Difference in colleges: London, Oxford, Cambridge?

[stevensfo]

Moderator Message:
Moved from DAK (leaving a link) as this discussion has exceeded that board's remit. - Chris

I often read about league tables or other similar measures of success, and they often mention Oxford uni vs Cambridge uni vs a London college, rather than just London uni.

Anyone know why this is? Is the college structure not the same?


Steve

[tjh290633]

I often read about league tables or other similar measures of success, and they often mention Oxford uni vs Cambridge uni vs a London college, rather than just London uni.

Anyone know why this is? Is the college structure not the same?


Steve

History, I think. The Oxbridge colleges often started out as monastic or religious bodies. The Universities as such organizations came along much later. On the other hand London has much later bodies, like Imperial College, University College, etc.

Although there may be Halls of Residence or dedicated Student Accommodation in London, they tend to be remote from the teaching establishments. My granddaughter has just done an MA at City University, and the accommodation was some way away. My impression is that the University structure is very different.

Maybe someone can enlighten us.

TJH

[Alaric]

Anyone know why this is? Is the college structure not the same?

The London colleges are universities in their own right whereas Oxfoed and Cambridge colleges are part of the respective universities. At Oxford and Cambridge, no matter which college, you attend the same lectures and take the same exams. Not so at London where Imperial, King's, University, LSE etc are distinct.

[Urbandreamer]

Anyone know why this is? Is the college structure not the same?


Steve

Not sure how it relates to league tables, but NO the structures are not the same.

I for example went to a Polytechnic*, or technical college and got a BSc (Bachelor of Science)..
While they did have arts and humanities courses they specialized in sciences.

Cambridge, to take one of your examples, specializes in other areas.
So much so that if you study chemical engineering there you may receive a BA (Bachelor of Arts) rather than a BSc.

Engineering is an art? Well apparently it is at Cambridge.

*The same institution is now called a University.

[Lootman]

Although there may be Halls of Residence or dedicated Student Accommodation in London, they tend to be remote from the teaching establishments. My granddaughter has just done an MA at City University, and the accommodation was some way away. My impression is that the University structure is very different.

I thought that City University is actually a special case as it is not part of the University of London, although of course it is in London.

People generally say they went to Oxford or Cambridge without identifying the individual college, thinking that it doesn't matter to most people. But not many people would say they "went to London". Rather they would specify UCL, LSE, Imperial, Kings, Queen Mary, Goldsmiths etc.

[mc2fool]

Although there may be Halls of Residence or dedicated Student Accommodation in London, they tend to be remote from the teaching establishments. My granddaughter has just done an MA at City University, and the accommodation was some way away. My impression is that the University structure is very different.

I thought that City University is actually a special case as it is not part of the University of London, although of course it is in London.

It's not "City University" (any more), it's "City, University of London" (since 2016), and is a part of the University of London.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City,_University_of_London

[UncleEbenezer]

Cambridge, to take one of your examples, specializes in other areas.
So much so that if you study chemical engineering there you may receive a BA (Bachelor of Arts) rather than a BSc.

Engineering is an art? Well apparently it is at Cambridge.

That "Bachelor of Arts" has arguably lost something in translation. From memory, the actual term used was something like Baccalaureat in Artibus.

And one thing about Cambridge is that it doesn't specialise in the sense of many other institutions, it aims to excel across the board. The courses somewhat reflect this: you couldn't enroll for "chemical engineering", instead you'd enroll for an engineering degree and then specialise in chemical engineering topics while also getting a broader education.

Specialism is, broadly speaking, for those institutions that don't have the capacity to do general but do, typically for reasons of history and/or geography, excel in one or a small number of disciplines. For example, one or two universities in coastal cities that do marine sciences and/or engineering.

Insofar as Cambridge does specialise ... well ... it produces more Nobel prizes in "STEM" subjects than anywhere else. The usual contrast there is Oxford producing disproportionate numbers of politicians and others around them (both Sir Humphrey and Bernard Woolley in Yes Minister are - very realistically - Oxford alumni). But to characterise either place solely on such observations would of course be nonsense.

