team

don't make me hate you now!

Oxford, is absolutely brilliant, probably gone a little down hill since I left, however cost of living is higher than York. York is a pretty city but so is Oxford. Oxford also has the added advantage of not being in the north ;)

However, I remain convinced that York, socially, would be more to my tastes, and that I could read history as an MA at Oxford postgrad. Thus, what should do I?

if they are both equally good schools, why no go for the better social life, it's also very very important.
there are several people i know who didn't finish school because they became depressed or were all alone and stuff.

My parents went to York, I hear its very good. Though Oxford is a lovely town and the university is good too, the only problem is likely to be the concentration of rich toffs.

Ahhh, *schadenfreude*

TBC has a dilemma;

Essentially, I applied to Oxford for history this academic year, and, due simply to my AS level reults being a little low, namely AABBB, I was rejected at interview. Incidentally, this is certain, given my having asked for feedback. Thus, I am currently likely to read history at York next year.However, having recieved my January examination results today, I have been placed in somewhat of a dilemma. My results were, by anybody's standards, fan-fucking-tastic, overall UMS being 590/630 between 6 papers, and thus I have been advised to consider reapplying to Oxford next year, given that my AS levels now read AAAAA. However, I remain convinced that York, socially, would be more to my tastes, and that I could read history as an MA at Oxford postgrad. Thus, what should do I?
Well done - I got 311/420 (not including Critical Thinking, in which I got 130/120 marks somehow:confused: ). But then, I'm lumbered as a prole in the state sector.

York is a good university, though, and if you're happier there socially, you'll do better in your course. Then, as you say, you can do a post grad in Oxford. That way, you don't potentially waste your course, and three years of your life.

I've got an interview at Imperial soon (man, I need to get the grades for that...), so best of luck to the both of us.:)

Ahhh, *schadenfreude*
Well...

My parents went to York, I hear its very good. Though Oxford is a lovely town and the university is good too, the only problem is likely to be the concentration of rich toffs.
I assure you, that would please Chris no end.

Thus, what should do I?
Well, Oxford would be a very good choice - it has the stronger debating society. That is, if you happen to be a debater.

Go to York, for that is where I want to go.

Mate both my brothers went to oxford. Im deliberately avoiding it. I'd say go to Leeds next year, you can spend the entire time in history lessons with me.

Ahhh, *schadenfreude*

lol :p



what are these UMS marks i see here? what happened to UCAS points? :confused:


frankly, my only advice would be to stick with what you think you'd be happier with. you'll do better if you're happier with a good social life, etc, at a non-oxbridge uni than you would should you be unhappy at a 'better' uni. get what i mean?

what are these UMS marks i see here? what happened to UCAS points? :confused:

Undefined Marking System; basically, people make up arbitrary big numbers to make themselves look good on internet forums. True. *nods*

I'm at Cambridge, and from what I've heard, the non-Oxbridge experience is quite different. So it depends on what you want from a uni. I'm quite happy not going out clubbing 4 times a week.

TBC has a dilemma;

Essentially, I applied to Oxford for history this academic year, and, due simply to my AS level reults being a little low, namely AABBB, I was rejected at interview. Incidentally, this is certain, given my having asked for feedback. Thus, I am currently likely to read history at York next year.However, having recieved my January examination results today, I have been placed in somewhat of a dilemma. My results were, by anybody's standards, fan-fucking-tastic, overall UMS being 590/630 between 6 papers, and thus I have been advised to consider reapplying to Oxford next year, given that my AS levels now read AAAAA. However, I remain convinced that York, socially, would be more to my tastes, and that I could read history as an MA at Oxford postgrad. Thus, what should do I?

You should study at York and then do your post grad at Oxford.
If you like York better thats where you should go, you will have a miserable 3 or 4 years if your at a school where you feel like you don't fit in.
Besides if you go to York for a year and decide you hate it you can always reapply to Oxford and go there for your second year and those that follow.

I'm at Cambridge, and from what I've heard, the non-Oxbridge experience is quite different. So it depends on what you want from a uni. I'm quite happy not going out clubbing 4 times a week.

i wish i ever did go out clubbing 4 times a week. the main difference between the oxbridge/durham style and the rest of the country's universities as far as i can gather is the rest of us don't have colleges (with all their associated traditions and whatnot) and uni accomodation is only available for 1st years and a very small number of other students. once you get to second year you find your own accomodation. plus i've heard oxbridge students get one-on-one tutelage, that sort of thing is unheard of elsewhere, smallest class i've been in is 10 people.

