Oxbridge takes in more international (about 30%) than US Ivies (7%). It is a matter of policy. In a way, US Ivies are hard to get into only because of this 7% quota system. It is relatively ok for domestic students to get into lower ivies like Cornell, good GPA/SAT/ECs/Essays would suffice. In contrast, Oxbridge does not have a international quota so they are just taking the most able. The average quality of students at Oxbridge is comparable to HYP.</p>
<p>Whereas for Imperial, I guess you are really kidding since it is about the same difficulty as Cornell. In fact, a friend of mine would be reading engineering at Cornell as he was rejected by Imperial. I donât know whether you are lying that 38/40 got offers, but since only 3 are going, I guess the take up rate for offers at your region is low. Imperial would calculate the statistic and figure that they need to give out more offers to attract students from your region. This is not unlike how it is way easier for domestic students to enter Ivies.</p>
<p>I said Dartmouth was a de facto LAC. God, how thick are you? Do you even know what de facto means?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Hey spencer, I still want you to answer my questions from above. Oh, canât do it can you? Thatâs because youâre fighting a losing battle.</p>
<p>You also talk about who deserves what. Well spencer, itâs not that easy. There are certainly some Cornell grads that could shank their Caltech counterparts. Just like any one Harvard graduate is not unequivocally better than a graduate from sayâŠBrown.</p>
<p>But that still doesnât detract from my point that finance is a highly coveted area. Hey, a lot of Caltechers want to be doctors as well. But they canât do it because of the ridiculous grade deflation at Caltech.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Since youâre running out of arguments, you go for - Google hits?</p>
<p>OkâŠI donât even have to comment on this one. Other CCers can see for themselves how your argument is flawed on so many levels.</p>
<p>Oh I wouldnât say that. Itâs obvious that spencer is anti-Dartmouth. He started three threads like the one weâre in now, because he couldnât get enough of veteran posters like sakky, hawkette, and InquilineKea telling him off.</p>
Unless he made it to Harvard, his arrogance and despise for Cornell is unwarranted. I donât see why Cornell blows Berkeley and Imperial out of way. Both of these schools do better research than Cornell. Most student from my region would rank Berkeley > Imperial > Cornell, in this order. A note for you: another of my friend got in Berkeley and Columbia, and she is going Berkeley.</p>
This is a good post: 1. They are talking shlt about Imperial. Full of crap really.
2. Of the the location is important. Imperial grads would go on to fill the offices of Google Europe and Investment banks in London, while Princeton grads would go on to fill those in Wall Street.</p>
Rubbish! You donât know what you are talking about!
Exceptional? What do you mean by exceptional? I hardly think Cornell students are exceptional, much less so for Dartmouth ones.
I strongly suspect that even a moderately good student from US can make it into Cornell. I strongly suspect that even a fine student from US can make it into Dartmouth.</p>
Yes Berkeley is hard for OOS and insane for intâl. It is definitely harder than Dartmouth for international, esp. so because it has a much better recognition world-wide.</p>
Are you serious??? W00t, that must be only me, then (not kidding!).</p>
<p>@ammarsfound:</p>
<p>You have no idea of what youâre talking of. We had many Oxbridge vs. Ivy discussions already and I donât want to bring it up again. To make a long story short: HYPSM+Oxbridge play in the same league. Choosing one college or the other is basically (1) a matter of taste, and (2) a matter of subject. Anyway, saying that Oxbridge accepts 30% and concluding that itâs easy to get into is more than just ridiculous, itâs plainly dumb. Get cleverer! :P</p>
<p>Hey spencer, are you going to answer my questions? Or are you going to beat around the bush and try to attack Dartmouth some more?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You canât just answer the questions you like to hear, or that you can only answer in a debate. You have to account for all of my points addressed. Letâs face it, you canât answer my questions because you probably have no answers for them.</p>
<p>Uh uh. I can see right through your strategy. And it isnât going to work on me. If you want to play fair, then you to account every single point Iâve made.</p>
<p>Whatâs fair is fair. Stop equivocating. Stop focusing on points that you can handle. Answer the questions.</p>
<p>Whereas for Imperial, I guess you are really kidding since it is about the same difficulty as Cornell. In fact, a friend of mine would be reading engineering at Cornell as he was rejected by Imperial. I donât know whether you are lying that 38/40 got offers, but since only 3 are going, I guess the take up rate for offers at your region is low. Imperial would calculate the statistic and figure that they need to give out more offers to attract students from your region. This is not unlike how it is way easier for domestic students to enter Ivies.</p>
<p>Those three guys going to imperial? Iâm assuming youre going to meet them there? How about you just check with them?</p>
<p>Imperials entire admission process is silly (as is that of most british colleges, oxbridge excluded). ALL they care about is the number of Aâs you have in the cambridge International exams (which is THE single most grade inflated board on the planet), an essay where they ask you LIST (not talk about, just list) everything youâve done. If you have 7 or 8 Aâs in your o levels, and 3 in your AS, youâre in, and were part of ONE society in school, youâre off to imperial college london. So please donât even TRY to compare the selectivity of the ivies with imperial. As for prestige, it depends where youâre off to. I doubt many people will have heard of imperial in the US. Itâs recognized in south east asia because of colonial ties. If you go to africa or something, people will NOT have heard of it. I dont even know WHY you care whoâs heard of a college and whoâs not. I mean if ten years down the line youâre teaching in a classroom, and you tell your class that you went to imperial college, and no one seems impressedâŠi mean HOW insecure do you have to be for that to matter? </p>