As for London, there are many University institutions, some of them much bigger - by measures like student numbers - than the whole of Oxford or Cambridge. The London institutions have different histories; broadly speaking, the more prestigious ones are the colleges historically known as University of London, while others are re-branded polytechnics often at the bottom of the league tables (there are also a few that are neither). And of course many other cities have re-branded polys: for example Oxford Brookes University has nothing to do with its ... um ... senior cohabitee.

[JohnB]

Imperial does have "halls" but they are purely halls of residence, without academic staff.

Oxbridge colleges are combination of halls of residence and a body of teaching staff, but there are many academics who are employed solely by the broader university, and there are college fellows who are university professors.

But with 500 people in a college, it wouldn't make much sense doing statistics at that level. Most colleges offer most subjects, but specialist courses are more restricted. Cambridge traditionally has initially broader courses than Oxford, so "Natural Sciences" rather than "Physics". After spending my tenner to get an Oxford MA in Physics, and a year to get a Imperial/UCL MSc, I rather like claiming to have attended 3 of the top 10 universities at the world. I've merely punted in Cambridge...

[Spet0789]

Anyone know why this is? Is the college structure not the same?

The London colleges are universities in their own right whereas Oxfoed and Cambridge colleges are part of the respective universities. At Oxford and Cambridge, no matter which college, you attend the same lectures and take the same exams. Not so at London where Imperial, King's, University, LSE etc are distinct.

Precisely this. Although formally degrees are awarded by the University of London, an Economics graduate from LSE has done a completely different course and taken a completely different exam to one from UCL or KCL.

In contrast, all Oxford or Cambridge students follow the same course and take the same exam irrespective of college.

[stevensfo]

Thanks everyone. That makes sense.

One reason I asked was because last year, our eldest was accepted for a MSc by both Kings and UCL in London and I was surprised at how everything seemed so different between them.

In the eighties, I did a part-time evening MSc at Birkbeck (hard work!!) and the certificate had 'University of London' at the top, with 'Birkbeck College' after my name.


Steve

[Spet0789]

Cambridge, to take one of your examples, specializes in other areas.
So much so that if you study chemical engineering there you may receive a BA (Bachelor of Arts) rather than a BSc.

Engineering is an art? Well apparently it is at Cambridge.

That "Bachelor of Arts" has arguably lost something in translation. From memory, the actual term used was something like Baccalaureat in Artibus.

And one thing about Cambridge is that it doesn't specialise in the sense of many other institutions, it aims to excel across the board. The courses somewhat reflect this: you couldn't enroll for "chemical engineering", instead you'd enroll for an engineering degree and then specialise in chemical engineering topics while also getting a broader education.

Specialism is, broadly speaking, for those institutions that don't have the capacity to do general but do, typically for reasons of history and/or geography, excel in one or a small number of disciplines. For example, one or two universities in coastal cities that do marine sciences and/or engineering.

Insofar as Cambridge does specialise ... well ... it produces more Nobel prizes in "STEM" subjects than anywhere else. The usual contrast there is Oxford producing disproportionate numbers of politicians and others around them (both Sir Humphrey and Bernard Woolley in Yes Minister are - very realistically - Oxford alumni). But to characterise either place solely on such observations would of course be nonsense.

As for London, there are many University institutions, some of them much bigger - by measures like student numbers - than the whole of Oxford or Cambridge. The London institutions have different histories; broadly speaking, the more prestigious ones are the colleges historically known as University of London, while others are re-branded polytechnics often at the bottom of the league tables (there are also a few that are neither). And of course many other cities have re-branded polys: for example Oxford Brookes University has nothing to do with its ... um ... senior cohabitee.

Amusingly, the over-representation of Oxford graduates in senior civil service grades in the 60s, 70s and 80s was partly owing to the perception that Cambridge graduates were more likely to be traitors, post the “Cambridge Five” scandal (Philby, Burgess, et al). Basically the Civil Service pivoted substantially to Oxford to avoid “Reds”!

[Lootman]

That "Bachelor of Arts" has arguably lost something in translation. From memory, the actual term used was something like Baccalaureat in Artibus.

And one thing about Cambridge is that it doesn't specialise in the sense of many other institutions, it aims to excel across the board. The courses somewhat reflect this: you couldn't enroll for "chemical engineering", instead you'd enroll for an engineering degree and then specialise in chemical engineering topics while also getting a broader education.