TBC has a dilemma;

Essentially, I applied to Oxford for history this academic year, and, due simply to my AS level reults being a little low, namely AABBB, I was rejected at interview. Incidentally, this is certain, given my having asked for feedback. Thus, I am currently likely to read history at York next year.However, having recieved my January examination results today, I have been placed in somewhat of a dilemma. My results were, by anybody's standards, fan-fucking-tastic, overall UMS being 590/630 between 6 papers, and thus I have been advised to consider reapplying to Oxford next year, given that my AS levels now read AAAAA. However, I remain convinced that York, socially, would be more to my tastes, and that I could read history as an MA at Oxford postgrad. Thus, what should do I?
Go to York.

If you're going to enjoy it more, you're going to do better due to being in a more positive state of mind, and it's very highly regarded, albeit not so much as Oxford.

In addition to this, it has the highest duck to student ratio in all of the United Kingdom, which is a big plus.

I'm at Cambridge, and from what I've heard, the non-Oxbridge experience is quite different. So it depends on what you want from a uni. I'm quite happy not going out clubbing 4 times a week.
Youth, oh, how it's wasted on the young.

i wish i ever did go out clubbing 4 times a week. the main difference between the oxbridge/durham style and the rest of the country's universities as far as i can gather is the rest of us don't have colleges (with all their associated traditions and whatnot) and uni accomodation is only available for 1st years and a very small number of other students. once you get to second year you find your own accomodation. plus i've heard oxbridge students get one-on-one tutelage, that sort of thing is unheard of elsewhere, smallest class i've been in is 10 people.

I think its slightly more than the college system and small classes (and yes, all my 'supervisions' as they're called are in groups of 1-5), it seems a different work ethic. Maybe the difference between amount of work is exaggerated, but I believe it is present, I've certainly done alot more than my brother who is at Leeds.

Mate both my brothers went to oxford. Im deliberately avoiding it. I'd say go to Leeds next year, you can spend the entire time in history lessons with me.

Much better idea. I went to Leeds, and loved every booze-addled minute of it.

i wish i ever did go out clubbing 4 times a week. the main difference between the oxbridge/durham style and the rest of the country's universities as far as i can gather is the rest of us don't have colleges (with all their associated traditions and whatnot) and uni accomodation is only available for 1st years and a very small number of other students. once you get to second year you find your own accomodation. plus i've heard oxbridge students get one-on-one tutelage, that sort of thing is unheard of elsewhere, smallest class i've been in is 10 people.

iirc oxbridge students have to sign out if they want to leave the place. its basically like being at a really big boarding school, from what i can tell.

and as for tutors, at cardiff i never even got to see my personal tutor - not that he was supposed to help with work or anything, i think he was termed a 'guidance tutor' or something. he fucked off on sabbatical a week into the first semester, and the second year i couldn't be fucked to go find a new one.

cardiff was the most dreary and depressing place to go to uni... avoid it.

You have perfect ASes.

You can do anything you want with your life.

You can get a Harvard scholarship. Literally. Study in the best unis in the world for free.

I envy you so much.

I envy you so much.

Don't. It's what you do with it that counts.

(Edit: Although the "ASes" in your post looks like "asses", which almost made me giggle.)

Some thoughts.
[1] It probably is easier to go from Oxford to anywhere else than to come in from anywhere else to Oxford. The systems are different, and the mind-set is different. An Oxford bachelor's degree will tend to open doors elsewhere unless you have only scraped through the finals. By contrast, coming to Oxford for graduate work from other universities will see you pitted against serious competition for relatively few places. Oxford graduates likely will be at an advantage, if only because they already know how to present themselves and are known to those interviewing them at least indirectly. Also, depending upon the specific department and fellow with whom you want to study, demand may be such that it will prove difficult to be in serious contention unless you got a good 2.1 or even a first.
[2] It probably is easier to acclimatize to Oxford University's unique sub-culture at under-graduate level than at graduate level. You may wish to read round the subject somewhat; AN Wilson among others makes reference to this. In any case, successful socialization into the university culture is an important part of the overall life of a student at the university, and the more so for graduates.
[3] I hate to say it, but there remains within Oxford a suspicion that most other universities simply do not require of their under-graduates the same rigour and knowledge in depth. Whether or not this is always true is quite beside the point; it often is, and it can add to the difficulty of application from "outside" at graduate level. The walls that surround Oxford Colleges are not only stone and mortar, they are also expectations and traditions and a long habit of genuine excellence. For the under-graduate this is less of a factor.
[4] It is a fact that Oxford University attracts its dons as well as visiting scholars from among the best minds in the world, in most academic disciplines. This creates an expectation that students will be of similar quality, and those who refuse to work to that level risk being marginalized. But students who do measure up may find themselves learning from, and socializing with, outstanding scholars not only in their own subject but in others.
[5] Oxford students appear not only to work hard but to play hard. Images of dour, scurrying students with little time or inclination for fun may be banished from your mind. The university, and the city itself, are anything but dull!
[6] The snobbish, upper-class nature of the student body is no longer the rule, although there still is a bit that. The under-graduate contingent, who are taken more broadly from the population than in former times, have created a more egalitarian and accepting attitude than would have been found even 20 years ago.
[7]Those at Oxford University like to think they have the best way of teaching and learning. Perhaps, perhaps not, but it is a very, very good way. If you come, you will find it difficult to leave without knowing your subject, unless you are unwilling or unable to cut the mustard. Having said that, the Oxford way isn't the only way and it isn't for everyone, and you might find it unsuitable. That won't be necessarily because you're inadequate; it may be only that you and Oxford University are incompatible.