<p>Choosing one college or the other is basically (1) a matter of taste, and (2) a matter of subject. Anyway, saying that Oxbridge accepts 30% and concluding that itâs easy to get into is more than just ridiculous, itâs plainly dumb.</p>
<p>When did i say that it was easy to get into? I said its as hard to get into as a lower ivy. Thats VERY hard as it stands. But, while you can OBVIOUSLY compare their brand-value and prestige, you cannot compare the selectivities of HYPSM to oxbridge, if for no other reason than that they look for completely different things. HYPSM attract more internationals because they dish out money in the form of aid. Oxbridge doesnât. This automatically means that only the richest 30 percent of the most deserving applicants can afford oxbridge. In contrast, ANYONE who gets into harvard, princeton, mit, yale can afford it. This means the rich kids have to compete with the poorer ones at top american colleges. They donât at oxbridge.</p>
<p>And you arenât talking ***** about Dartmouth? Come on, who started this thread? You are going to have to answer for your initial claims buddy. Thatâs why I donât usually start threads.</p>
<p>But weâve all backed up our points with several anecdotes and qualified evidence (aka from slipper, a Dartmouth alumni; hawkette, an employer; sakky, a Berkeley alum etc.). Letâs be honest, the only evidence you have to back up your claims isnât exactly qualified. First the THES and the Jiaotong, and now - Google hits.</p>
<p>How low can you go?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I donât accept this excuse. Iâve already provided a counter-example to the location argument. Also, why canât American graduates take jobs overseas? Iâm fairly certain weâre doing well in Asia right now as managers.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Oh I would argue that it is not me who doesnât know what heâs talking about. If Cornell students arenât exceptional, then what makes UT Austin students?</p>
<p>United States college admissions is a holistic process. So no, it is not enough to just be a good student. For Imperial, it would seem that all you would need are mostly grades and test scores. No offense bro, but you donât have to be that good to get into Imperial. ammarâs example proves this (I suspect that he goes to a fairly competitive high school).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Those are YOUR words, not mine. Find me an example of where Iâve placed Dartmouth above all the other Ivies sans HYP. Oh, canât do it can you? Thatâs because I never made such claims.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>For the purposes of Wall Street recruiting and professional schools, I still concede that. Letâs face it, most Oxbridge undergraduates wonât get exceptionally good jobs in finance or whatnot. Most students there are also restricted by their major, it seems.</p>
<p>But listen, I donât blame you if you find that observation counterintuitive. You are cognitively biased after all. Iâve provided examples of why certain colleges will get you great jobs. You havenât done that. Instead, youâve relied on cognitive preferences and brand name perception. But come on spencer, you have to face the facts. Weâve had this discussion before. Oxbridge wasnât even the focus of this - itâs about you dissing Dartmouth, remember?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Hey, I know my own anecdotes. Are you saying that Iâm wrong?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well of course those are just anecdotes! I never stated otherwise. I was just trying to bring up an interesting point to foster an interesting observation in this thread. Unlike you, who keeps insisting on insulting Dartmouth.</p>
<p>Unless he made it to Harvard, his arrogance and despise for Cornell is unwarranted. I donât see why Cornell blows Berkeley and Imperial out of way. Both of these schools do better research than Cornell. Most student from my region would rank Berkeley > Imperial > Cornell, in this order. A note for you: another of my friend got in Berkeley and Columbia, and she is going Berkeley.</p>
<p>He did :-p Cornell gave him like 10000 in loans and he was just like ***? Harvards aid package was much more generous. He admitted, however, that heâd probably have been happier at dartmouth/brown, but the Harvard name was little too much to turn down. Just out of curiosity what is your âregionâ ?</p>
<p>So another colonial country. Itâs understandable why youâd hold imperial in a higher regard that American colleges then. I think all former colonies do (besides maybe canada, but thats probably due to trans border influences). But if you want to get a job in singapore, then i guess imperial probably would help you out more than a degree from an american college :-/ If you want to go into post-grad and stuff, or if you plan on working in the states, dartmouthâs clearly the better choice.</p>
<p>But I still fail to see why youâre coming to an online forum dissing a college you didnt even apply to.</p>
<p>Thatâs my unbiased view of the situation: Harvard is the hardest to get into, then gap, follow by Princeton, Yale, Stanford, Oxbridge, MIT and Caltech. After that, gap, then Berkeley, Columbia, Chicago, Imperial, LSE and may be Duke. After that, gap, then Cornell, Penn and other lower Ivies.</p>
<p>Not all Ivies are the same. Harvard is infinitely harder than Penn/Cornell. Dartmouth is no where near Harvard, in teams of prestige. Be honest here, it is more rational to equate Dartmouth to Cornell.</p>
I donât have particular bias for UK universities. I donât hold Imperial in higher regard than Berkeley, thatâs for sure. If they have accepted me, I would have rejected Imperial. Go check the Sci&Tech page at any major newspaper. I bet the term âUniversity of California, Berkeleyâ or âUniversity of California at Berkeleyâ is mentioned at least once every two days.</p>
<p>Berkeleys renowned for research you wouldnt be doing if you went there. Dartmouths famous for its study abroad programs, good undergrad professors, dplan, aid packages, small classes, and good grad school/job placement. That is stuff thats pertinent to what youâll be doing and how you will perform as an undergrad. But the point remains why would you want to go to a school whose students hate it there (cal, chicago, cornell)?</p>