Specialism is, broadly speaking, for those institutions that don't have the capacity to do general but do, typically for reasons of history and/or geography, excel in one or a small number of disciplines. For example, one or two universities in coastal cities that do marine sciences and/or engineering.

Insofar as Cambridge does specialise ... well ... it produces more Nobel prizes in "STEM" subjects than anywhere else. The usual contrast there is Oxford producing disproportionate numbers of politicians and others around them (both Sir Humphrey and Bernard Woolley in Yes Minister are - very realistically - Oxford alumni). But to characterise either place solely on such observations would of course be nonsense.

As for London, there are many University institutions, some of them much bigger - by measures like student numbers - than the whole of Oxford or Cambridge. The London institutions have different histories; broadly speaking, the more prestigious ones are the colleges historically known as University of London, while others are re-branded polytechnics often at the bottom of the league tables (there are also a few that are neither). And of course many other cities have re-branded polys: for example Oxford Brookes University has nothing to do with its ... um ... senior cohabitee.

Amusingly, the over-representation of Oxford graduates in senior civil service grades in the 60s, 70s and 80s was partly owing to the perception that Cambridge graduates were more likely to be traitors, post the “Cambridge Five” scandal (Philby, Burgess, et al). Basically the Civil Service pivoted substantially to Oxford to avoid “Reds”!

For some reason, Uncle often makes me think of the Cambridge Five. On the surface an impeccable establishment figure. On the inside, a seething and critical cauldron of ideological resentment against the state.

It's sort of a compliment really.

[Loup321]

The London colleges are universities in their own right whereas Oxfoed and Cambridge colleges are part of the respective universities. At Oxford and Cambridge, no matter which college, you attend the same lectures and take the same exams. Not so at London where Imperial, King's, University, LSE etc are distinct.

Precisely this. Although formally degrees are awarded by the University of London, an Economics graduate from LSE has done a completely different course and taken a completely different exam to one from UCL or KCL.

In contrast, all Oxford or Cambridge students follow the same course and take the same exam irrespective of college.

Degrees are no longer awarded by the University of London, but instead by the individual Universities. Back in 2001, all Doctoral degrees were from the University of London, but 2008 was during the transition and candidates could choose. Since about 2010 it's all been from the individual Universities. I believe undergraduate degrees switched earlier, but I did mine elsewhere.

And regarding only awarding "Arts" degrees, I think when I first applied to University (mid 1990's), Oxford, Cambridge and (I think) York, only awarded BA degrees. Everywhere else I read about in the UCAS handbook awarded BA or BSc degrees, depending on what you studied.

[UncleEbenezer]

Amusingly, the over-representation of Oxford graduates in senior civil service grades in the 60s, 70s and 80s was partly owing to the perception that Cambridge graduates were more likely to be traitors, post the “Cambridge Five” scandal (Philby, Burgess, et al). Basically the Civil Service pivoted substantially to Oxford to avoid “Reds”!

For some reason, Uncle often makes me think of the Cambridge Five. On the surface an impeccable establishment figure. On the inside, a seething and critical cauldron of ideological resentment against the state.

It's sort of a compliment really.

Thanks for the chuckle

But ... impeccable? establishment figure? Phrases that would never even cross the minds of anyone who knows me! Nor half as ideological as many here, not least, um, Lootman.

[didds]

But with 500 people in a college, it wouldn't make much sense doing statistics at that level.

My degree, gained in 1984, is joint with Statistics. University college of Wales, Aberystwyth[1]. The "class of '84" was about ten of us. similar number in the 2nd year. 1st year maybe 50 (as stats was a 3rd subject for many in their 1st year)....




[1]so Aber was a constituent college of the University of Wales then. I've only recently learned there was some hoo-hah a while back (involving "overseas affiliates, cheating and student visas" [2]) and the University of Wales as was then ceased to be - Aber is now a Uni solely in its own right

[2]https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-15171830


Here's a slightly hokey but lovely (for ex-alumni anyway!) video of Aber in 1984!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EX0kkBAMYK4

[Hallucigenia]

Degrees are no longer awarded by the University of London, but instead by the individual Universities. Back in 2001, all Doctoral degrees were from the University of London, but 2008 was during the transition and candidates could choose. Since about 2010 it's all been from the individual Universities. I believe undergraduate degrees switched earlier, but I did mine elsewhere.