The important thing at the end of the day is whether you are educated in your chosen field, and whether you can build a career effectively utilizing your education and especially, effectively utilizing the disciplines you acquired while being educated. Where you studied to achieve those things is only important if you're considering a career as an academic. Even then, in some disciplines the "right" answer may be surprising. Compulsive Depression is right: it's what you do with it that counts.


For the benefit of Pure Metal, the requirement to sign in and out of one's college is no longer the norm.

I'd say go for York, its not as full of tossers. I got rejected from Oxford (6 marks short of my offer) and it was one of the luckiest happenings of my life. So yeah, I'd say york, but;

Mate both my brothers went to oxford. Im deliberately avoiding it. I'd say go to Leeds next year, you can spend the entire time in history lessons with me.

Much better idea. I went to Leeds, and loved every booze-addled minute of it.
Leeds FTW! :cool:

Youth, oh, how it's wasted on the young.

Lol, maybe he likes studying every night of the week.

Aren't AS levels, like, half an A'level or some such?

Or were those banned because they were hard?

I only say this because it they are, five AS level's is pathetic. In my day people took four A'Levels. (Though general studies doesn't count).

CAPTAIN BLACKADDER : And then the final, irrefutable proof. Remember, you mentioned a clever boyfriend...
NURSE MARY : Yes.
CAPTAIN BLACKADDER : I then leapt on the opportunity to test you. I asked if he'd been to one of the great universities, Oxford, Cambridge, or Hull.
NURSE MARY : Well?
CAPTAIN BLACKADDER : You failed to spot that only two of those are great Universities.
NURSE MARY : Swine!
GENERAL MELCHETT : That's right! Oxford's a complete dump!"

It sure is.

You'll also have a lifelong inferiority complex regarding Cambridge graduates

My Sister read History at York, she likes the University but I don't think she likes the course - her entire second or third year was 'reading' - not a single lecture. But you might be looking for different things from a degree course.

If you are considering re-applying to Oxford then it is worth remembering that the grades are just a filter. That almost every one of their applicants will have straight A grades and glowing UCAS statements - yours will be no guarentee that you will be accepted, although grades actually achieved are viewed a litttle more favourably than those that might be achieved. If you do take a gap year ensure you get relevent experience to your degree - your interviewers will not be impressed to hear you spent the year on a beach in Thailand. Also - this is not what you might want to hear but if they really wanted you then they would ahve taken you on your previous good grades. A friend of mine went to read history at Oxford a few years ago and was given an offer of two E grades. This is not to say that you won't get in, but that your grades might not be all that you need to improve.

Further research has convinced me. Indeed an AS level, (whatever the hell that is) is, in point of fact, equivalent to half an A level.

Frankly I wouldn't be boasting about 2 and one half As unless I was virtually retarded.

That's like, what, 12.5 A level points? Which puts people in the barely verbal category.

Further research has convinced me. Indeed an AS level, (whatever the hell that is) is, in point of fact, equivalent to half an A level.

Frankly I wouldn't be boasting about 2 and one half As unless I was virtually retarded.

That's like, what, 12.5 A level points? Which puts people in the barely verbal category.
2 and a half A's at A-level is 25 A-Level Points under the old system.

I suspect it's really a bit watered down so your 12.5 might not be too far from the truth - my brother did the same A-Levels as me but he did them on the AS system - he tried to use my old A-Level Maths and Physics text books for revision and found that a heap of content had been removed from 'equivalent' parts of his syllabus. Nothing had been added.

2 and a half A's at A-level is 25 A-Level Points under the old system.

I suspect it's really a bit watered down so your 12.5 might not be too far from the truth - my brother did the same A-Levels as me but he did them on the AS system - he tried to use my old A-Level Maths and Physics text books for revision and found that a heap of content had been removed from 'equivalent' parts of his syllabus. Nothing had been added.

Four A's under the old system was twenty points. (Though I expect it would be forty by your reckoning. No half grades in my day).

Then there were s'levels, though I suppose they have gone the way of the brontosaurus.

Four A's under the old system was twenty points. (Though I expect it would be forty by your reckoning. No half grades in my day).

Then there were s'levels, though I suppose they have gone the way of the brontosaurus.

When did you do yours?

I did mine in 1999, where a full A-Level at grade A was 10 points, and a half A-level (not readily available in all subjects) at Grade A was 5 points. Maths was a common half A-level as you had 4 modules in a full one, so it was easy to do a half one by just taking 2 modules.

They then changed them into the AS system of today a few years later.

I guess you mean the system from before I did mine...

Though, actually, since I apparently have 36 A'level points (under the old system), and knowing where he comes from, well I am going to apply for his place.

Being a citizen of the UK and all, and since this makes him a 'lock' for oxbridge.

When did you do yours?

I did mine in 1999, where a full A-Level at grade A was 10 points, and a half A-level (not readily available in all subjects) at Grade A was 5 points. Maths was a common half A-level as you had 4 modules in a full one, so it was easy to do a half one by just taking 2 modules.

They then changed them into the AS system of today a few years later.

I guess you mean the system from before I did mine...

1988.

I got an A for general studies, but that doesn't count.

Also, mine are all JMB.

But I suppose those days are gone also.

Also, mine are all JMB.

But I suppose those days are gone also.

JMB?

Something Something Board?

JMB?

Something Something Board?

Joint matriculation board, or some such. It was nearly twenty years ago, but it was the real deal back then.

I got an A for general studies, and A for Biology, a B for physics and a B for chemistry.

It got me a fat scholarship to a big american school. (they even paid for my masters degree).

Joint matriculation board, or some such. It was nearly twenty years ago, but it was the real deal back then.

I got an A for general studies, and A for Biology, a B for physics and a B for chemistry.

It got me a fat scholarship to a big american school. (they even paid for my masters degree).
I wish they had that when I did it - mine were too easy. I felt kinda robbed by the examining boards as I got 98% for my Math A-Levels and 97% for my Physics A-Level but as far as the admissions tutors were concerned all they could say was that I was in about the top 25%...

Further research has convinced me. Indeed an AS level, (whatever the hell that is) is, in point of fact, equivalent to half an A level.

Frankly I wouldn't be boasting about 2 and one half As unless I was virtually retarded.

That's like, what, 12.5 A level points? Which puts people in the barely verbal category.
Yeah, you're right. Technically. The point is, AS Levels are taken in lower sixth, while A Levels are taken in upper sixth. And your AS Level results count towards your A Levels. So five A's at AS Level basically means TBC is in a very good position when it comes to taking his A Levels (which I should bloody expect, considering the school he goes to).

I wish they had that when I did it - mine were too easy. I felt kinda robbed by the examining boards as I got 98% for my Math A-Levels and 97% for my Physics A-Level but as far as the admissions tutors were concerned all they could say was that I was in about the top 25%...

That is weird. When I took them 70% - or there abouts - was an A. (Depending on the class/subject/exam). They basically designed them for you to fail.

A three hour paper, comprising of a few short answer questions then some essays. (except for physics which was mostly just questions as I recall). That was it, and that was your grade. Maths might have been higher, but I didn't take that.

What I find odd is that people actually know their grades going into the final term. In my day, anything could happen, and often did.

Yeah, you're right. Technically. The point is, AS Levels are taken in lower sixth, while A Levels are taken in upper sixth. And your AS Level results count towards your A Levels. So five A's at AS Level basically means TBC is in a very good position when it comes to taking his A Levels (which I should bloody expect, considering the school he goes to).

Wait though. People now do their UCCA forms and such in lower sixth?

And TBC is actually doing five A'levels?

My, how times have changed.