I suspect your experience is with Imperial?

Imperial was always the cuckoo in the nest, that wanted to become a university before any of the other colleges. So it broke free in ?2007? from memory and became an independent, degree-awarding university. The same privilege was offered to all the other colleges by the University of London Act 2018 but not all of them have taken up the option, and I think it was one of those things where actual implementation got held up by Covid-19.

As others have said the London colleges may have started out with the Oxbridge model but have evolved into de facto universities in their own right even while notionally part of UoL, with teaching and exams all done within the college, whereas at Oxbridge lectures and exams are organised by the departments (which are a whole parallel federal structure, there's really not that much by way of a "central" university) although tutorials are mostly done in college.

Of course, there are many more universities that are collegiate or federal to a greater or lesser degree :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colleges_ ... ed_Kingdom

Oxbridge gives a BA/MA for all subjects because they've been giving degrees since before science existed in the modern sense, it was considered natural philosophy and so an arts subject. And they don't see any reason to change just because more recent institutions choose to differentiate between BA and BSc.

[stewamax]

Oxbridge gives a BA/MA for all subjects because they've been giving degrees since before science existed in the modern sense, it was considered natural philosophy and so an arts subject. And they don't see any reason to change just because more recent institutions choose to differentiate between BA and BSc.

But for STEM postgraduate awards, Oxford has MSc (and upwards to doctorates) while Cambridge offers MPhil (and upwards). Cambridge also has a few postgraduate diploma courses; in the past the diplomas were, for arcane reasons, awarded for courses that are now ranked MPhil

[tjh290633]

Oxbridge gives a BA/MA for all subjects because they've been giving degrees since before science existed in the modern sense, it was considered natural philosophy and so an arts subject. And they don't see any reason to change just because more recent institutions choose to differentiate between BA and BSc.

But for STEM postgraduate awards, Oxford has MSc (and upwards to doctorates) while Cambridge offers MPhil (and upwards). Cambridge also has a few postgraduate diploma courses; in the past the diplomas were, for arcane reasons, awarded for courses that are now ranked MPhil

Back in 1956, Chemistry undergraduates at Oxford were awarded a BA (Worthy of Honours) after successfully completing their Final Examinations at the end off their 3rd Year. After doing a fourth year of research and submitting a thesis, your BA was classified. My supervisor told me that, if I could work out what some anomalies in my results indicated, I could put that forward and get a BSc. I didn't. Nowadays after their 4th year undergraduates are awarded an MSc. I don't know if they get anything after their 3rd year. https://www.ox.ac.uk/admissions/undergr ... /chemistry implies not.

Incidentally, one of my friends did nothing for his 4th year and was awarded 4th class honours, unprecedented for some years, I believe.

TJH

[UncleEbenezer]

Oxbridge gives a BA/MA for all subjects because they've been giving degrees since before science existed in the modern sense, it was considered natural philosophy and so an arts subject. And they don't see any reason to change just because more recent institutions choose to differentiate between BA and BSc.

But for STEM postgraduate awards, Oxford has MSc (and upwards to doctorates) while Cambridge offers MPhil (and upwards). Cambridge also has a few postgraduate diploma courses; in the past the diplomas were, for arcane reasons, awarded for courses that are now ranked MPhil

Oh, there are various different higher degrees (isn't an Oxford doctorate a D.Phil rather than the customary PhD)?

My own Cambridge letters include the relatively-unusual MMath on top of the BA and MA.

[tjh290633]

But for STEM postgraduate awards, Oxford has MSc (and upwards to doctorates) while Cambridge offers MPhil (and upwards). Cambridge also has a few postgraduate diploma courses; in the past the diplomas were, for arcane reasons, awarded for courses that are now ranked MPhil

Oh, there are various different higher degrees (isn't an Oxford doctorate a D.Phil rather than the customary PhD)?

My own Cambridge letters include the relatively-unusual MMath on top of the BA and MA.

Correct. There are some more Oxford idiosyncrasies, like the DCL, Doctor of Common Law.

TJH