Wait though. People now do their UCCA forms and such in lower sixth?
Generally they're done in the first term of upper sixth (and it's now UCAS, not UCCA), though the school TBC goes to (same as the one I went to, which is how I know) encourages the students to do them early.

I believe what has happened is that TBC sat his AS Level exams last summer, did his UCAS form last term, then re-sat some AS Level exams in January and improved his AS results, so he's now thinking it might be better to delay going to university for a year so that he can get into a better university.

And TBC is actually doing five A'levels?
Unless he's dropped a subject, yes.

My, how times have changed.
Indeed.

He still is, and I say this notwithstanding other points, not to mention his egregious use of words and sentences which go on and on yet no-where, despite his claims as a historian, or otherwise, or the claims to be a lock for oxbridge, simply because of the school he went to, a bit of a thickie.

I believe what has happened is that TBC sat his AS Level exams last summer, did his UCAS form last term, then re-sat some AS Level exams in January and improved his AS results, so he's now thinking it might be better to delay going to university for a year so that he can get into a better university.


Unless it is totally different, resits count for nothing.

Bah, blairs britian.

And five A'levels? That is not possible, well unless you don't have sex or anything. (general studies doesn't count)

That is weird. When I took them 70% - or there abouts - was an A. (Depending on the class/subject/exam). They basically designed them for you to fail.

A three hour paper, comprising of a few short answer questions then some essays. (except for physics which was mostly just questions as I recall). That was it, and that was your grade. Maths might have been higher, but I didn't take that.

What I find odd is that people actually know their grades going into the final term. In my day, anything could happen, and often did.
In Math 80% was an A, while in Physics 68% was an A.

But so many people got A grades that getting a really high A did not really show up as the universities just got the grade, not the percentage you got.

The exams were pretty similar when I did them - maths was four papers at 3 hours each IIRC (might have been 1.5 hours :S) and physics was three papers - a 3 hour short answer/calc paper, a 45 min multiple choice paper and an essay question. Chemistry was three papers IIRC.

I knew I was going to get an A in Math, as I had taken three of the four exams early at the end of my first year at A-Level and needed 30% in the final one to get an A :) But the other subjects all depended on the exam performance on the day - you got your results a month or so later.

In Math 80% was an A, while in Physics 68% was an A.

But so many people got A grades that getting a really high A did not really show up as the universities just got the grade, not the percentage you got.

The exams were pretty similar when I did them - maths was four papers at 3 hours each IIRC (might have been 1.5 hours :S) and physics was three papers - a 3 hour short answer/calc paper, a 45 min multiple choice paper and an essay question. Chemistry was three papers IIRC.

I knew I was going to get an A in Math, as I had taken three of the four exams early at the end of my first year at A-Level and needed 30% in the final one to get an A :) But the other subjects all depended on the exam performance on the day - you got your results a month or so later.

In my day three A's (general studies doesn't count) would get you anywhere.

In my day three A's (general studies doesn't count) would get you anywhere.

Same here - though an extra one never hurt.

General studies also did not count :) I suspect that's still the case - I did Further Maths instead of general studies.

He still is, and I say this notwithstanding other points, not to mention his egregious use of words and sentences which go on and on yet no-where, despite his claims as a historian, or otherwise, or the claims to be a lock for oxbridge, simply because of the school he went to, a bit of a thickie.

Winner. :D

I did my A-Levels at the same time as Shx, and I don't understand this new-fangled AS system either. When I were a lad, etc. >_<

Maths, Computing, Further Maths, Physics. You knew where you were with them. What is a General Study, anyway? I never looked at it, because, as has been said, it didn't count.

Winner. :D

I did my A-Levels at the same time as Shx, and I don't understand this new-fangled AS system either. When I were a lad, etc. >_<

Maths, Computing, Further Maths, Physics. You knew where you were with them. What is a General Study, anyway? I never looked at it, because, as has been said, it didn't count.
I did General Studies. Mainly because we didn't have any lessons for it, we just sat the exams. Sure, universities might not count it, but it's still another A Level.

And I sucked at AS Level Maths (two pure modules and one statistics). So I dropped it. :)

I did General Studies. Mainly because we didn't have any lessons for it, we just sat the exams. Sure, universities might not count it, but it's still another A Level.

But what is it? A study of military strategy? Studying everything yet nothing in particular? A line on your CV that didn't impact on free periods so you could still go to the cinema on a Thursday afternoon? What?

I did General Studies. Mainly because we didn't have any lessons for it, we just sat the exams. Sure, universities might not count it, but it's still another A Level.

And I sucked at AS Level Maths (two pure modules and one statistics). So I dropped it. :)

d00d, doesn't count.

How many times do I have to drive that home?

(See, eighties jokes just don't work in the future. I told my friends this. I said, "one day all of are funny upper sixth catchphrases are - does your finger smell like fish - not going to be funny anymore". And they said, "yes, it smells like fish".

And I said liar, "you don't work down the fish quay and stuff".

And then we forgot what we were talking about.)

But what is it? A study of military strategy? Studying everything yet nothing in particular? A line on your CV that didn't impact on free periods so you could still go to the cinema on a Thursday afternoon? What?
Basically it's current affair studies - political issues and the like. I remember one of the essays I did in one exam was on GM food.

But what is it? A study of military strategy? Studying everything yet nothing in particular? A line on your CV that didn't impact on free periods so you could still go to the cinema on a Thursday afternoon? What?

Yah, us people who took the old general studies were initiated into the art of war.

In fact, we can call ourselves "General".

Naturally, Gordon Brown got rid of it, fearing our knowledge.

Seriously though, it's like a hodge podge of the crappy subjects. (Or at least it was when I took it). A little human geography, a little classical studies, a little bit of history. You know, general studies.

d00d, doesn't count.

How many times do I have to drive that home?
I understand it doesn't really count for anything, but, y'know, I just don't care.

A good grade in GS basically means that you can write good essays.

Basically it's current affair studies - political issues and the like. I remember one of the essays I did in one exam was on GM food.

Ah, well they vamped it up for you. Though saying that, there might have been some media studies shite.

Anyway, everyone gets an A, and it doesn't count.

(Unless you are going to a poly).

I understand it doesn't really count for anything, but, y'know, I just don't care.

A good grade in GS basically means that you can write good essays.

It's just a joke.

Still, I want to meet this kid who is going to get 25 (50) A'level points.

Still, I want to meet this kid who is going to get 25 (50) A'level points.
Meh. 25 people in my year (out of 120) got 5 A Levels (four and General Studies). I, sadly, wasn't one of them.

Basically it's current affair studies - political issues and the like. I remember one of the essays I did in one exam was on GM food.

Oh right, ta. A writing-stuff subject. Glad I didn't pick that then!

York! If you think university is only about the piece of paper that you get at the end of it then you'll be in for a surprise when not a single employer cares about it.

British university education suffers heavily because it's heavy focus on single subjects. Having a broader experience at university where you can get involved in stuff other than your degree is valued by employers and will help make you a more rounded person in general.

It's often complained about that an Bachelor's degree is becoming increasingly worthless, and that many students resort to taking a Master's to compensate. This is just silly. As part of my university education I can show that I have essay writing skills, analytical skills, listening skills, public speaking skills, design skills, managerial skills, that I'm trustworthy, reliable and many others. By going straight through Oxford, to do a BA and then an MA, all you can show is that you have good essay writing skills, good analytical skills and an in-depth knowledge of a very specific subject. All that really qualifies you for is a PhD.

York! If you think university is only about the piece of paper that you get at the end of it then you'll be in for a surprise when not a single employer cares about it.

British university education suffers heavily because it's heavy focus on single subjects. Having a broader experience at university where you can get involved in stuff other than your degree is valued by employers and will help make you a more rounded person in general.

It's often complained about that an Bachelor's degree is becoming increasingly worthless, and that many students resort to taking a Master's to compensate. This is just silly. As part of my university education I can show that I have essay writing skills, analytical skills, listening skills, public speaking skills, design skills, managerial skills, that I'm trustworthy, reliable and many others. By going straight through Oxford, to do a BA and then an MA, all you can show is that you have good essay writing skills, good analytical skills and an in-depth knowledge of a very specific subject. All that really qualifies you for is a PhD.

It's true. University is bollocks. I'm a forensic engineer (though I took a law degree part time because it is semi wrapped up with what I used to do).

I would happily take an apprentice to learn the shit that you cannot learn from teh wankstains in University. The only thing is it won't have any legitimacy.

It's really easier just to daytrade when I feel like it.

My Sister read History at York, she likes the University but I don't think she likes the course - her entire second or third year was 'reading' - not a single lecture. But you might be looking for different things from a degree course.


Just so I'm sure; I spend a year of my degree "reading", with no lectures to attend? If so, thats pretty damn awesome.

Just so I'm sure; I spend a year of my degree "reading", with no lectures to attend? If so, thats pretty damn awesome.
Wish I'd applied to York now. Most ducks per rood of any UK university.